Sort:  

I saw this somewhere else too, but now I can't remember where, pointing out that no, it's not really statistically significant between "no drinks" and "one drink." I chalk it up to media sensationalism - crazy, misleading, sensational headlines gets eyeballs.

In fairness to the mainstream news, some sources were OK in reporting the small print.

Others not so good!

Posted using Partiko Android

Drink moderately and reporting moderately are not very exciting now, are they?
More worrying, I think, is how these sorts of statistics translate into advice from doctors and nurses who really should know better. I'm insisting on continuing to take a particular medication as, having done an assessment of risk factors as they apply to me, my view is that the benefits outweigh the potential risks. NICE guidelines also say that my opinion is the significant one as long as I am aware of the risks.
However, there is constant pressure from doctors to stop this medication, most recently over research regarding ovarian cancer. When I enquired for detailed information, it transpires that 6 women in 1,000 are statistically likely to get ovarian cancer anyway, and with this medication, it increases the statistical risk to 7 women in 1,000.
It's true, there is an increased risk, but really?

There's a 0.01% greater risk by the sounds of it! Sounds like good odds to me!

Also once you factor in all the other variables particular to you that may not even apply!

Posted using Partiko Android

When you cannot get access to clean water, alcohol is your friend. Alcohol is responsible for millions and millions of humans surviving over thousands of years when they would not have because of pathogens in water. The new study is nonsense. There are benefits, and they definitely outweigh the negatives as long as you drink in moderation and responsibly.

Yes good pint!

Posted using Partiko Android

Sorry I couldn't resist that. You're quite right of course. Widespread in medieval Britain and many rainforest tribes in the form of 'manioc beer'I understand!

Posted using Partiko Android

Great information, thank you. One could argue that a candy bar is most likely worse for health than a can of beer.

Especially if the beer is real ale and the bar an 'edible food like substance', like most of them are!

Posted using Partiko Android

To the question in your title, my Magic 8-Ball says:

Outlook good

Hi! I'm a bot, and this answer was posted automatically. Check this post out for more information.

Hi @revisesociology!

Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.813 which ranks you at #4390 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 37 places in the last three days (old rank 4427).

In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 450 contributions, your post is ranked at #111.

Evaluation of your UA score:
  • You're on the right track, try to gather more followers.
  • The readers like your work!
  • Good user engagement!

Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server

Food is getting worse by the day, one's got to drink... :D

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.30
TRX 0.12
JST 0.034
BTC 63750.99
ETH 3130.22
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.95