Does Cycling Have a Drinking Problem?
#176
Junior Member
The body has an incredible way to heal and survive the slings and arrows we throw at it without for the most part suffering immediate repercussions. Alcohol is but one of these attacks however the difference with alcohol versus so many cosmic rays and insults is that you can choose to completely avoid it.
#177
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,623
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Liked 904 Times
in
507 Posts
The body has an incredible way to heal and survive the slings and arrows we throw at it without for the most part suffering immediate repercussions. Alcohol is but one of these attacks however the difference with alcohol versus so many cosmic rays and insults is that you can choose to completely avoid it.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
Likes For rosefarts:
#178
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: lost
Posts: 538
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 128 Post(s)
Liked 98 Times
in
49 Posts
Nobody is saying alcohol isn’t bad for you.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
#179
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,189
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3500 Post(s)
Liked 3,642 Times
in
1,826 Posts
It’s a single drink per day, 7 per week. Well into the increased cancer risk territory. And cancer takes years off of life span.
#180
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Redmond, WA & Bangkok, Thailand
Posts: 570
Bikes: 1999 Giant ATX MTB, 2002 Lemond Zurich, 2018 Fuji Transonic 2.3, 2019 Specialized Tarmac Disc Expert
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 171 Post(s)
Liked 399 Times
in
229 Posts
Exactly! I seriously doubt that having 12 drinks over the course of ONE YEAR, one a month on average, is going to take 6 years off of your life as that one poster stated.
#181
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,623
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Liked 904 Times
in
507 Posts
Are you under the impression that non drinkers live hundreds of years longer than drinkers?
A single drink may shorten the lifespan by a measurable number, but 6 months a pop? Do some math and get back to me.
#182
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD
Posts: 5,449
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2520 Post(s)
Liked 3,003 Times
in
1,707 Posts
I imagine many drinkers would figure it's worth it. If I were a drinker, I probably would think so. Might depend on the quality of life as the end approaches.
#183
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,591
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4486 Post(s)
Liked 4,959 Times
in
3,065 Posts
Nobody is saying alcohol isn’t bad for you.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
Likes For PeteHski:
#184
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,189
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3500 Post(s)
Liked 3,642 Times
in
1,826 Posts
A completely believable statistic, given that alcohol is a known carcinogen.
Why are people having such a hard time with this?
Likes For terrymorse:
#185
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,189
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3500 Post(s)
Liked 3,642 Times
in
1,826 Posts
Drinking is common in my family. Having buried sister 1 already, with sister 2 just starting chemo, and sister 3 in stage 4 after years of chemo, I wouldn’t wish their quality of life on anyone.
#186
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,623
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Liked 904 Times
in
507 Posts
6 months in a typical 80 year lifespan. That’s within the margin of error, static on the edge of the screen. I actually figured it would be worse than that.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
#187
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,189
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3500 Post(s)
Liked 3,642 Times
in
1,826 Posts
6 months reduction in expected average lifespan of a population is huge.
Compare it to COVID-19, with 1 million plus US deaths, which reduced life expectancy by about a year.
#188
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 12,953
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4843 Post(s)
Liked 3,968 Times
in
2,578 Posts
We are a country grounded in alcohol. The slave triangle. Ships built in the southern New England states ran slaves from Africa to sugar plantations, that sugar back to New England where is was made into rum, loaded on the same ships and sailed to Africa to sell, buy more slaves and repeat. The settlers who moved west, staked their claim, then planted apple starts given to them by Johnny Appleseed to establish that they were "working their land" and could get the deed for the land. Now most of those apple trees bore bitter apples no one would eat, but hey! great for hard cider! And cider/alcohol consumption ran at incredibly high per capita levels. 130 years ago, prohibition. The huge booster for gangs. Names, products etc. have changed but now gangs are as much of American life as alcohol. Black market prohibition alcohol production and distribution. Whiskey and hot cars. The cars live on as NASCAR. Our states are funded in very large part by alcohol which they tax and in many cases, sell.
And alcohol has that magic quality to make you feel good while lowing your standard of living, health and bank account.
Not a saint here. I love really good scotch. Also fine wine. I buy bottles of scotch I sometime go through in a month, one shot at night. I don't buy wine because it is just so-so days after opening to get that first glass. (I refuse to get into a situation where I "have to drink", either socially or to consume that whatever before it goes past its best.) And I often go a month or longer drinking no alcohol at all and always note I feel better all the time when I do.
Likes For 79pmooney:
#189
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,367
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8326 Post(s)
Liked 9,137 Times
in
4,515 Posts
6 months in a typical 80 year lifespan. That’s within the margin of error, static on the edge of the screen. I actually figured it would be worse than that.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
If you are going to try and compare alcohol to sugar you would have to figure out some sort of ratio/amount. Like how many Cokes per day does equal damage to how many beers, or something like that.
I know there is obesity, diabetes, and other sugar related illness but in my lifetime these things pale in comparison to the destruction caused by alcohol.
#190
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Along the Rivers of Pittsburgh
Posts: 1,255
Bikes: 2011 Novara Forza Hybrid, 2005 Trek 820, 1989 Cannondale SR500 Black Lightning, 1975 Mundo Cycles Caloi Racer
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 258 Post(s)
Liked 291 Times
in
157 Posts
People are all different. Some can drink and it appears not to affect their life span or life style. Some can have a drink and not have another. Others can start and fall rapidly into alcoholism to the point where one drink leads to a falling down drunken stupor each and every time. My family is dealing with that right now in a 30 something nephew. If things don't change, I expect to be at his funeral within a few years either from a DUI car crash or suicide. .
Likes For Altair 4:
#191
Junior Member
Nobody is saying alcohol isn’t bad for you.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
The BS is where someone upthread quoted something that a single drink takes 6 months off your life.
This simply doesn’t make sense. Otherwise, non drinkers would be living decades, even hundreds of years longer than drinkers.
Sounds like a misquoted/misremembered statistic to me.
#192
Junior Member
6 months in a typical 80 year lifespan. That’s within the margin of error, static on the edge of the screen. I actually figured it would be worse than that.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
Its fear mongering. Plain and simple.
Every single Mormon I know (no booze) eats way more sugar and especially sugary drinks than most other people I know.
Overconsumption of sugar has a lot more tangible negative side effects than one beer a day. Just an observation.
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0...310-2/fulltext
It's the big kahuna when it comes to the topic but isn't the only one.
The WHO page is also enlightening if you're less into the nitty gritty science:
https://www.who.int/europe/news/item...for-our-health
A good general read for civilians and non medical personal is a recent Time magazine article and while a lay publication that is not peer reviewed the benefit is that it quotes highly reputable sources:
https://time.com/6248439/no-safe-amount-of-alcohol/
There is a TON of such info out there, all sobering reads. It's been around for a while but people are starting to notice.
#193
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
I am not plugged into any sort of bike culture, so this was news to me.
https://www.bicycling.com/health-nut...cohol-effects/
https://www.bicycling.com/health-nut...cohol-effects/
Oh and my daughter in law works for MADD!!!!!!
Last edited by rydabent; 02-09-23 at 03:42 PM.
#194
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,272
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2614 Post(s)
Liked 5,737 Times
in
2,954 Posts
In my experience, science is deemed ‘bogus’ when it interferes with something someone wants to do or not do.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Likes For rsbob:
#195
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern CA
Posts: 743
Bikes: Cannondale tandems: '92 Road, '97 Mtn. Mongoose 10.9 Ti, Kelly Deluxe, Tommaso Chorus, Cdale MT2000, Schwinn Deluxe Cruiser, Torker Unicycle, among others.
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 279 Post(s)
Liked 207 Times
in
129 Posts
#196
Junior Member
The issue here and why I believe these anti alcohol stats is because nobody is benefitting except individual people who will likely quit consuming it. It goes against the money, goes against power. Alcohol not only is big business but it's a great sedative to make people weak, powerless and accept what their government is shoving down their throats, or at least take away the strength to resist. It's a numbing agent part of the "bread and circus for the masses" control agenda that has been going on for millenia and useful to the politicians, international finance, corporations and old money power structure.
Obviously going against the money or big companies isn't always a sign of truth either, take the anti-vax quack from the UK who claimed that vaccines cause autism in children. His "study" had a sample size of maybe 10-12 subjects which alone made his claims ridiculous on its face. But these anti alcohol studies are huge, of high quality, very significant, and the message is very repeatable through slightly different study designs in different places with large groups of people. When you have that level of reproducibility using different techniques, looking at different things, surviving peer review to that high level and it goes against the established money I listen! The truth is that there is no "cui bono" or "who benefits" other than individuals saving money, time, disease and life expectancy. Being without alcohol is like most good things in life, free!
Likes For Attilio:
#197
climber has-been
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 7,189
Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3500 Post(s)
Liked 3,642 Times
in
1,826 Posts
The issue here and why I believe these anti alcohol stats is because nobody is benefitting except individual people who will likely quit consuming it. It goes against the money, goes against power. Alcohol not only is big business but it's a great sedative to make people weak, powerless and accept what their government is shoving down their throats, or at least take away the strength to resist.
His "study" had a sample size of maybe 10-12 subjects which alone made his claims ridiculous on its face.
The truth is that there is no "cui bono" or "who benefits" other than individuals saving money, time, disease and life expectancy.
#198
Junior Member
Tell it, comrade! To paraphrase that great German scientific philosopher, "Alkohol ist das Opium des Volkes".
10-12 subjects? To be fair, that's a pretty common size -- for an athletic performance study (which is why we should all be skeptical of those findings).
I can think of one big and powerful group that would benefit: the health insurance industry.
10-12 subjects? To be fair, that's a pretty common size -- for an athletic performance study (which is why we should all be skeptical of those findings).
I can think of one big and powerful group that would benefit: the health insurance industry.
Regarding health insurers it's one of those cases that what's good for the goose is also good for the gander as there's nothing wrong with having incentives align. Years ago people were pretty stupid about coming in for their physical, getting colonscopies/mammograms done that sort of stuff. Now I (the physician) am starting to lose money on non-compliant patients who don't do that health maintenance stuff as the insurer takes it off the top at the end of the year if more than handful of patients don't check off those boxes. It's simple logic if you get your health maintenance addressed and diseases treated you'll do better. The patient will be healthier, happier and have a better outcome which also means the insurer saves money. When everybody wins there is nothing wrong with that.
Likes For Attilio:
#199
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 2,623
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1110 Post(s)
Liked 904 Times
in
507 Posts
Like the anesthesiologist who went on a long rant about the Covid vaccine was poison and a science experiment, because that is what aligns with his political beliefs.
Or the nurse who went on a long racist diatribe on FB (also about Covid) while trying to frame it as some sort of scientific observation. Adding that his time in healthcare made his opinion more accurate.
Just two examples from my Facebook (former) friends.
It goes both ways. Everyone is biased. Including me.
Read back what I have written. I’ve never advocated for heavy drinking and I’ve even suggested that my former 1-2 beers most nights was too much. On that note, I’ve cut down to post ski, post climb, and vacation drinking. Probably a 2/3 reduction.
Likes For rosefarts:
#200
Grupetto Bob
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Seattle-ish
Posts: 6,272
Bikes: Bikey McBike Face
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2614 Post(s)
Liked 5,737 Times
in
2,954 Posts
This is true but going back to med school, at least at the recent turn of the century (circa 2000 A.D.) the indoctrination wasn't really present, they were still encouraging critical thinking and above all they trained us to be very skeptical of what is called science. The problem is that a study can be designed based on inclusion criteria or how the control groups are chosen or treated to seem quite valid when in reality they easily confound variables that can reach the desired conclusion by those behind the study.
The issue here and why I believe these anti alcohol stats is because nobody is benefitting except individual people who will likely quit consuming it. It goes against the money, goes against power. Alcohol not only is big business but it's a great sedative to make people weak, powerless and accept what their government is shoving down their throats, or at least take away the strength to resist. It's a numbing agent part of the "bread and circus for the masses" control agenda that has been going on for millenia and useful to the politicians, international finance, corporations and old money power structure.
Obviously going against the money or big companies isn't always a sign of truth either, take the anti-vax quack from the UK who claimed that vaccines cause autism in children. His "study" had a sample size of maybe 10-12 subjects which alone made his claims ridiculous on its face. But these anti alcohol studies are huge, of high quality, very significant, and the message is very repeatable through slightly different study designs in different places with large groups of people. When you have that level of reproducibility using different techniques, looking at different things, surviving peer review to that high level and it goes against the established money I listen! The truth is that there is no "cui bono" or "who benefits" other than individuals saving money, time, disease and life expectancy. Being without alcohol is like most good things in life, free!
The issue here and why I believe these anti alcohol stats is because nobody is benefitting except individual people who will likely quit consuming it. It goes against the money, goes against power. Alcohol not only is big business but it's a great sedative to make people weak, powerless and accept what their government is shoving down their throats, or at least take away the strength to resist. It's a numbing agent part of the "bread and circus for the masses" control agenda that has been going on for millenia and useful to the politicians, international finance, corporations and old money power structure.
Obviously going against the money or big companies isn't always a sign of truth either, take the anti-vax quack from the UK who claimed that vaccines cause autism in children. His "study" had a sample size of maybe 10-12 subjects which alone made his claims ridiculous on its face. But these anti alcohol studies are huge, of high quality, very significant, and the message is very repeatable through slightly different study designs in different places with large groups of people. When you have that level of reproducibility using different techniques, looking at different things, surviving peer review to that high level and it goes against the established money I listen! The truth is that there is no "cui bono" or "who benefits" other than individuals saving money, time, disease and life expectancy. Being without alcohol is like most good things in life, free!
Was ready for someone to challenge me and say that one cannot trust science because it flip flops. My reply would have been that sciences is evolutionary. Beware click bait headlines, do your research using reputable institutions and research studies. Having an undergrad in Bio Sci I was inculcated in the Scientific Method but at the same time taught to question and validate. We have two M.D.s in the immediate family and several which are friends as a result. I appreciate their thoughtful approach to life and values.
__________________
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Road 🚴🏾♂️ & Mountain 🚵🏾♂️
Likes For rsbob: