• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

bowerbird said:
Hmmmm I think I have heard this style of rebuttal before - whenever someone posts something that others do not want to hear it is labelled "alarmism". But that is alright. Meanwhile I will continue to care for my poor wonderful and gentle indigenous people of Australia who are dying far far far too young of alcohol related diseases.
Click to expand...

Your post is a good example of the fallacy of hasty generalization. You work with a small population who has a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, and is killing themselves with abusing the substance. Your words have about as much relevance to this discussion as a random rendition of Yankee Doodle Dandy.

:roll:
 
rivrrat said:
Holy crap, what I had to go through to get this. I think I just signed away my first born child.

http://www.ufrealms.com/Late_Life_Alcohol_Consumption_and_20_year_mortality.pdf
Click to expand...

************SNAP!!**************

Cochrane Database of systematic reviews

CONCLUSIONS: A pattern of usual alcohol intake consistent with the NHMRC recommendations will confer a mortality risk similar to or less than that observed in abstainers. The biologically effective dose of alcohol on mortality in women is approximately two standard drinks per day less than in men. Our validation is most reliable for drinkers aged 35 years or older.
Click to expand...

Meta-analysis of alcohol and all-cause mortality: a validation of NHMRC recommendations
Author(s) Holman CD, English DR, Milne E, Winter MG
Source Med J Aust
Date of Publication 1996

However those NHMRC guidelines have since been updated and tightened and they now read

Guideline 1: Reducing the risk of alcohol-related harm over a lifetime

The lifetime risk of harm from drinking alcohol increases with the amount consumed.
Click to expand...

Alcohol Frequently Asked Questions | National Health and Medical Research Council
 
Oh, SNAP! From your source:

For healthy men and women, drinking no more than two standard drinks on any day reduces the lifetime risk of harm from alcohol-related disease or injury.
Click to expand...

2 drinks or less = MODERATE CONSUMPTION.

:prof Read sources before posting.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Your post is a good example of the fallacy of hasty generalization. You work with a small population who has a genetic predisposition to alcoholism, and is killing themselves with abusing the substance. Your words have about as much relevance to this discussion as a random rendition of Yankee Doodle Dandy.

:roll:
Click to expand...

Believe me it is not only the indigenous - but they are the worst affected. See my previous post for the evidence basing - it is difficult to source material more valid than Cochrane because it is a meta-analysis of the research
 
bowerbird said:
Believe me it is not only the indigenous - but they are the worst affected. See my previous post for the evidence basing - it is difficult to source material more valid than Cochrane because it is a meta-analysis of the research
Click to expand...

Unlike you, I actually read your links.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Oh, SNAP! From your source:



2 drinks or less = MODERATE CONSUMPTION.

:prof Read sources before posting.
Click to expand...

Errrrr - read it yourself - REDUCES THE RISK OF LIFETIME HARM

Guideline 1 STILL states

The lifetime risk of harm increases with intake.

But I am well aware of the beneficial effects of red wine in prevention of heart disease. The point is moderation to a LOW level of consumption - which is rare to see.

My concern is that research, reported as this has been is like telling a diabetic that "sugar is good for some people"
 
Last edited:
Some more info
Alcohol And Health


bowerbird said:
But I am well aware of the beneficial effects of red wine in prevention of heart disease. The point is moderation to a LOW level of consumption - which is rare to see.
Click to expand...
Yes, the point IS moderation, but no it's not rare to see. More people consume moderately than heavily.

My concern is that research, reported as this has been is like telling a diabetic that "sugar is good for some people"
Click to expand...
Sugar is necessary for survival, so it is good for ALL people. People with certain conditions have to manage it differently, is all.
 
rivrrat said:
Some more info
Alcohol And Health



Yes, the point IS moderation, but no it's not rare to see. More people consume moderately than heavily.


Sugar is necessary for survival, so it is good for ALL people. People with certain conditions have to manage it differently, is all.
Click to expand...

You haven't read the latest research on sugar..............


Perhaps I do have some bias but remember Australia is one of the heaviest consumers of alcohol in the world (Germans outflank us)
 
rivrrat said:
You mean like it's the basic fuel for our bodies? Essential to our cell function? That without it we would die?
Click to expand...

No I mean in the sense that we can get get C6H12O6 from complex carbohydrates which are better for us as they are slower to digest...............Oh! You are confusing sugar with GLUCOSE - different thing altogether..

SUCROSE is the refined carbohydrate that the Western world is currently killing itself with
 
Last edited:
Heavy Drinkers are about six times more likely to develop oral cancer than non-drinkers...

Why is that?....Any heavy drinkers in the house?
 
bowerbird said:
No I mean in the sense that we can get get C6H12O6 from complex carbohydrates which are better for us as they are slower to digest...............Oh! You are confusing sugar with GLUCOSE - different thing altogether..
Click to expand...
No, they aren't different things altogether. Glucose is a sugar.
 
rivrrat said:
No, they aren't different things altogether. Glucose is a sugar.
Click to expand...

Not in the body it is not and sugar is VERY different from glucose. It was white refined sucrose that I was thinking of NOT glucose. And my point was that there are those who will take ANY news they think is even remotely favourable to justify beliefs

i.e. Drinking is good for me - while downing 3-4 drinks a day

OR the diabetic who is so thinks it is fine to eat a box of candy after each insulin shot because "sugar is good for you"

I know it is irrational - but it is also very very human
 
bowerbird said:
Not in the body it is not and sugar is VERY different from glucose.
Click to expand...
glucose: Definition from Answers.com

A monosaccharide sugar, C6H12O6, occurring widely in most plant and animal tissue. It is the principal circulating sugar in the blood and the major energy source of the body.


Glucose - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

a simple sugar (monosaccharide), is an important carbohydrate in biology

I could go on, but really. It's a sugar. And it's required by our bodies in order to survive. Diabetics can't avoid it, they NEED it. Type 1 diabetics just can't produce enough insulin to control it, so they require insulin.

It was white refined sucrose that I was thinking of NOT glucose.
Click to expand...
Very well then, but you SAID sugar, which encompasses more than just sucrose.

And my point was that there are those who will take ANY news they think is even remotely favourable to justify beliefs

i.e. Drinking is good for me - while downing 3-4 drinks a day
Click to expand...
Well, according to the multiple reports from various independent researchers, institutions, and countries, that WOULD be healthier than abstaining ;)

OR the diabetic who is so thinks it is fine to eat a box of candy after each insulin shot because "sugar is good for you"

I know it is irrational - but it is also very very human
Click to expand...
Education is a good thing. Reading is good too, which is why it's good to note the hazards of excessive drinking they mention in this study and in every other one. This study (and all of the others) specify that moderate drinking is good for you. If a diabetic thinks that moderate sugar consumption is a box of chocolates, then that's really their own retardedness getting the best of them. I'll thank them for helping to clean out the gene pool. ;)
 
Catz Part Deux said:
There is a difference between being an alcoholic and being a moderate drinker. I have 3-4 drinks a week (beer, wine or cider), and have never had issues with my liver. :roll:
Click to expand...

My husband is an alcoholic and he *rarely* drinks.

Alcoholism isn't just "drinking a damn lot all the time" - it can include binge drinking which can occur sparingly (few times a year - special celebrations frequency). It's psychological and physical altering addiction, evident in your attitude and mood - not just in your # of drinks you average per week or so.

Frequency of drink consumption is not a measure of alcoholism.
Huge difference.
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
My husband is an alcoholic and he *rarely* drinks.
Click to expand...

That would technically make him a recovering/reformed alcoholic.

You can't become addicted to something unless you do it regularly, by definition. And if you are addicted to it, you want to do it regularly, even constantly.
 
Dav said:
That would technically make him a recovering/reformed alcoholic.

You can't become addicted to something unless you do it regularly, by definition. And if you are addicted to it, you want to do it regularly, even constantly.
Click to expand...

Some people are addicts in nature and always crave *something* - you don't have to consume it regularly to want it, crave it, be an addict, need it, depend on it (physically or psychologically)

It's not like a broken leg that heals or a cold that goes away. He *is* and alcoholic = he can never *ever* touch it and he always is tempted to swing by the liquor store - he craves it, eventhough it's been a very long time since he's had any. . . he *is* an alcoholic. . . as long as he keeps that in his mind he can handle it. The moment he thinks "I'm not an alcoholic anymore!" is the moment he'll have another binge episode.

We (he and I) won't consider him a 'recovered' alcoholic until he actually doesn't crave it, anymore. . . and he might never get passed the cravings and temptation.

But all this is aside the OP
 
bowerbird said:
No I mean in the sense that we can get get C6H12O6 from complex carbohydrates which are better for us as they are slower to digest...............Oh! You are confusing sugar with GLUCOSE - different thing altogether..

SUCROSE is the refined carbohydrate that the Western world is currently killing itself with
Click to expand...
What about Fructose - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The Mark said:
Sounds like the best option is to be a light to moderate drinker.

I probably qualify as very light...

My last drink was ~ 4-6 months ago, at least.
Click to expand...

You are virtually at non-drinker status and will die early.
 
American said:
You are virtually at non-drinker status and will die early.
Click to expand...
Well, ****!

Does it help if the drink in question was an alcoholic additive to coffee?


...


......


.........


.............:mrgreen:
 
The Mark said:
Well, ****!

Does it help if the drink in question was an alcoholic additive to coffee?


...


......


.........


.............:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Get your ass to the liquor store now!!!! :lol:
 
This is just a feeble rationalization to justify toper's bad habits. Sorry, it won't work. Too many drunks have died in their forties and fifties... Flynn, Bogart, Barrymore, Fields, to name a few.

ricksfolly
 
danarhea said:
The answer to that question is obvious. The heavy drinkers spend their lives well pickled and preserved. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Exactly... case in point:

keith-richards-771731.jpg


Keith should have kicked off decades ago... yet the alcohol preserves him in ways no other chemical could. He's also got a liver of granite which helps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom