You’re basically quoting old research to dispute new findings. If you would read what I posted, you would see that…
We fully agree that high-dose alcohol consumption, particularly as binge drinking, has well-established detrimental effects on the liver, pancreas, and brain and increases the risks of certain cancers, injuries, and substantial harm to others.
We also respect the World Health Organization’s position, advocating universal abstention, which was largely shaped by an influential Global Burden of Disease (GBD) report published in The Lancet in 2018. However…
and then comes my quote. It’s basically a “yes, but…” situation. Alcohol is bad for you, especially if you’re young but new research shows that if you’re over 35 moderate consumption has it’s benefits. I don’t think the findings are final but it goes both ways: it’s not 100% clear alcohol is always bad for you either.
And MedDiet has nothing to do with blue zones. Nothing I mentioned was about longevity. I linked to latest research which shows clear benefits of MedDiet that go beyond correlation. The first link, right before the part I quoted states that “The criteria for causality were met”.
I mean, it’s clear you’re not interested in the evidence and just trying to reaffirm your believes. Not much I can do about so I will move on.
just no, that research is mostly causation correlation and cones. down to fraid mostly (see below)
No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health
https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-alcohol-consumption-is-safe-for-our-health
and most blue zone long life nonsense is to do with pension fraud and poor record keeping, not diet
https://allthatsinteresting.com/blue-zones-supercentenarians
You’re basically quoting old research to dispute new findings. If you would read what I posted, you would see that…
We fully agree that high-dose alcohol consumption, particularly as binge drinking, has well-established detrimental effects on the liver, pancreas, and brain and increases the risks of certain cancers, injuries, and substantial harm to others.
We also respect the World Health Organization’s position, advocating universal abstention, which was largely shaped by an influential Global Burden of Disease (GBD) report published in The Lancet in 2018. However…
and then comes my quote. It’s basically a “yes, but…” situation. Alcohol is bad for you, especially if you’re young but new research shows that if you’re over 35 moderate consumption has it’s benefits. I don’t think the findings are final but it goes both ways: it’s not 100% clear alcohol is always bad for you either.
And MedDiet has nothing to do with blue zones. Nothing I mentioned was about longevity. I linked to latest research which shows clear benefits of MedDiet that go beyond correlation. The first link, right before the part I quoted states that “The criteria for causality were met”.
I mean, it’s clear you’re not interested in the evidence and just trying to reaffirm your believes. Not much I can do about so I will move on.