re: Why don’t we hear much about alcohol and the effect on the heart?

quote:

---

Why don’t we hear much about alcohol and the effect on the heart?

---

I have this discussion with people close to me often. At the end of the day, you are putting a poison in your body that the body wants to reject and has no health benefits outside of a short-term mental easement (aka - taking the edge off). Which in and of itself is not a curing of problems but a temporary distraction from them, which is a whole side-tangent.

It's a societal thing. For many years, tobacco was socially acceptable. It got to the point where society as a whole had collectively come to the conclusion that the bad outweighed the good for the premise of tobacco to fall off. Alcohol is so widely accepted, championed, and promoted in society that we aren't there yet. Not even close.

Sure, it may have made that beach trip back in '88 like 5% more fun than it would have been without it....but when you take a logical, objective view at it....there's no merit to it and is a net negative in peoples lives.

Personal view points aside, it makes sense that hearts are working harder. The whole system is working harder. Back to the premise I stated earlier that it is a toxin to the system and the system has to actively work to rid the body of it. Which also leads system resources to be allocated from digesting other food and drink intake to prioritizing flushing the toxin out. Which is why fat/obesity is a side effect of drinking alcohol.




Or it's because we all have different organs or something like that I read earlier in this thread....

quote:

---

This thread went off the rails right away, but I am commenting just to tell you ronricks how disappointed in you I am. Your first post you mentioned someone smoking 2 packs a day, 2nd post was 4 packs, 4th post was 6 packs. When I saw this had 4 pages, I was expecting you to be over 20 packs a day by now.

---

-Your genetic predisposition matters as far as your metabolic and cardiovascular health goes

-Genetic predisposition is a gigantic factor in how long one lives even taking into considering lifestyle choices.

-We are all different and will have different outcomes to use/abuse of any substance legal or illegal


OP then gave us this gem after I gave a perfect example of what he says I didn't "understand"

quote:

---

do you not understand how abusing them still worsens them?

---

Sorry this triggers people.

quote:

---

ronricks

---

Dude. Here was your first post (which was the very first of the thread):

quote:

---

Because not everyone is the same. Not everyone is impacted the same. There are raging alcoholics who smoke two packs a day who live to be 90 while marathon runners croak at 45. You are only as good as your genetic predisposition.

---

Please just stop and admit that is an utterly silly answer. The reason we don't talk about it is because people are impacted differently? That's dumb. Just own it and move on.

ANY variable pertaining to ANY impact on bodily organs is of course going to be operating in a population of non-clones. Why are you acting like that's news?

quote:

---

ronricks

---

Keep digging baw

quote:

---

If I drink one 8oz glass of red wine 3 times a week how many years am I taking off my life? How much damage am I doing to my heart?

---

Just to be clear - your contention is that it's not even worth talking about because it's multivariate.

Stop and think how dumb that is.

quote:

---

Stop and think how dumb that is.

---

What’s dumb is he gave us no metrics to go by. For all we know this guy was knocking back a 12 pack everyday. Even then, it’s not going to really matter because people drink different amounts, different types, and different frequencies etc What’s dumb is he gave us very little info then wanted us to ‘discuss’ it. There’s way too much at play here even if he gave us this information which makes this whole post dumb and irrelevant. Do you understand this? It’s the equivalent of me posting my cholesterol levels and saying “hey guys why is nobody talking about this!” Without giving any other info.

Meh I kinda see what you’re saying.

Expected responses would be:
Because it’s not really that bad.
Because of alcohol lobby covering up.
Etc.
You’re saying: we don’t hear more about it because Way too many variables at play here genetically, frequency, and consistency/consumption volume etc.

shite went off the rails somehow, but that’s a viable response.

quote:

---

Why don’t we hear much about alcohol and the effect on the heart?

---

Ironically, we are in the middle of essentially a systemic retraction of the preposterous "red wine is good for your heart" conventional wisdom of the past however many years.

Resveratrol it turns out was a scam:

quote:

---

A University of Connecticut researcher who studied the link between aging and a substance found in red wine has committed more than 100 acts of data fabrication and falsification, the university said Wednesday, throwing much of his work into doubt.

"Dipak K. Das, who directed the university's Cardiovascular Research Center, studied resveratrol, touted by a number of scientists and companies as a way to slow aging or remain healthy as people get older. Among his findings, according to a work promoted by the University of Connecticut in 2007, was that 'the pulp of grapes is as heart-healthy as the skin, even though the antioxidant properties differ.'

"'We have a responsibility to correct the scientific record and inform peer researchers across the country,' Philip Austin, the university's interim vice president for health affairs, said in a statement

---

I was cheering for you in this thread, but you’re by far the dumbest one in the argument.

quote:

---

Doctors aren't taught to rationalize root cause of conditions. They are taught to medicate those conditions for a lifetime as a chronic disease. I don't think most of them are intentionally doing this, but are just practicing what they were taught.

---

You better hope that cocksucker crazylsu guy doesn’t read this