A small amount of alcohol is healthy? The truth may not be so

A few years ago, a researcher named Curtis Ellison claimed at the podium of a crowded lecture hall at the Boston University School of Public Health that he had solved a problem that had long been debated by a college public health team: Is the right amount of drinking columns a healthy life? the way. Ellison gave the audience his answer: Of course.

You should have heard of Ellison's high-sounding discussion before: Every day a glass of wine can improve heart health and longevity. In the speech, he talked about Johannsen, a famous cross-country skier who lived to 111 years old. According to Ellison, Johannsen put forward four longevity recommendations: Do not smoke, exercise more, do not drink too much wine, and then he paused and then said: "Do not drink too little." Sudden burst of laughter and applause among the crowd .

But Ellison's point of view met with challenges. A colleague of Boston University, who is on the other side of the stage, and Professor Tim Naimi, who is in the same building as Ellison, his views are less attractive: drinking is clearly unhealthy. Different from popular opinion, he is not targeting alcoholics, but that even moderate drinking will still increase the risk of cancer.

For researchers in the public health field, this view is not surprising. Since 2012, the World Health Organization has classified alcoholic beverages as a class 1 carcinogen, that is, there is evidence that drinking alcohol increases the risk of cancer. In March of this year, Jennie Connor of the Department of Preventive and Social Medicine at the University of Otago, New Zealand, published a paper that examined the correlation between drinking and cancer and concluded that "there is strong evidence that alcohol causes seven (or even more) The culprit is cancer at the site.” The study also attributed nearly 6% of cancer deaths worldwide to alcohol.

Most alcohol and cancer research organizations in the United States are using the subtle "risk" term, and Connor's outspoken "leader" makes her look quite different. For the perception that drinking is a threat to health, American consumers and researchers do not say they are unwilling to accept or at least be unfamiliar. The American Institute for Cancer Research has investigated public perceptions of different carcinogenic factors. Strangely, less than half of the risk of cancer is believed to be due to alcohol, and 56% believe that genetically modified crops may cause cancer, although there is no scientific evidence to prove this.

In fact, scientific research on the effects of alcohol on the body is still in its infancy. The dispute between Ellison and Naimi is not a rehearsal: the public health community does hold two views. Some people think that drinking alcohol is healthy, while others think that they should beware of the risks associated with drinking. The World Health Organization has designated alcohol and processed meat and solar radiation as a class of carcinogens, but does not indicate dose and risk levels. At the same time, the consumer is also instilling the opposite message: moderate drinking can increase "good cholesterol" levels and reduce the risk of heart disease (the most deadly disease in the United States).

"A lot of us drink alcohol. We really hope that drinking is good for us," Naimi said. “But the relevant studies in various places have indeed disappeared in the past few years.” Since Ellison made a swearing speech in front of the microphone two years ago, Naimi and many of his colleagues are committed to opposing the “drinking benefit theory” and calling it a theory. It was blown out by a commercial-funded researcher whose purpose was to divert consumers' attention from the fact that they were at risk of cancer.

Distorted wine science

As early as the end of 1991, Ellison shared new findings about red wine and heart health in 60 minutes (60 Minutes, CBS TV program editor's note), and this idea began to spread. Behind this theory is the observation and study of moderate drinkers and non-drinkers over the years. Some studies have found that moderate drinkers are actually healthier than non-drinkers.

However, in recent years, alcohol researchers such as Connor and Naimi have criticized the previous study as having a “regression” bias. That is, some non-drinkers who compare with moderate drinkers are actually alcoholic people who are unable to continue drinking because of alcohol abuse. Therefore, they are generally more likely to get sick than healthy moderate drinkers. When Naimi took the above deviations into consideration for meta-analysis, he found that the study still showed that the hearts of moderate drinkers are indeed healthier than non-drinkers, but the differences are far less obvious than they were.

Ellison said that recent studies have been more detailed and avoided these deviations. However, the deviations in the literature do not only come from "regressors." In the summer of 2014, the British academic journal Addiction published a sharp editorial, exposing Ellison's "acceptance of free use of scientific research funds by the wine industry." His research at Boston University was supported by this funding, and his leadership The research team published articles advocating drinking for health.

The magazine is not the first time to expose the awkward relationship between the academia and the industry. Some trade organizations, such as the Distillery Liquor Council, the largest alcohol lobby, often represent the alcohol industry in cooperation with regulatory agencies and researchers. Some researchers will continue to work in the industry chain. Samir Zakhari is the former director of the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (US National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the US National Institutes of Health's alcohol research department). After he retired from NIH, he went to the Distillery Council.

The council does not endorse the latest research revealing the link between alcohol and cancer. Council spokesman Frank Coleman said that most of the meta-analyses are flawed and will tilt toward the most preferred data points.

Problems with alcohol research

These deviations pose a direct challenge to the effectiveness of alcohol and health research. But even without these deviations, the nature of drinking still makes it extremely difficult to produce credible results. Health risks, including cancer, result from the complex and complex effects of multiple factors, such as lifestyle, age, and inherited predispositions, which can have different effects on each individual.

For example, those who drink a little wine every day often sit and eat while they drink. Most of these people are rich and have higher social status. Ellison believes that this is the reason they are healthier. People who drink beer tend to drink more easily.

When studying the effects of alcohol on the human body, it is difficult to abandon the influence of these factors. "We don't study the specific nature of beer or wine," Ellison said. "We study people who drink." Kenneth Portier (director of the American Cancer Society's mentoring statistics and assessment program) said that even low-calorie beers have a lot of non-nutritive calories. Drinking too much can lead to another risk - obesity. “

Ellison does not deny that there is a link between alcohol and cancer, but he believes that this link exists only with alcoholics. So the new question comes: What is the right amount of alcohol? How to study moderate and heavy drinkers among a large number of subjects with different body types, metabolic conditions, and socio-economic backgrounds? To guide people in making informed decisions, researchers collect resources from the non-alcoholic industry to conduct random studies to isolate the effects of alcohol on the body in past decades of data.

Naimi said that even the currently imperfect evidence suggests that about 15% of breast cancer deaths are related to alcohol. In the United States alone, nearly 20,000 cancer deaths each year are attributed to alcohol, and the United States has the largest number of people in the world. At the same time, the craft beer market has grown to a $22.3 billion industry, and the world’s two largest alcohol companies, AB InBev and SAB Miller, are preparing to merge. When can we agree on the impact of alcohol on the human body? The best is now.

The bad truth

Connor's analysis of existing alcohol research is a turning point in the debate about alcohol and cancer. However, even if you have already determined that alcohol poses a significant public health risk, you still have to persuade drinkers to accept this fact. It is much easier to tell people that drinking is good for them than telling them that drinking is not good and explaining the reason.

"We tend to think that familiar things are less risky," Portier said. "Alcohol will occur in the lives of most of us, and we know people who drink. They haven't died yet."

Current consumers will receive conflicting information, which makes it even more difficult to convey a clear concept of public health. Susan Brown (Health Education Campaign in Susan GKomen) said that women who drink alcohol each day have a 7% increase in risk of breast cancer compared to women who do not drink. People are often surprised and disappointed to hear about the association between alcohol and breast cancer. She said that many times they have heard that moderate drinking is good for the body. "This may confuse or cover up the truth."

So now, health organizations like Susan GKomen and the American Cancer Society simply emphasize the "moderateness" of drinking. In terms of public health, the right amount is defined as a cup for a woman and two cups a day for men (a cup of wine is understood as a glass of wine or a very low-yielding beer, not a double martini).

But for most consumers, the easiest thing to think about the right amount of concept is the alcohol industry's slogan: "Responsible drinking." This is to remind consumers not to drink too much, but in fact does not define how much is too much in the end. "I sometimes worry that the winery is distorting people's perception of risk for their own benefit," Portier said.

This is when the policy comes into play. For example, the British Department of Health's drinking advice originally stated that "appropriate drinking is safe," and it was recently acknowledged that even if you consume 14 units (140 mL) of alcohol per week, it may cause some serious diseases, including some cancers. "Although the risk of moderate drinking is low," they write, "but as long as you keep drinking, you can't be completely safe. ”

Looking back at the surrounding public health information on tobacco, you will find that they are all sending a simple message: Do not smoke. There is a risk of smoking too much, so there is no moderation. However, drinking recommendations are unpredictable: Do not drink too much. It is important to understand how much "too much" is for you, and also to measure other risk factors in your personal life to reduce the risk of drinking. This is not an easy-to-remember public service announcement. However, in a world where drinking and culture are closely linked, this may be the best option.

"It all comes down to perceptions of risk and what life you want," Portier said. For example, some people have a higher risk of heart disease than cancer, and they may be more inclined to drink a glass of red wine each evening than those with a family history of breast cancer. "People should be able to decide for themselves how much to drink," Naimi said. "But I do think people's understanding on this point needs to be strengthened."

In order to achieve this goal, Naimi will carry out a long-term, comprehensive and random study. All parties are very much looking forward to the results of this study. Zakhari, alcohol expert at the Distillers Council, said that the subject’s long-term drinking habits are important because tumors usually develop very slowly. These studies always investigate women: "How much did you drink last week, last month, last year?" He said: "But the reason why cancer germinated more than 20 years ago was not related to what they did last week or last month or last year. It's like someone was poisoned by food today, but doctors asked them what Christmas dinner they had in 1980."

But it does not mean that this does not work at all. According to the Wall Street Journal, Anheuser-Busch InBev and Diageo, another heavyweight producer, are planning to collaborate with several other liquor companies to make a donation for a random study that focuses on the health effects of drinking and will be studied by NIAAA (Zakhari). The same functional government department that once served as the executive officer).

Finished Dosage Formulation

Tetanus Vaccine,Hepatitis B Vaccine For Adults,Tetanus Booster,Td Vaccine

FOSHAN PHARMA CO., LTD. , https://www.full-pharma.com