The reason is compelling. Alcohol does seriously increase the risk of cancer. The sugars in it are the problem. They create the opportunities for cancer cells to grow, a fact known to oncologists as they use glucose as the marker to find cancer cells when testing for the disease.
Booze causes liver and oesophogal cancer because sugar. This might not be wholly and exactly quite the cause.
And yet, cancer sufferers in the UK are not warned off alcohol to assist disease management and to prevent the risk of recurrence, and nor are health warnings given on alcohol.
Why not, is the question?
And answer came there none….
” a fact known to oncologists as they use glucose as the marker to find cancer cells when testing for the disease. ”
Yes they do.. But that is because agressive cancer cells are much more active against the background activity of the surrounding tissues, so they accumulate the detectable marker attached to the glucose more than their surrounding , “lighting them up” .
The glucose is merely the carrier for the marker. Not the actual detection agent.
Which is something you get taught even at the lowest level of lab tech, as part of “general tissue staining/marking techniques 101”.
Which proves that the Potato didn’t even look into the matter, given that the information that proves him dead wrong, and even more of a dingleberry than he’s already proven to be umpteen times over, is freely available.
It seems his entire life is a series of wholly avoidable misapprehensions; the eager grasping of the wrong end of the stick when a moment’s research will reveal the objective, apolitical facts.
“Apolitical”. I think I may be onto something there, because he’s not alone. “Ideologies are fairy stories for adults.” – T Sowell
Bizarre. There are health warnings on many alcohol products. And the “courageous” nanny state often mentions the health risks, too.
Did you ever see an NHS recommended diet for any disease or condition which did not say stop drinking alcohol (and coffee, and don’t eat anything nice either)?
And yet, cancer sufferers in the UK are not warned off alcohol to assist disease management and to prevent the risk of recurrence, and nor are health warnings given on alcohol.
Why not, is the question?
When I was asked about diet and alcohol after my cancer diagnosis I got some advice on diet but no mention of whether or not I should stop drinking either as a strategy for disease management or in preparation for or after the operation, although I chose to stop drinking the week before and for 2 weeks afterwards. The only comment on my diet was that I should start eating Brazil nuts, apparently they are good for prostate health.
So who should I take heed of, the whole prostate cancer research and treatment industry or some twat sat in an end of terrace Ely who is famous for his inability to beat up straw men? Hard choice.
PS Fully recovered and the last blood test had a PSA of 0.
Best stick to that naturally sugar-free whisky then.
Doctor: And you should drink less alcohol.
Me: How do you know how much I drink currently?
Doctor: um.
Christopher Snowdon has written about the benefits of alcohol. Maybe it does increase cancer but people who drink tend to live longer than teetotals. See https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/2024/12/moderate-drinking-continues-to-be-good.html
“Which proves that the Potato didn’t even look into the matter, given that the information that proves him dead wrong, and even more of a dingleberry than he’s already proven to be umpteen times over, is freely available.”
Could be. Or maybe he looked and didn’t understand that which contradicted his opinion.
The “medics and alcohol” thing seems very strange to me. When I were nobbut a lad the definition of “an alcoholic” was “someone who drinks more than his doctor”.
If sugar is so bad then Coke and other fizzy drinks should have most UK kids popping off before they reach school leaving age. Yet that doesn’t seem to be a problem. Biology is complicated.
Everything in moderation, except Labour politicians which should be zero tolerance.
“but people who drink tend to live longer than teetotals. ”
As a former lifelong teetotaller I’ve just (as of NYE) started drinking a small glass of red wine a day, I’ve become that convinced by the data as to its beneficial effects, particularly on the heart.
If you keep breathing oxygen while you have cancer, the cancer cells will stay alive.
Therefore . . . .
Jim,
I can’t remember where I read/heard it but alcohol researchers are now saying the J curves aren’t right and that even the first glass of alcohol is harmful. Apparently they used a new statistical technique (of course they did).
Yes, they’re lying about that. J Curves are real.
“alcohol researchers are now saying ”
I think they are up there on a par with climate scientists, epidemiologists and covid vaccine creators in a long list of ‘people who are lying bastards’.
Cancer sufferers should certainly be warned off of carbohydrates, yet hospital food is primarily cheap carbs. People report remarkable success beating cancer with a carnivore diet and extended fasts. It really pulls the rug from under those sugar-hungry cancer cells (though certain cancers may also use glutamine as fuel, which healthy cells also require.) A keto/carnivore diet may also stop you getting that alarming diagnosis in the first place, as well as avoiding all the other modern chronic diseases.
“If sugar is so bad then Coke and other fizzy drinks should have most UK kids popping off before they reach school leaving age. Yet that doesn’t seem to be a problem.”
Ditto smoking.
Sugar’s mechanisms of harm are well understood and, like smoking, cumulative.
“the committee found those who consumed moderate levels of alcohol had a 16% lower risk of all-cause mortality than those who never drank.”
The correlation of smoking with lung cancer is in the thousands of percent, and there’s an obvious causal mechanism. Sixteen percent is absolutely nothing, especially when it’s the result of meta-analyses of associative studies which themselves are garbage (based on completely unreliable and infrequent diet questionnaires.) This is the same approach which ludicrously identified red meat as a carcinogen. Can’t pick and choose which of these worthless studies to believe.
Slippery slope Jim, but it’s a great slope to be on. In your moderation you can really push the boat out a little too – may I suggest importing a case of this (all vintages good):
https://en.maison-galhaud.com/eshop/moulin-galhaud
“alcohol researchers are now saying the J curves aren’t right and that even the first glass of alcohol is harmful.”
To be more accurate, a handful of temperance cranks, generally funded by nanny states, have said this recently and it got taken up by various rags*. Chris Snowdon has written about their dubious methods and findings.
*Britain’s lame dead tree press clearly supports the state’s aim to keep the population as cowed and anxious as possible.
Interested: That looks nice and what a huge chunk of merlot in the blend.
I’m afraid I’m a heathen when it comes to alcohol, I just can’t stand the taste of it. Always had a sweet tooth, good/expensive wine would be wasted on me. I’ve been recommended a sweet red dessert wine that might fit my palate, one I’m sure any self respecting proper wine drinker wouldn’t have in the house.
Jim
You’ve reminded me: Quite some time back, when commuting to the heart of the evil empire, I used to be able to buy Carruades des Lafittes from the local supermarket, for about £12 a bottle. Second bottle of (of the much pricier) Chateaux Lafittes, one of the five 1st Cru Classe growths of the Medoc.
Prices of both Lafittes and the Carruades later shot through the roof, got very silly, because the Chinese started buying masses (obviously there wasn’t that much to start with); apparently the name meant something in Chinese? Oh well, it was all great fun at the time.
Which brings us back to your sweet tooth. Those oriental heathens used to enjoy drinking this glorious wine – one of the finest in Christendom – with bloody coca cola…..
Enjoy!
Weird. I can proof read something and STILL get it wrong. Getting worse…
@TMB – delicious and relatively cheap for a St Emilion grand vin. We stumbled across the vineyard in St Emilion in the summer and I’ve had a bit shipped back. It’s a bit of an indulgence when tbh you can get perfectly good wine in Majestic (or, for us, Stroud Wines) for £15, but a nice treat. It is Merlot heavy but the blend is very good (IMO).
@Jim
If you’re worried about your heart you’d be better off cutting down on the sugar I’d have thought. Re the ‘taste of alcohol’, grappa, Guinness, IPA, Chablis, whisky – there is no taste of alcohol (though you wouldn’t be expected to know that). A really good Bordeaux (or Burgundy) will take you a while to appreciate but is well worth the effort. Great with cheese.
Jim – Try Muscat de Beaumes-de-Venise which is a slightly fortified (15%) big fat sweet grape in a bottle.
@Marius – January 4, 2025 at 10:11 pm
To be more accurate, a handful of temperance cranks, generally funded by nanny states, have said this recently and it got taken up by various rags*. Chris Snowdon has written about their dubious methods and findings.
Further to this… Ten years or so ago I read a report on “heavy drinkers” written by a group at Chicago University Hospital – they were, in essence, studying “winos”. They obviously hadn’t read the briefing-paper from the Temperance Society as one of the findings in the conclusion is that, on average (obviously), you had to be doing North of 100 units/week before any physical changes were observable! Make of that what you will… Personally, I’m treating it as Gospel. 🙂
“Those oriental heathens used to enjoy drinking this glorious wine – one of the finest in Christendom – with bloody coca cola…..”
I’m less than a week in and I’ve already tried that. A definite improvement IMO………
Hmm, if you like it that sweet. You could try a ruby port. Smaller glass tho. Also Portuguese would be Moscatel (again, lightly fortified, so smaller glass).
Reds aren’t often that sweet. There’s a Hungarian red that is, the name I can’t recall (Erm, Eger?). And then there’s Tokay of course,but that’s usually white – might be a red variant.
One weird tip. Try the kosher wines. They tend to be sweeter. People who rarely drink tend to like sweeter. And observant jews must drink wine during passover (lots of glasses too, but they make very small glasses for this). So the kosher wines tend to be sweet, for that v occasional palate. There’s a Rothschild sweet kosher red I know. I was served it at a bar mitzvah once….
“ Further to this… Ten years or so ago I read a report on “heavy drinkers” written by a group at Chicago University Hospital – they were, in essence, studying “winos”. They obviously hadn’t read the briefing-paper from the Temperance Society as one of the findings in the conclusion is that, on average (obviously), you had to be doing North of 100 units/week before any physical changes were observable! Make of that what you will… Personally, I’m treating it as Gospel. ”
About 12 years ago when I was still living in the Chilterns I was playing in a golf match and raised the issue of units, safe drinking levels and the J curves. It turned out one of my opponents had been a scientist at one of the drug companies, Smith Klein Beecham IIRC, and he worked closely with the liver unit at Guys Hospital.
Very long story short, when the government asked them for a safe drinking levels and when the idea of units was being discussed they said 2 bottles of wine a day. The government was having none of that and they were told what number they had to come up with.
It should be noted that wine was usually 10% or so in those days.
I would suggest a piesporter, which is a very light white. Moderately sweet spatlese or very sweet auslese.
Here an ok michelsberg runs $15 a bottle. Good godtropfchen about $29.