Anyway, the news keeps getting more interesting. The most recent research says that not only do moderate drinkers out live abstainers, so do heavy drinkers.
But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers. [Emphasis added]This is not an argument for being a heavy drinker; moderation and self control are still the best policy. And you would probably be better abstaining if you have any reason to believe you are addicted to alcohol or if you are pregnant.
That said, there is no reason whatsoever for anyone else to abstain from alcohol or even to sharply limit their intake. This is the opposite of what health authorities have been advocating for several decades now. Anyone heard a mea culpa from these folks yet? Has anyone ever heard the bureaucracy apologize for anything ever?
I didn't think so. And they've been wrong about a lot of things.
Moderation, by the way, is one to three drinks a day. Your results may vary but that's a lot of alcohol for me. I couldn't drink more than three drinks a day even if I wanted to. One day, maybe, but I couldn't do it two or three days in a row.
No comments:
Post a Comment