Well, now. This is rare: "The Truth We Won’t Admit: Drinking Is Healthy." A few excerpts:
Sláinte!
Not discussing the beneficial impact of alcohol on heart disease has been a systematic policy of the U.S. public health establishment, one example of which is the Framingham Study. The National Institutes of Health, which funded the Framingham research, forbad Harvard epidemiologist Carl Seltzer from publishing this finding, he later revealed. Why? NIH’s reasoning, published in a 1972 memo, still pervades American thinking:The whole article is worth the time you'll spend to read it. There's one important caveat, however: not everyone should drink. My mother was an alcoholic and it killed her, quite literally. I've seen the damage alcohol can do to a person's life and to the alcoholic's loved ones and it's not pretty, believe me. If I had to give thanks for one single thing in my life it would be that the alcoholism trait went missing in my genetic make-up (and that of my children, too). Otherwise? I believe I'm the beneficiary of alcohol's prophylactic effects. My doctor agrees with me, sayin' my "numbers" are so good I'd prolly live to be 100. If I could only breathe.
The encouragement of undertaking drinking with the implication of prevention of coronary heart disease would be scientifically misleading and socially undesirable in view of the major health problem of alcoholism that already exists in the country.Flash forward to 2011, when the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans were finally released by the Department of Agriculture and HHS. One reason for their delayed publication was the uproar raised by public health organizations to the Guidelines’ alcohol committee’s report of “strong evidence” that moderate drinking prevents heart disease, and the “moderate evidence” that it prevents dementia. Such battles are old hat: Similar campaigns against mentioning alcohol’s health benefits are mounted every five years when the Guidelines threaten to include them, starting with South Carolina senator and teetotaler Strom Thurmond’s strenuous objections to the 1995 edition.
Epidemiological study after study (that is, research tracing drinkers, their consumption, and their life outcomes) produces consistent findings—there are now hundreds of such studies. But whenever any sort of research can be teased out to suggest drinking is bad for you, it will be put on full display to confuse the picture.
Sláinte!
I'm reminded of the (apocalyptic) advice that we should drink three glasses of red wine each day; one glass to prevent heart disease, one to prevent Alzheimer's, and one to prevent something else but I've forgotten what it is!
ReplyDeleteHeh. The last thing wouldn't be "to keep memory intact," now, would it?
DeleteI had planned to blog this article but you were first. I find that I cannot search for pictures from older times without delving into the pictures of a really splendid time that is gone and will never be again. I was putting together such a post with ancient pics but none shall see the dolphin callers at the Top of the Mark or the floating band in the basement of the Mark Hotel in San Francisco... thanks to you. :).
Delete@ Curtis: Oh, Shoot! This is bad, innit!?! (with apologies to Discover card)
DeleteAll things in moderation is good advice.
ReplyDeleteAnything proclaimed by the gubmint is probably bad advice.
And that's MY philosophy.
All things in moderation is good advice.
DeleteUsually, but there are one or two things in life where too much is not quite enough. ;-)
"There's one important caveat, however: not everyone should drink."
ReplyDeleteAmen to that.
The sad thing is they are usually the last one to know.
My Mom knew and she tried and tried and tried to quit. She wasn't strong enough, however.
DeleteI feel so bad for your mom because it isn't about will power.
Delete