Maybe, just maybe, moderate drinking isn’t really good for your health. Maybe the many scientific papers claiming benefits to heart health are more observational than scientific. Maybe Deirdre Tobias, a Harvard epidemiologist cited by Washington Post food columnist Tamar Haspel, is worth following on Twitter. Tobias points out that the touted rise in HDL (good cholesterol) that has been associated with moderate drinking is not necessarily good news, because the alleged protective health benefits of HDL are now questioned by many researchers. She also points to some gene related reasons that drinking alcohol is seriously problematic (explained in the WashPo story). Haspel points us to a study (also observational) of global alcohol consumption published in Lancet in 2018. It’s a lengthy and dense read, so we’ll skip directly to the conclusion: “Alcohol use is a leading risk factor for disease burden worldwide, accounting for nearly 10% of global deaths among populations aged 15–49 years, and poses dire ramifications for future population health in the absence of policy action today. The widely held view of the health benefits of alcohol needs revising, particularly as improved methods and analyses continue to show how much alcohol use contributes to global death and disability. Our results show that the safest level of drinking is none.”
Haspel isn’t arguing with that, but she isn’t giving up her occasional evening glass of wine either. “No, drinking isn’t helpful,” she writes, “but it’s not that harmful either. The risks are small enough that we’ll still be opening a bottle of wine most nights at our house. I’ll make up for it by managing my stress, spending less time in front of screens and sleeping better.”