The study, published in the Lancet, found that 59% of those who drank harmful amounts were aged 15-39 – people for whom alcohol provided no health benefit and posed risks, including injuries relating to drinking or car accidents, suicides or murders. Three-quarters of harmful drinkers were men.
Well, yes, the things that alcohol is protective against tend to be diseases of age, don’t they? Therefore among the young you’ll not see the benefits, only the costs.
They found that for men aged 15-39, the recommended amount of alcohol before “risking health loss” was just 0.136 of a standard drink a day. For women of the same age, the “theoretical minimum risk exposure level” was 0.273 drinks – about a quarter of a standard drink a day.
For adults of 40 and older without any underlying health conditions, drinking a small amount of alcohol was linked to some health benefits, such as reducing the risk of ischaemic heart disease, stroke and diabetes.
Among those aged 40-64, safe alcohol consumption levels ranged from about half a standard drink a day to almost two standard drinks. For those aged 65 or older, the risks of “health loss from alcohol consumption” were reached after consuming a little more than three standard drinks a day.
And how have they pulled out those who did not drink when young, but did when older? To see whether the effects of drinking while young provided benefits when older?
First impressions here would be that this is Tosh. We’ll wait for Mr. Snowdon’s analysis to confirm that thought…..