Daniel Peterson Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Over the past several years, some studies have suggested that moderate alcohol consumption is beneficial for cardiac health. Although medical researchers have been very cautious about this -- frequently advising non-drinkers not to take up drinking on the basis of the findings -- certain (in my experience, mostly secularist) ex-Mormons and anti-Mormons have loudly crowed that science is proving the Word of Wisdom false and redundantly demonstrating Mormons to be (once again) deluded buffoons.Now, though, a very large study of British women seems to demonstrate that even moderate alcohol consumption -- whether beer or red wine or whatever -- significantly increases a woman's risk of various cancers, and that the risk increases with each additional regular drink:http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-02/...nt_10894798.htmI doubt that this finding will be trumpeted at such places as the so-called "Recovery" board, but there it is.My own feeling is that the scientific findings will continue to go up and down on the topic of alcohol. But, in any case, celebrations of red wine as a Mormonism-refuting health food seem to have been premature.
Fly Fisherman Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 It will be interesting to see the results of Utah's Intermountain Health Care's study of grape juice, and if that would contribute to the health benefits as well as red wine, as per the French Paradox.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Daniel Peterson:It awaits further study.
captain-jack Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I've always just held the view that any benefit you could possibly get from any alcoholic beverage can be obtained from another non-alcoholic source making it that much better for you.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 captain-jack:With the exception of alcohol soluble proteins, and flavor compounds I agree. Don't drink the stuff, just cook with it.
katherine the great Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 The biggest problem I see is that people (especially Americans) don't tend to be moderate in our behavior. Has anyone laid out heart health statistics next to drunk driving and other social and health problems caused by over consumption of alcohol?
Lachoneus Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I've always just held the view that any benefit you could possibly get from any alcoholic beverage can be obtained from another non-alcoholic source making it that much better for you.According to mayoclinic.com, grape juice is probably just as good as red wine in preventing hearth disease.
Manny Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 The biggest problem I see is that people (especially Americans) don't tend to be moderate in our behavior. Has anyone laid out heart health statistics next to drunk driving and other social and health problems caused by over consumption of alcohol?Bingo. I don't think God really thinks having an occassional or social drink is the stuff that sends people to hell. But, the natural man makes it so difficult to use alcohol moderately that God put a blanket prohibiition on it.According to mayoclinic.com, grape juice is probably just as good as red wine in preventing hearth disease.SHHHHHHH!!!!
The Nehor Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 According to mayoclinic.com, grape juice is probably just as good as red wine in preventing hearth disease.I think that's only fresh grape juice. If the juice is pasteurized I think you lose most of it.
cjcampbell Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 There are probably medical benefits to marijuana or even crack cocaine, too. Napoleon's doctor administered cyanide for his ailments.I will await for the return of Jesus Christ, when our bodies will change and we all live to the age of a tree, even then to not taste death, before I start drinking wine. It probably will not have any ability to affect me then.
katherine the great Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I think that's only fresh grape juice. If the juice is pasteurized I think you lose most of it.How about blueberries? I used to hate them. Now I eat them all the time.
Manny Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I think that's only fresh grape juice. If the juice is pasteurized I think you lose most of it.Pasteurization ruins everything.
cjcampbell Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Pasteurization ruins everything.It does have the benefit, however, of keeping you from dying from some horrible diseases.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 KtG:Wasn't it the "everlasting Gobstopper" that turned the greedy little girl blue like a giant blue berry?
Manny Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 It does have the benefit, however, of keeping you from dying from some horrible diseases.Purportedly.
The Nehor Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 There are probably medical benefits to marijuana or even crack cocaine, too. Napoleon's doctor administered cyanide for his ailments.I will await for the return of Jesus Christ, when our bodies will change and we all live to the age of a tree, even then to not taste death, before I start drinking wine. It probably will not have any ability to affect me then.I'm going to start using cyanide as an herbal remedy. It probably makes you a military genius.
katherine the great Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 KtG:Wasn't it the "everlasting Gobstopper" that turned the greedy little girl blue like a giant blue berry? Yep. (Do you think I'm in danger of that?)
Daniel Peterson Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Pasteurization ruins everything.Oh yes.If only we had medical science as it was before Louis Pasteur!
captain-jack Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I'm going to start using cyanide as an herbal remedy. It probably makes you a military genius.Remember, large doses means an exponential effect.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 KtG:Only if you eat too many Blueberries or just one "Everlasting Gobstopper".
The Dude Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 China news? The story here is a bit more detailed:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090225/ap_on_...lcohol_cancer_8The effect of alcohol is statistically significant, when viewed population-wide. But:For an individual woman, the overall alcohol risk is smallAlso,moderate drinkers actually had a lower risk of thyroid cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and renal cell cancer.Let the celebrations continue in moderation!
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 The Dude:In the study 2 to 3 drinks a week was considered moderate. Maybe real moderation is significantly lower.
Daniel Peterson Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Let the celebrations continue in moderation!Is anybody suggesting, on the basis of this study, that non-drinkers take up drinking as a health measure?From the news on it I've been reading and seeing, the answer is emphatically No. If anything, it's been to the contrary.
LeSellers Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Pasteurization ruins everything.It does have the benefit, however, of keeping you from dying from some horrible diseases.That's not as accurate as many people think. Raw milk ... is loaded with health benefits. It's got lots of vitamin D, and it also contains probiotics, good bacteria that aid digestion and can attack and destroy harmful pathogens. But in spite of its many upsides, raw milk is a tough sell for many people because of Big Dairy propaganda. That the federal government and the majority of states prohibit the sale of raw milk to the public is nothing new. But the iron- fisted tactics used against Nolt represent a dark turn in this battle.For years, the knock on raw milk from public health bureaucrats is that it's responsible for sickening hundreds with bacterial illnesses such as salmonella, E. coli, Listeria monocytogenes, and others. But this is patently untrue.In fact, as I've told you, recent milk-related outbreaks of Listeria and E. coli that caused illness and even death were caused by pasteurized milk, not raw milk (typically, the health officials didn't have much of an explanation for this). But the FDA and the CDC never let the facts get in the way of a good story.State goons open new front in the raw milk battleEnjoy,Lehi
cjcampbell Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I'm going to start using cyanide as an herbal remedy. It probably makes you a military genius.Nah. Speaking as a military genius myself, I am reasonably certain that cyanide is unnecessary. An overactive thyroid might be of some help, however. Napoleon did not start with the mercury and cyanide until after he was banned to St. Helena. He actually died of slow arsenic poisoning, not cancer as some textbooks still say. But his doctor thought he had cancer and they gave him mercury and cyanide to treat it. Instead, they finished him off. Horrible death.As to where he was exposed to arsenic, that is a matter of some controversy. American and Swedish historians who have no vested interest in protecting their reputations as to how Napoleon was treated support the theory that the arsenic was deliberately administered in his wine over a long period of time. Joseph Smith knew whereof he spoke when he wrote of the evil men who plotted against the Church. It was certainly common enough to poison peoples' wine back then; there were even books about how to do it. And Napoleon consistently showed symptoms of arsenic poisoning whenever he drank his wine.British and French historians, however, come from countries that could never admit that Napoleon was murdered by a French agent while in the custody of the British. They insist that Napoleon got the arsenic from dyes in his drapes. Odd, considering the drapes were never a problem while he was in Europe...I think I will stick with David Chandler's assessment of the situation. He had no axe to grind and nothing to protect. Napoleon was assassinated by slow arsenic poisoning administered in his wine, and that is that. One more reason to avoid wine.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.