rouseytastic
Well-known member
Spot on (my signature in fact!!)
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
New " safe " drinking limit - 3.5 units a week
- Thread starter Uncle Spielberg
- Start date
Spot on (my signature in fact!!)
34064 Fighter Command
New member
Which makes perfect sense because ( assuming you start consumption at age 18 ), like smoking, the effects are cumulative built up over a lifetime. Your body doesn't just reset itself to 'age 18' every Monday morning after a heavy weekend session.
Gregory2Smith1
J'les aurai!
i've drank around 3 bootles a week! for years
never mind throwing in ricard and lager and i'm still here!
look,you'll all gonna die someday,enjoy it while your here
life into your days,not days into your life
your a long time dead
never mind throwing in ricard and lager and i'm still here!
look,you'll all gonna die someday,enjoy it while your here
life into your days,not days into your life
your a long time dead
Norman Potting
Well-known member
I think that that there ought to be an official National Wagging Finger, somewhere in the middle of the country. It would be enormous, and everytime a pronouncement of this type was made it would be from the foot of this giant digit which, by a cunning arrangement of cables and motors, would wag. We would then all know that we had been bad and must stop because someone with a professional qualification had told us something was bad.
If there were later proved wrong the self same professional would have custard pies thrown at them, live on the Six'o'clock news.
Not quite up to Meade's Ball standard, but I have tried.
If there were later proved wrong the self same professional would have custard pies thrown at them, live on the Six'o'clock news.
Not quite up to Meade's Ball standard, but I have tried.
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
In the middle ages, most peoples diet was quite healthy, lots of fruit and veg and they didn't drink a lot (they drank beer but not lots and it wasn't very strong). They had no medical research. People lived to about 35 on average.
Now we have loads of medical research, loads of drugs and treatments, stronger beer and e-numbers, people live to nearly 80 on average.
So, because we know what alcohol does, we are living longer.
I'll not change my drinking habits, even if it does mean I might not live as long.
Now we have loads of medical research, loads of drugs and treatments, stronger beer and e-numbers, people live to nearly 80 on average.
So, because we know what alcohol does, we are living longer.
I'll not change my drinking habits, even if it does mean I might not live as long.
But how will they stop these 4600 people from dying from something else? Or will they live forever if they reduce their alcohol intake?
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #28
I think this report is Horseshit personally. I also read a report that said anything up to 60 units a week was not going to do any real damage, over that and you are pushing it. I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. My ex colleague at 47 had drunk everyday for 25 years and I mean he did not have 1 day when he didn't have a drink or several and he is in rude health. It is also down to genes and a bloke could drink 100 units a week and still be going strong and an other would start to get ill with much less. As it is 4600 people dying is probably as low as any statistic of dying of something else. Only 1 in 7 alcoholics go onto get Cirrohsis so its a roll of the dice. I think moderation of up to 40 units and 2 alcohol free days a week will see you in hearty health.
We are all going to die of something. I really believe that.
We are all going to die of something. I really believe that.
Last edited:
brightn'ove
cringe
may as well just f***ing ban alcochol. less than 2 pints a week... no chance "oxford"
what is the point in this report, its stating the bloody obvious, they may as well say "don't drink alcohol... its bad for you"
ridiculous.
what is the point in this report, its stating the bloody obvious, they may as well say "don't drink alcohol... its bad for you"
ridiculous.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #30
Drinking alcohol is good for you as moderate drinkers live longer than teetotalers.
Great Post Uncle Spielberg
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #32
The BMA 21 units is just plucked from the air anyway by a load of bean counters sat around a table as the Government demanded a figure to publicise and one of them put his finger is the air and came up with it. There is little scientific evidence to support this figure and is cautious, at least that was the feeling until " Ms Oxford " came up with 3.5 units a week. Maybe on the back of this pubs need to get in 1/4 pint glasses and 2 of these, 1/2 pint in one session will be deemed to be " binge drinking ".
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #33
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #34
Gazza was drinking 4 bottles of whisky a day for a while which is 700 units a week. I think that is probably not very good for you.
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #35
One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.
But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does tend to increase one's risk of dying, even when you exclude former problem drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.
But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)
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 were not current drinkers, regardless of whether they used to be alcoholics, second highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the abstainers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.
These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who don't drink, even if they never had a problem with alcohol. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party
But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does tend to increase one's risk of dying, even when you exclude former problem drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.
But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)
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 were not current drinkers, regardless of whether they used to be alcoholics, second highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the abstainers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.
These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who don't drink, even if they never had a problem with alcohol. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
Uncle Spielberg
Well-known member
- Thread starter
- #37
He looks shockingly ill. Although he is off the booze now he pushed his body to the very limits and he is stable now but I think he did so much damage to himself he will never get back to the way he was.
toostonedtocare
Banned
- Feb 12, 2012
- 211
I drink a bottle of whisky a day. It prevents a slow lingering death from Alzeimer's disease.
Was not Was
Loitering with intent
- Jul 31, 2003
- 1,598
So you're not going to take any notice of anyone who knows more than you about something, unless they demonstrably know, err, everything?