J.S. Mill Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I'm pretty sure you're just trying to find a reason to exclaim the church is wrong.From cancer.org:I'll say it again, I believe that less than half the male population has "emissions" more than once a week on average. I have no evidence to assert this because I really don't want to go drudging through that neck of the internet.You probably shouldn't assert things for which you have no evidence. According to this study (link removed), 70% of men "emit" at least eight times a month -- and that's across the population as a whole, not just 20-somethings, who do so significantly more. Other studies report similar figures.You're banned from this thread. Skylla
Skylla Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Keep this thread on the topic of alcohol.Skylla
krose Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 So what we learn from this study is that perhaps women should reconsider moderate alcohol consumption?
sethpayne 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.All I know, is that I like Beer. However, there is only one Beer that I will drink on Sunday:Hebrew: The Chosen Beer"Messiah Bold. It's the Beer You've been Waiting For."
The Dude Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Is anybody suggesting, on the basis of this study, that non-drinkers take up drinking as a health measure?No, nobody is suggesting that.Is anybody suggesting, on the basis of this study, that individual women who drink moderately have a significantly increased risk of developing cancer?
Scott Lloyd Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 No, nobody is suggesting that.Is anybody suggesting, on the basis of this study, that individual women who drink moderately have a significantly increased risk of developing cancer?What I get from Daniel's opening post is that this is one more factor to weigh in concluding that alcohol consumption is not a good idea -- thus contradicting the notion that medical science is proving the Word of Wisdom wrong.
Daniel Peterson Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Scott gets it, of course.And I suspect that The Dude really gets it, too.No, nobody is suggesting that.Is anybody suggesting, on the basis of this study, that individual women who drink moderately have a significantly increased risk of developing cancer?So far as I'm aware, cancer occurs in individuals. I've never seen a hospital room for a statistical group.Come on, The Dude. We're talking about general rules and statistical probabilities.
oats Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 D&C 89:4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelationâ??Moderate alcohol consumption is ideal and I suspect that God sees nothing wrong with it. However, owing to the the 'evils and designs' of conspiring men I venture to say that the risk of non-moderate drinking is severely heightened. Over consumption is far too encouraged and glorified in most of our daily lives and throughout all mass media. Does this mean moderate consumption isn't possible? No. However moderate consumption, at least for the 20-30 year old bracket, is by far the exception. Very few individuals are lucky enough to have a naturally tempered drinking despite the constant bombardment of media pushing them to consume more.
LifeOnaPlate 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.Ditto.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 Moderate alcohol consumption is ideal ...I don't see that it's ideal; I would call consumption of any extent unnecessary.
Daniel Peterson Posted February 25, 2009 Author Posted February 25, 2009 Moderate alcohol consumption is idealThe British study that occasioned the opening post of this thread seems to suggest that that may not be the case.
Calm Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 All I know, is that I like Beer. However, there is only one Beer that I will drink on Sunday:Would you please fix this graphic or remove it as it's screwing up my ability to read this thread and I can just imagine how someone on a slower computer might be having much more significant problems with it.Thank you.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I suggest that "moderate" is far less than 2 to 3 alcoholic drinks per week. So that vanilla extract I use in my cooking and baking is perfectly fine.
Calm Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 I suggest that "moderate" is far less than 2 to 3 alcoholic drinks per week.It could also depend on whether those 2 to 3 alcoholic drinks are taken at the same time or on different days, how much alcohol per drink, whether the drinking is alone or social, with food or without, reasons for drinking (for social dining or for psychological relief), how an individual reacts to that amount of alcohol, etc.
thesometimesaint Posted February 25, 2009 Posted February 25, 2009 As the study shows even that "moderate" level is not so moderate in effects. I agree that all the additional factors should be considered. 2-3 alcoholic drinks once a week probably isn't moderate, but I can't say if served with a full meal that 2-3 glasses of wine, consumed once a week, would significantly increase long term health risks. Though I wouldn't recommend driving after that meal.
mfbukowski Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 Ok you are all behind the times now! Here is the latest:Alcohol raises cancer riskAdam Cresswell, Health editor | February 26, 2009 Article from: The AustralianEVEN low to moderate consumption of alcohol increases a woman's risk of developing cancer, and could explain nearly 13 per cent of the cancers of the breast, liver, rectum and airways combined.A huge new study by researchers at Oxford University that tracked more than 1.2 million women for an average of more than seven years has found that each additional alcoholic drink consumed on a daily basis led to at least 15 extra cancers per 1000 women up to the age of 75. This was a significant increase on the background risk for the six selected cancers per 1000 women.http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...7-23289,00.html
The Dude Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 2-3 alcoholic drinks once a week probably isn't moderate...For women, moderate = 1 drink / day. For men it is 2 drinks / day. This is the US recommendation, at least.
The Dude Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 So far as I'm aware, cancer occurs in individuals. I've never seen a hospital room for a statistical group.Come on, The Dude. We're talking about general rules and statistical probabilities.Yes, we are talking about such things. The study finds a statistical probability but what does it mean for individuals? It takes some extra thinking to arrive at that point.The finding from this study is an increase of 15 cancers / 1000 women. Usually that wouldn't be significant but this study followed over 1 million women, which is enough to make even that small number statistically significant. A great success from a public health point of view. What you have here is, on average, 1.5% increase in cancer risk (over the background risk) for women who drink moderately. This is not a large risk.The study has also received some mild criticism for failing to report on cardiovascular impact, even though the data is surely present in the results of the study. Cardiovascular is where you would expect to see the benefits of moderate alcohol consumption. Why hold back that data? Are the authors just trying to enhance the public impact of their present publication, or I wonder if they could be LDS?
The Dude Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 What I get from Daniel's opening post is that this is one more factor to weigh in concluding that alcohol consumption is not a good idea -- thus contradicting the notion that medical science is proving the Word of Wisdom wrong.If the WoW is meant as a covenant with God, how can science prove it wrong? That doesn't make sense to me.So just for the record, I am not claiming that medical science is proving the WoW wrong.
Scott Lloyd Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 If the WoW is meant as a covenant with God, how can science prove it wrong? That doesn't make sense to me.So just for the record, I am not claiming that medical science is proving the WoW wrong.While I see it as part of a covenant with God, I think it is also meant as a warning and a guideline to the people of God in the last days when alcoholism would be rampant and there would be widespread and significant health risks associated with the use of substances proscribed in the Word of Wisdom.Bear in mind that in the beginning, it was not intended as a commandment; that came later under inspiration to Church leaders.
charity's child Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 KtG:Wasn't it the "everlasting Gobstopper" that turned the greedy little girl blue like a giant blue berry? actually, it was gum
hordak Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 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?This stems from tough liquor lawsIn countries where alcohol is not treated as a right of passage into adulthood but a common thing enjoyed in moderation abuse is less common. Policies of abstinence reduces over all consumption but increases abuse by those who still drink.This applies to all addiction. In Amsterdam where marijuana is legal the percentage of HSchool students who use it about half of American rates.
Nofear Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 This stems from tough liquor lawsYou'll have a tough time proving that.I find it funny that these two websites contradict each other on almost every point:National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism No. 34 PH 370 October 1996Law and Policy by Alcohol Problems and Solutions
The Dude Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 While I see it as part of a covenant with God, I think it is also meant as a warning and a guideline to the people of God in the last days when alcoholism would be rampant and there would be widespread and significant health risks associated with the use of substances proscribed in the Word of Wisdom.It is a health guideline only as far as that goes, and when that runs into trouble -- e.g. hot drinks/caffeine/coke -- it is still a covenant with God. That's why I won't try disproving it to you.
thesometimesaint Posted February 26, 2009 Posted February 26, 2009 The Dude:It is a health code, and it says nothing about caffeine/coke.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.