Apologies if this has been done – I’m surprised it hasn’t already (and I’ve put the keywords I searched on in my title!)

New lower alcohol level guidance issued today
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35255384

I have to admit I’m not all that convinced this is a good thing – those who are already at significant risk are above the current guidelines, whilst these new ones will put more people over the recommended limit – 2 bottles of wine a week is over the limit, so you can only share a bottle on 3 nights a week.

I think all the new guidelines are saying is that essentially any significant amount of alcohol consumption has negative health effects. It’s not really a good or bad thing, just a fact that is become clearer as more research has been done.

It’s still your decision on what to do about it. I drink BTW, and I think it’s good to be made aware of the risks.

The harm done by alcohol is massive, it’s just sort of tolerated because it’s so engrained in our culture. It’s also pretty enjoyable to drink for most people most of the time.

I’m a bit disappointed by the new limits tbh, all the hype and build up getting us all excited then they end up bloody reducing them. Chiz.

The new “limits” are probably round about what I consume. Half of that would be a post-ride pub session. I can’t say that it bothers me that the new guidance is lower than the last.

2 bottles of wine a week is over the limit, so you can only share a bottle on 3 nights a week.

I have to say as a near tetotal individual [ about 10 pints a year if that] that seems quite a lot to drink per week to me so does 10 shots per week.

YMMV but everyone knows drinking is not a great health inducing past time

Drinking is the new smoking. Ban it! 😛
Interesting to see how much alcohol is drunk on TV making it appear normal.

I drink “far too much”. But it’s my vice and while consuming, say, 30+ units a week might well be “bad for me”, that’s a couple of pints of beard-stroking bitter a night, not a bottle of vodka in one go on Saturday evening. More state-nannying isnt going to change my lifestyle.

Fixed – I’m less than convinced that it is massively harmful to drink in moderation as the vast majority of people do*, not even if you’re above the new guidelines.

What I find a bit concerning about all this is that there appears to be no mention of the significant health benefits of moderate drinking – this has been shown in numerous studies for a variety of different diseases. The message coming here is that any drinking is harmful, when that appears to be completely contradicted by the research.

*My aunt died of alcoholism related illnesses so I’m well aware of the problems of excess – then again my other aunt smoked and died of lung cancer

Only 3 nights a week on the sauce, heaven forbid!

I will maybe manage 6 ales at the weekend if I drink Fri and sat, my kids have no respect for my hangovers

More state-nannying isnt going to change my lifestyle.

See you on the barricades comrade and you keep sticking iot to the man you dangerous subversive 😉

More state-nannying isnt going to change my lifestyle.

Comments like this are pretty annoying. This isn’t a “nanny state” thing. If you were being forbidden from consuming alcohol above a certain limit then you’d have a point, this is just a recommendation.

No one can make an informed decision about anything if they are lacking information!

tipsy dangerous subversive, I’ll have you know.

This is your moment in history, Stoner.
🙂

Like when Martin Luther King nailed the Magna Carta to the doors of the Alamo, it will be remembered for ever more.

About 2 pints a week here, I reckon I’ll be OK.

About 2 pints a week here

hardly seems worth getting the glass wet.

What I find a bit concerning about all this is that there appears to be no mention of the significant health benefits of moderate drinkin

professor on BBC this AM was saying this is a myth they wanted to dispel.

The best way to dispel that myth would be to show the flaws in the (many) earlier studies.

Bit I heard on the radio this morning discussing this had someone on explaining that the “there is no safe level” part of the advice is based on one study that contradicts the mass of studies and evidence that small amounts of certain alcohol is actually beneficial to the heart.

The advice is just based on a statistic (as usual) that alcohol “causes cancer”. Breathing air causes cancer also. We did the one recently about bacon causing cancer. Yes it does apparently, but doesn’t mean you will get cancer eating bacon. There is an increased risk but it still remains very small.

I’ve had a quick search and the only thing I can find suggesting the previous research is wrong is this new guidance – haven’t found any new research contradicting that. There were quite a lot of studies done showing benefits across quite a wide range of health issues.

edit:

Ah, that sounds like a valid way of analysing the research then 🙄

I think I’ll ignore it just as I have all the other scare stories regarding just about everything else. Did you know that mountain biking is dangerous?

You may have a better handle on this than me but as someone who’ll grasp at anything to justify an extra pint or two I’m unaware of all these significant health benefits. I think there was mention on the beeb this morning of an occasional glass of red having a slight protective effect against heart disease, but only for women over 55.

From what I understand these latest guidelines are pitched to reduce the risk of dying from an alcohol related illness to 1%, and it’s being stressed that there’s no safe amount of alcohol you can consume, it ups your risk from the first sip.

Breathing air causes cancer also

No it doesn’t.

The research merely confirms what even a mild hangover tells you – alcohol isn’t good for your body.
I doubt moderate drinking has any physical benefits.
But there is a lot to be said for the social and mental benefits of going down the pub and meeting friends.
It is a public health issue. We are living longer but taking worse care of our bodies. It is incredibly expensive to treat an elderly human being for diseases and conditions they have incurred from a bad lifestyle (note: this is not the same thing as just natural aging).
My experience is a lot of retired people are drinking heavily as they have nothing to do. Most heavy drinkers I know lack one thing: hope.
I drink too much, and it is all very well me saying, it’s my choice, but is it then fair for me to expect the NHS to rescue me from all the health conditions my drinking has incurred?

I think all the new guidelines are saying is that essentially any significant amount of alcohol consumption has negative health effects.

…

The harm done by alcohol is massive, it’s just sort of tolerated because it’s so engrained in our culture.

We have two things here. All drinking has negative effects on your health. This is the new bit. It’s mostly about increasing cancer risk.

The “massive” harm is more about heavier drinking whether it be violence, liver damage or drink driving.

I think cats have a sensible attitude to alcohol.

I am sceptical of studies claiming to show health benefits for moderate drinking, I wonder how many of these studies were funded by The Portman Group. By all means enjoy a drink, I do but do it in the full knowledge that it is bad for you. Badnewz is right about the social and mental benefit of meeting friends,you in the pub or anywhere

Farage is getting desperate.

Wheels falling off his car last week, mass lock-ins this week.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35261968

Breathing air causes cancer also

No it doesn’t.
[/quote]

Depends on the air 😉

Pure air and no pollutants, probably not. Polluted air, especially containing particulates from diesel, yes (according to WHO).

re farage folk seem very confused between advice and being compelled

the “state” provides you with information about remaining healthy

you can follow it or ignore it at a lock in as you see fit.

I am not sure why folk think the state should not provide us with advice about healthy living It’s not like being healthy is a bad idea.

FWIW i once heard matthew parris ranting about Zebra crossings as nanny stating and despair at the fact the government told him where to cross the road. Me i see it as a device to provide me with a safer method of crossing than elsewhere that i am free to use or ignore. That is all this is. Use the info or ignore it as its your life to be lived as you see fit.

Depends on the air

Pure air and no pollutants, probably not. Polluted air, especially containing particulates from diesel, yes (according to WHO).

He’s not a real Doctor you know.

There have been a lot of them, lots of them properly peer reviewed – so I doubt they were all funded by them, and even if so it’s unlikely they would have been published in major journals if the source of funding resulted in biases in the methodology or results. Why exactly are you sceptical?

BTW I meant to mention earlier that one of the reasons I’m concerned about new limits putting lots of moderate drinkers over the limits is that it encourages general disregard of such advice – which could have the result not only of people drinking more because they’re over the limit anyway, but also of them disregarding other health advice which is more important. I’m not suggesting that controlling alcohol is not important but I don’t believe the difference between 14 and 21 units a week is significant – not compared to plenty of other things people do which are bad for them, the most immediately obvious one being overeating, which I’m sure causes far, far more health issues than that 7 unit difference.

It’s like setting speed limits way below the 85th percentile speed 😈

@ aracer I’m sceptical for the very reason you quote about biases in methodology or results. I also think the drink industry has widespread easy access to the media where it can place stories about these claimed health benefits from studies funded by the portman group

I read somewhere that exceeding the new guidelines is as dangerous as driving. I don’t drive, so I’ll continue to drink.

I have a glass or two of wine (around 1/3 to a half a bottle) most evenings after the kids are in bed, unless I have a couple of beers. That probably puts me slightly above the new guidelines, but below/around the old ones, so might have a marginal detrimental effect on my overall health outcome statistics.

I can live with that. Albeit for slightly less time than I could.

from the BBC article:

This has been deemed to be an acceptable level of risk as it is approximately the same risk that someone has when they do an every day task such as driving a car.

This is the crux of it for me. It’s about risk, like everything in modern life. They have recalibrated what is safe based on the risk of harm caused by it, relative to other daily activities.

Applying statistics based on large populations to individuals is overly simplistic and just plain lazy.

Also from the BBC article:

Prof Sir David Spiegelhalter, an expert in understanding risk from the University of Cambridge, said it was important to put the 1% risk in context. He said an hour of TV watching or a bacon sandwich a couple of time a week was more dangerous.

I generally drink while watching TV. Life on the edge!

Just don’t be having that bacon sandwich at the same time!

Yeah, but as I mentioned, they’ve been peer reviewed so that should get rid of those biases – I’ve certainly not seen any suggestion that such biases exist in those studies, not even in any refutation of them. The scientific community does tend to control that sort of thing quite well. Nor am I talking about press releases – this is proper research which can be found in scientific journals.

Applying statistics based on large populations to individuals is overly simplistic and just plain lazy.

True, but you’re never going to be able to sit there with any more certainty and say “well i can drink 7 because I’m special or definitely going to die of something else”, so “drinking 6 pints a week is about as dangerous as driving 10,000miles a year” would be a good yardstick.

Just don’t be having that bacon sandwich at the same time!

But am I okay having the rest of the Christmas cake?

How much would you have to drink for it to be as dangerous as cycling? Is a lump of polystyrene likely to help at all? 😈

Yeah but the car thing is a utility booze is entirely discretionary

How much would you have to drink for it to be as dangerous as cycling? Is a lump of polystyrene likely to help at all?

The overall health benefits of cycling outweigh any increased risk of sudden death, and I always wear a helmet when I’m drinking.