OT: Alcohol & health

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.

On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
research, indluding:

Heart Attack:
37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.

Diabetes:
34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
diabetics at high risk of heart attack.

Stroke:
40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.

Dementia:
42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone density
than nondrinkers.

Those are pretty impressive stats. I hope it's all true. ;-)

Wondering what the thinking is on drinking alcohol and running. I have
always abstained from alcohol for three to four days prior to a race. It
seemed intuitively obvious that it wouldn't help my performance. But just
recently I ran a 10 mile training run after a night of drinking respectable
quantities of beer. And even though I anticipated having to run pretty
gingerly, I felt great and ended up running a training PB. So go figure.

Quoted message said:

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone density
than nondrinkers.

they're a lot "friendlier" too

When C. Edward Koop was surgeon general (Ronald Reagan maybe) he advised having
two drinks a day. I had the pleasure of becoming friends with a lady who had
worked with the 'Koo' in the past and she told me always had a couple himself
which was why he recommended it. I occasionally have a shot of bourbon after a
run and don't feel that it hurts me or that it helps, I just enjoy an
occasional shot.

Dan Stumpus said:

Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.

Just like W.C.Fields, for carrying cases of liquor, in case of a
snake bite. He also carried a snake, just in case.

Quoted message said:

On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
research, indluding:

Heart Attack:
37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.

That's worse than [censored]. How much is drunk each day?
What do those men "drink" (5-7 days a week)?

Quoted message said:

Diabetes:
34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
diabetics at high risk of heart attack.

Stroke:
40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.

Dementia:
42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone

density

Quoted message said:

than nondrinkers.

Of course, there are associated risks --

These are tabloid [censored]! By associated risk, I presume you mean
correlational studies based on uncontrolled experiments. Here, the
so-called risk-conclusion did not even know how to quantify what
constitues "drinking" (one sip of wine? one shot of 90-proof liquor?)

If a "drink" or "drink in a day" is a gallon of 190-proof vodka, I
don't need any study to assure that you DON'T have to worry about
any of those stated ailments. :-)

Quoted message said:

oral and esophageal cancer risks go
up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking

too much

Quoted message said:

causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.

So take heart, Doug!

-- Dan

Stick to running and forget about reading the Wall Street Journal
reporting statistical garbage on medicine and health.

-- Bob.

Yin Yang said:

Quoted message said:

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone

density

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

than nondrinkers.

they're a lot "friendlier" too

I duuno about that. Never been around any professional woman
wreslers or boxers, but I wouldn't like to test your theory on
them.

Paul Wilson said:

Wondering what the thinking is on drinking alcohol and running. I have
always abstained from alcohol for three to four days prior to a race. It
seemed intuitively obvious that it wouldn't help my performance. But just
recently I ran a 10 mile training run after a night of drinking respectable
quantities of beer. And even though I anticipated having to run pretty
gingerly, I felt great and ended up running a training PB. So go figure.

More likely due to your already good physical
conditioning. Try it everyday; I guarantee your
performance will go down.

One of the major causes of a hangover (which itself
tells one you been abusing alcohol, not moderately
drinking 1 or 2 drinks a day...) is dehydration.
This supposedly causes pressure in the brain and
is manifested as the common hangover headache.

Alcohol is a diuretic and is also why you pee
excessively when drinking, thus effecting a state
of dehydration. I'd say running and drinking a
necessary amount of rehydratuion fluids offset
your previous nights indulgence.

Dan Stumpus said:

Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.

On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
research, indluding:

Maybe better to review the social history of alcohol.
Most days I think the WSJ is full of right wing [censored]
anyway..

Quoted message said:

Heart Attack:
37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.

A good _many_ alcoholics die from heart failure, if liver
failure doesn't kill them first. A glass of wine or beer
per day? No. But don't feed me this BS about how "healthy"
alcohol is. Physiologically, it's a poison.

Any so called benefits for heart patients is easily
outweighed by it's deliterious affects on organ
tissues if used long term. But just short term, it's
a medical fact alcohol kills brain cells on contact.
Bet the media never mentions that "benefit..."

Quoted message said:

Diabetes:
34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
diabetics at high risk of heart attack.

And I say nonsense. There's generally more sugar in
alcohol than most others commercially processed
foodstuffs. Americans consume several pounds per
individual per year and is a likely cause of many
type 2 incidents.

Quoted message said:

Stroke:
40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.

Exercise and a good diet will do the same and better.
Ditto heart and diabetes...

Quoted message said:

Dementia:
42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.

IMO people who drink everyday (especially as many as
three) are alcoholics. It's when they then try to stop
that dementia occurs 🙂

Quoted message said:

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone density
than nondrinkers.

Bull [censored]. Osteoporosis is caused by a lack of
enough calcium...

Quoted message said:

Of course, there are associated risks -- oral and esophageal cancer risks go
up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking too much
causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.

You forgot to mention for a good many people alcohol
is highly addictive and behaves similarly as a drug
to cocaine. For those so inclined, there's no such
thing as "moderate" drinking.

Course the media loves studies and press releases,
espescially from the industries that fund them.
They never mention alcohol is a drug...

Quoted message said:

So take heart, Doug!

Well nothing seems to bother Doug. But a studious
exercise regime offsets high beer consumption.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.

Just like W.C.Fields, for carrying cases of liquor, in case of a
snake bite. He also carried a snake, just in case.

Quoted message said:

On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
research, indluding:

Heart Attack:
37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.

That's worse than [censored]. How much is drunk each day?
What do those men "drink" (5-7 days a week)?

Quoted message said:

Diabetes:
34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
diabetics at high risk of heart attack.

Stroke:
40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.

Dementia:
42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone

density

Quoted message said:

than nondrinkers.

Of course, there are associated risks --

These are tabloid [censored]! By associated risk, I presume you mean
correlational studies based on uncontrolled experiments. Here, the
so-called risk-conclusion did not even know how to quantify what
constitues "drinking" (one sip of wine? one shot of 90-proof liquor?)

If a "drink" or "drink in a day" is a gallon of 190-proof vodka, I
don't need any study to assure that you DON'T have to worry about
any of those stated ailments. :-)

Quoted message said:

oral and esophageal cancer risks go
up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking

too much

Quoted message said:

causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.

So take heart, Doug!

-- Dan

Stick to running and forget about reading the Wall Street Journal
reporting statistical garbage on medicine and health.

-- Bob.

How about this: I'll stick to assembling facts from all sides of an issue,
deciding for myself based on this best available evidence, and not taking
the advice of know it alls such as Bob, who apparently has determined that
his conclusions are to be followed without examination. And its hardly off
topic as feared by the OP. A beer or seven after a run (and sometimes
before) is quite a pleasure.

Published by alchoholics.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
:
: Dan Stumpus wrote:
: > Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
: > Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.
:
: Just like W.C.Fields, for carrying cases of liquor, in case of a
: snake bite. He also carried a snake, just in case.
:
: >
: > On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
: > research, indluding:
: >
: > Heart Attack:
: > 37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.
:
: That's worse than [censored]. How much is drunk each day?
: What do those men "drink" (5-7 days a week)?
:
:
: > Diabetes:
: > 34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
: > diabetics at high risk of heart attack.
: >
: > Stroke:
: > 40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.
: >
: > Dementia:
: > 42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.
: >
: > Osteoporosis:
: > Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone
: density
: > than nondrinkers.
: >
: > Of course, there are associated risks --
:
: These are tabloid [censored]! By associated risk, I presume you mean
: correlational studies based on uncontrolled experiments. Here, the
: so-called risk-conclusion did not even know how to quantify what
: constitues "drinking" (one sip of wine? one shot of 90-proof liquor?)
:
: If a "drink" or "drink in a day" is a gallon of 190-proof vodka, I
: don't need any study to assure that you DON'T have to worry about
: any of those stated ailments. :-)
:
:
: >oral and esophageal cancer risks go
: > up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking
: too much
: > causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.
: >
: > So take heart, Doug!
: >
: > -- Dan
:
: Stick to running and forget about reading the Wall Street Journal
: reporting statistical garbage on medicine and health.
:
: -- Bob.
:
Anyone else here thinking Bob is a bit angry and argumentative and could
really use a good strong drink to chill out?

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
:
:
: Dan Stumpus wrote:
: >
: > Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
: > Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.
: >
: > On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
: > research, indluding:
:
: Maybe better to review the social history of alcohol.
: Most days I think the WSJ is full of right wing [censored]
: anyway..
:
: > Heart Attack:
: > 37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.
:
: A good _many_ alcoholics die from heart failure, if liver
: failure doesn't kill them first. A glass of wine or beer
: per day? No. But don't feed me this BS about how "healthy"
: alcohol is. Physiologically, it's a poison.
:
: Any so called benefits for heart patients is easily
: outweighed by it's deliterious affects on organ
: tissues if used long term. But just short term, it's
: a medical fact alcohol kills brain cells on contact.
: Bet the media never mentions that "benefit..."
:
: > Diabetes:
: > 34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
: > diabetics at high risk of heart attack.
:
: And I say nonsense. There's generally more sugar in
: alcohol than most others commercially processed
: foodstuffs. Americans consume several pounds per
: individual per year and is a likely cause of many
: type 2 incidents.
:
: > Stroke:
: > 40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.
:
: Exercise and a good diet will do the same and better.
: Ditto heart and diabetes...
:
: > Dementia:
: > 42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.
:
: IMO people who drink everyday (especially as many as
: three) are alcoholics. It's when they then try to stop
: that dementia occurs 🙂
:
: > Osteoporosis:
: > Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone
density
: > than nondrinkers.
:
: Bull [censored]. Osteoporosis is caused by a lack of
: enough calcium...
:
: > Of course, there are associated risks -- oral and esophageal cancer
risks go
: > up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking too
much
: > causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.
:
: You forgot to mention for a good many people alcohol
: is highly addictive and behaves similarly as a drug
: to cocaine. For those so inclined, there's no such
: thing as "moderate" drinking.
:
: Course the media loves studies and press releases,
: espescially from the industries that fund them.
: They never mention alcohol is a drug...
:
: > So take heart, Doug!
:
: Well nothing seems to bother Doug. But a studious
: exercise regime offsets high beer consumption.

Tom, you sound totally anti-alcohol but ignore the fact that a good many
people have a glass of wine or a beer every now and then and aren't addicted
or harming themselves at all. You mention those who are inclined to be
addicted to alcohol. I understand your point. But that's true of many
things. There are people addicted to food who are destroying their lives
and ruining their health. Or addicted to sex. But I'm sure you aren't
saying that people need to abstain from food or sex. Just the abuse of
those things.

John Galt said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Dan Stumpus said:

Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most

evenings.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.

Just like W.C.Fields, for carrying cases of liquor, in case of a
snake bite. He also carried a snake, just in case.

Quoted message said:

On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some

alcohol-health

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

research, indluding:

Heart Attack:
37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.

That's worse than [censored]. How much is drunk each day?
What do those men "drink" (5-7 days a week)?

Quoted message said:

Diabetes:
34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection

for

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

diabetics at high risk of heart attack.

Stroke:
40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.

Dementia:
42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.

Osteoporosis:
Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher

bone

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

density

Quoted message said:

than nondrinkers.

Of course, there are associated risks --

These are tabloid [censored]! By associated risk, I presume you mean
correlational studies based on uncontrolled experiments. Here, the
so-called risk-conclusion did not even know how to quantify what
constitues "drinking" (one sip of wine? one shot of 90-proof

liquor?)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If a "drink" or "drink in a day" is a gallon of 190-proof vodka, I
don't need any study to assure that you DON'T have to worry about
any of those stated ailments. :-)

Quoted message said:

oral and esophageal cancer risks go
up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and

drinking

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

too much

Quoted message said:

causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.

So take heart, Doug!

-- Dan

Stick to running and forget about reading the Wall Street Journal
reporting statistical garbage on medicine and health.

-- Bob.

How about this: I'll stick to assembling facts from all sides of an

issue,

Quoted message said:

deciding for myself based on this best available evidence, and not

taking

Quoted message said:

the advice of know it alls such as Bob,

Bob was giving his expert opinion that the stated conclusions were
not warranted from facts partially and inaccurately given.

Quoted message said:

who apparently has determined that
his conclusions are to be followed without examination.

My conclusion is based on faulty statistical methodology, independent
of the actual data. If you had any training in statistics, you would
have known my conclusion is correct. Since you obviously did hot
have adequate statistical training, the only way for you to "examine"
my conclusion is to study the subject of statistical inference until
you know how and what to examine.

Meanwhile, dispensing some wacky conclusion by statistical quacks
is not going to help you or anyone else one bit.

However, everyone in a ng discussion is free to believe what they
want. Statistical Fools will be no more able to distinguish between
statistical [censored] from a nutritious piece of statistical cake
than an regular fool is able to distinguish wheat from its chaft.

-- Bob. Ph.D Statistics.
Elected Fellow of the American Statistical Association (1984)

Quoted message said:

And its hardly off
topic as feared by the OP. A beer or seven after a run (and

sometimes

Quoted message said:

before) is quite a pleasure.

bikeme said:

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
:
:
: Dan Stumpus wrote:
: >
: > Some time ago, I got into the habit of having a drink most evenings.
: > Purely for medicinal purposes, of course.
: >
: > On 12/28, the Wall Street Journal ran a review of some alcohol-health
: > research, indluding:
:
: Maybe better to review the social history of alcohol.
: Most days I think the WSJ is full of right wing [censored]
: anyway..
:
: > Heart Attack:
: > 37% lower risk in men who drink 5 to 7 days a week.
:
: A good _many_ alcoholics die from heart failure, if liver
: failure doesn't kill them first. A glass of wine or beer
: per day? No. But don't feed me this BS about how "healthy"
: alcohol is. Physiologically, it's a poison.
:
: Any so called benefits for heart patients is easily
: outweighed by it's deliterious affects on organ
: tissues if used long term. But just short term, it's
: a medical fact alcohol kills brain cells on contact.
: Bet the media never mentions that "benefit..."
:
: > Diabetes:
: > 34% lower risk of developing disease, up to 60% more protection for
: > diabetics at high risk of heart attack.
:
: And I say nonsense. There's generally more sugar in
: alcohol than most others commercially processed
: foodstuffs. Americans consume several pounds per
: individual per year and is a likely cause of many
: type 2 incidents.
:
: > Stroke:
: > 40% to 60% lower risk with one to two drinks a day.
:
: Exercise and a good diet will do the same and better.
: Ditto heart and diabetes...
:
: > Dementia:
: > 42% lower risk with consumption of one to three drinks a day.
:
: IMO people who drink everyday (especially as many as
: three) are alcoholics. It's when they then try to stop
: that dementia occurs 🙂
:
: > Osteoporosis:
: > Women who have 6 ot 7 drinks a week have significantly higher bone
density
: > than nondrinkers.
:
: Bull [censored]. Osteoporosis is caused by a lack of
: enough calcium...
:
: > Of course, there are associated risks -- oral and esophageal cancer
risks go
: > up (but these are much rarer than the above maladies), and drinking too
much
: > causes moral decay, pollutes our vital bodily fluids, etc.
:
: You forgot to mention for a good many people alcohol
: is highly addictive and behaves similarly as a drug
: to cocaine. For those so inclined, there's no such
: thing as "moderate" drinking.
:
: Course the media loves studies and press releases,
: espescially from the industries that fund them.
: They never mention alcohol is a drug...
:
: > So take heart, Doug!
:
: Well nothing seems to bother Doug. But a studious
: exercise regime offsets high beer consumption.

Tom, you sound totally anti-alcohol but ignore the fact that a good many
people have a glass of wine or a beer every now and then and aren't addicted
or harming themselves at all. You mention those who are inclined to be
addicted to alcohol. I understand your point. But that's true of many
things. There are people addicted to food who are destroying their lives
and ruining their health. Or addicted to sex. But I'm sure you aren't
saying that people need to abstain from food or sex. Just the abuse of
those things.

Well, I think we'll all addicted to water. But water,
while you can die from too much of it, isn't a poison
that kills brain cells on contact. I'm just interested
in the facts, not industry sponsored BS. Wasn't too
long ago the tobacco industry claimed smoking was
"healthful," and even had medical opinions and medical
doctors to back that bull [censored] up. Why? To sell more.
Fact is, I know people that died from buying into that
marketing-disguised-as-"science" BS.

So, lets look at the facts: Alcohol is a drug. Ask any
medical degree, although some nutritionist idiots are
assinine enough to try to classify it as a "food"
because it's metabolized (in the liver, which is why it
causes liver damage.) It's responsible for more drug
addiction, human suffering, disease, genetic defects,
and death (100,000 US alcohol related deaths each year)
than any other known "food" substance in history. It
depresses the respiratory system (not good for running)
and erodes nerve cell linings. It attacks heart, liver,
and brain tissues. Now, those are the facts. I don't
think real food qualifies, since food addiction isn't
chemical and doesn't destroy tissue, it's psychological.
Of course if sex is addictive, I'm all for it :^)

Here's my point: If reasonsible adults want to drink
fine; no one here is preaching prohibition. But the
facts are something else. I'm just sick of having it
foisting upon the more intelligent this media and
industry sponsored myth that alcohol is "healthy" or
"beneficial." It ain't. If it were healthy, it wouldn't
kill brain cells regardless of the _amount_ consumed
(food and sex, OTOH, is known to create cells 😉 ) So,
that's the major health facts all these studies ignore.
It's just that some people will adopt any load of self
denial bull [censored] to justify a favorite habit. Why can't
people just admit it instead of teaching our kids
alcohol is some sort of life giving elixir? Another
fact is I live near several college towns and innocent
kids brainwashed by our "alcohol is healthy" society die
all the time here from drinking. I haven't seen anyone
die lately from sex...

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Well, I think we'll all addicted to water. But water,
while you can die from too much of it, isn't a poison
that kills brain cells on contact. I'm just interested
in the facts, not industry sponsored BS. Wasn't too
long ago the tobacco industry claimed smoking was
"healthful," and even had medical opinions and medical
doctors to back that bull [censored] up. Why? To sell more.
Fact is, I know people that died from buying into that
marketing-disguised-as-"science" BS.

So, lets look at the facts: Alcohol is a drug. Ask any
medical degree, although some nutritionist idiots are
assinine enough to try to classify it as a "food"
because it's metabolized (in the liver, which is why it
causes liver damage.) It's responsible for more drug
addiction, human suffering, disease, genetic defects,
and death (100,000 US alcohol related deaths each year)
than any other known "food" substance in history. It
depresses the respiratory system (not good for running)
and erodes nerve cell linings. It attacks heart, liver,
and brain tissues. Now, those are the facts. I don't
think real food qualifies, since food addiction isn't
chemical and doesn't destroy tissue, it's psychological.
Of course if sex is addictive, I'm all for it :^)

Here's my point: If reasonsible adults want to drink
fine; no one here is preaching prohibition. But the
facts are something else. I'm just sick of having it
foisting upon the more intelligent this media and
industry sponsored myth that alcohol is "healthy" or
"beneficial." It ain't. If it were healthy, it wouldn't
kill brain cells regardless of the _amount_ consumed
(food and sex, OTOH, is known to create cells 😉 ) So,
that's the major health facts all these studies ignore.
It's just that some people will adopt any load of self
denial bull [censored] to justify a favorite habit. Why can't
people just admit it instead of teaching our kids
alcohol is some sort of life giving elixir? Another
fact is I live near several college towns and innocent
kids brainwashed by our "alcohol is healthy" society die
all the time here from drinking. I haven't seen anyone
die lately from sex...

I hate to let you down after such a long diatribe, but alcohol
in moderation (glass of wine a day) has been shown in studies
ad nauseum that the benefits outweigh the risks. All the people
doing these studies aren't in cahoots with the booze industry.
There's no conspiracy. It's really, really true.

It's also true that the negatives start to outweigh the positives
very quickly as the amounts taken in increase. It must be kept
at a very low concentration or there's nothing good going on.
All the bad things you mentioned become an issue then.

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

SwStudio said:

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Well, I think we'll all addicted to water. But water,
while you can die from too much of it, isn't a poison
that kills brain cells on contact. I'm just interested
in the facts, not industry sponsored BS. Wasn't too
long ago the tobacco industry claimed smoking was
"healthful," and even had medical opinions and medical
doctors to back that bull [censored] up. Why? To sell more.
Fact is, I know people that died from buying into that
marketing-disguised-as-"science" BS.

So, lets look at the facts: Alcohol is a drug. Ask any
medical degree, although some nutritionist idiots are
assinine enough to try to classify it as a "food"
because it's metabolized (in the liver, which is why it
causes liver damage.) It's responsible for more drug
addiction, human suffering, disease, genetic defects,
and death (100,000 US alcohol related deaths each year)
than any other known "food" substance in history. It
depresses the respiratory system (not good for running)
and erodes nerve cell linings. It attacks heart, liver,
and brain tissues. Now, those are the facts. I don't
think real food qualifies, since food addiction isn't
chemical and doesn't destroy tissue, it's psychological.
Of course if sex is addictive, I'm all for it :^)

Here's my point: If reasonsible adults want to drink
fine; no one here is preaching prohibition. But the
facts are something else. I'm just sick of having it
foisting upon the more intelligent this media and
industry sponsored myth that alcohol is "healthy" or
"beneficial." It ain't. If it were healthy, it wouldn't
kill brain cells regardless of the _amount_ consumed
(food and sex, OTOH, is known to create cells 😉 ) So,
that's the major health facts all these studies ignore.
It's just that some people will adopt any load of self
denial bull [censored] to justify a favorite habit. Why can't
people just admit it instead of teaching our kids
alcohol is some sort of life giving elixir? Another
fact is I live near several college towns and innocent
kids brainwashed by our "alcohol is healthy" society die
all the time here from drinking. I haven't seen anyone
die lately from sex...

I hate to let you down after such a long diatribe, but alcohol
in moderation (glass of wine a day) has been shown in studies
ad nauseum that the benefits outweigh the risks. All the people
doing these studies aren't in cahoots with the booze industry.
There's no conspiracy. It's really, really true.

I hate to let you down, but it ain't the alcohol. There
is simply no end to silly justifications for drinking.
Why people won't admit they drink to get high is beyond
me. When these "studies" first appeared, it was in
relation to and benefiting the wine industry. But more
objective studies in fact showed it wasn't the alcohol,
it was the unfermented ingredients: i.e., the grapes
and grains ***IN*** the alcoholic beverages, that
provided the health benefits. In other words, you can
get the ***SAME*** health benefits from drinking
unfermented red grape juice as you can from alcoholic
red wine. Youir ignorance is simply astounding.

Alcohol is a drug and is known/proven to have
deliterious effects on human physiology. Only someone
in denial and looking for justification for the alcohol
induced "high" claims it's the alcohol that is
"healthy."

Quoted message said:

It's also true that the negatives start to outweigh the positives
very quickly as the amounts taken in increase. It must be kept
at a very low concentration or there's nothing good going on.

Rubbish. Not only rubbish, complete medical nonsense.

Quoted message said:

All the bad things you mentioned become an issue then.

Yeah, BAD due to the alcohol. Good due to the
ingredients, which simply don't require fermentation
to be of benefit. Low concentration means nothing.
Alcohol is alcohol. Like I said it's deliterious
effects occur whether in large or small quantities.
In other words even 1 single ounce will kill brain
cells and depress the respiratiory system. That is
a medical fact. You simnply have no idea what you're
talking about.

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
abstainers...

Quoted message said:

That's bull [censored], Doug 🙂

Tom, I'm only citing science. 😉

Quoted message said:

As you well know,
there are people who abuse their health and
live long lives, and people who don't abuse
their health and live long lives. Course more
people who do abuse their health tend to die
younger than those who don't. But frankly,
unless one is an alcohol addict/abuser, I don't
think it has zip to do with how long you live.

You may be right. As with many of these correlation studies and the
use/abuse of statistics(statistics, dammed statistics and lies) they
can draw a conclusion that foot size and month of birth are also
factors. OTOH I do run and play with a few Md's and although they make
[censored] poor patients they also feel that drinking in moderation is just
fine. It's true that no one has done long termed controlled studies to
prove this(that I know of) but there seems to be enough data points that
my Heineken or Cabernet will not help bury me.

Let's just say based on the current information I will continue this
personal vice. 😉

Quoted message said:

Sort of like heads in the 60's who used to
justify a daily joint by saying "it's a
natural drug." In fact, I think I used to say
that 🙂

You mean it wasn't. I grew my own and it was very natural. 😉

-DF

"Tom Phillips" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

SwStudio wrote:
I hate to let you down, but it ain't the alcohol. There
is simply no end to silly justifications for drinking.
Why people won't admit they drink to get high is beyond
me.

It's obvious you take this personally and have some sort of
axe to grind, Tom.

Quoted message said:

Youir ignorance is simply astounding.

Tell me how you really feel, Tom. Get it all out.

Quoted message said:

Alcohol is a drug and is known/proven to have
deliterious effects on human physiology. Only someone
in denial and looking for justification for the alcohol
induced "high" claims it's the alcohol that is
"healthy."

That's me! I have to admit to going to bars nightly and staggering
home because I think it's damn good for me. Hopefully my denial
will come to an end soon. We all have our vices. Yours appears
to be taking people's statements wildly out of context in order to
display an unusually high degree of anger towards people's reasons
for drinking. Even people you will never meet! Life's too short
for that, don't you think?

cheers,
--
David (in Hamilton, ON)
www.allfalldown.org
www.absolutelyaccurate.com

You mean "hornier"? The ugly ones also look better after WE have a few.

I duuno about that. Never been around any professional woman
wreslers or boxers>

Except for his wife.