which goes against the current scientific consensus and advice of the top public health official in the UK. you do understand how consensus works in the scientific community, right?
all of the large studies which point out alcohol’s harms explicitly say that the ‘low quantities can combat certain symptoms like blood pressure’ benefit is FAR outweighed by the long-term harm to your health. but keep conveniently ignoring that part.
so bizarre that an article whose entire thrust is that negative habits like drinking and smoking must be CONTROLLED, to under one drink a day, is interpreted by you as ‘extends your life’. reading with blinkers on much? why would the rhetoric on these drinks be one of limited intake, control, cutting down, if they were beneficial? don’t you think it’s the rest of the article’s content, about, y’know, leading a healthy lifestyle that is the important takeaway there? oh yeah, alcohol can possibly extend your life if you drink ‘no more than ...’, oh and also eat a healthy balanced diet, run for 30 minutes a day, never smoke, clean your room, kiss your loved ones to sleep etc every night. i’m sure drinking beers in itself is magically extending your life, dilbert.
well lookie here at what i found on my morning commute! very interesting essay on mescaline in the latest LRB. https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v42/n01 … ble-cactus
Last edited by uziq (2020-01-09 01:23:18)