Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 187
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Beer and cancer ?

    Heard this one in the news recently. Say it ain't so ! Beer Drinking May Speed Pancreatic Cancer Onset - US News and World Report
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  2. #2
    Paper Mill Aleworks
    Reputation: JFryauff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,484
    <applies tinfoil hat> Paging TL1...paging TL1...<applies tinfoil hat>
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. - Winston Churchill

  3. #3
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by jfryauff View Post
    <applies tinfoil hat> paging tl1...paging tl1...<applies tinfoil hat>
    lol :d

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    541
    It's OK, this study found an increase in liquor drinkers but not wine/beer drinkers:

    Heavy Drinking Linked to Pancreatic Cancer

  5. #5
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by JFryauff View Post
    <applies tinfoil hat> Paging TL1...paging TL1...<applies tinfoil hat>
    haha, no kidding, when I saw the title i figured it had to be him again.


    If beer caused cancer there would of been cancer outbreaks going back way into history, beer has been around a long time, cancer is a relatively new thing.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  6. #6
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    I bet you if they did a study of people who breathed on a regular basis would have a much higher chance of getting cancer than people who chose not to breath.

    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    haha, no kidding, when I saw the title i figured it had to be him again.


    If beer caused cancer there would of been cancer outbreaks going back way into history, beer has been around a long time, cancer is a relatively new thing.
    I agree with this, but with the caviot that cancer is a relatively newly discovered thing, Its been around this whole time but was just a sickness leading to death prior to its discovery.
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    If beer caused cancer there would of been cancer outbreaks going back way into history, beer has been around a long time, cancer is a relatively new thing.
    That's probably due to the fact in the middle ages if you made past childhood/child birth and weren't killed in a war, your life expectancy was in the mid 40's. Believe it or not, complications from tooth decay were historically a major cause of death. Most cancers didn't have time to take hold or even be recognized as cancer.

    Having said all that, I sure do like some beer and am tremendously grateful for both health insurance and dentists.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Maybe it was the PBR or the Rainier ?

    Wonder if the survey was done in areas of high PBR / Rainier ale/the green death consumption ? "Waldo always took a six pack of Green Death to BYOB parties. That way, he was assured of having all six cans." - Urban dictionary ... Just sayin
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  9. #9
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,416
    What isn't linked to cancer these days?

    Beer me, please!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    9
    Beat cancer once already, most people willl get it, enjoy the life you have. More beer please.

  11. #11
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    So apparently...I'm not the only maniac with the temerity to present the evidence about the correlation between beer (and alcohol) and cancer to the beer drinkers regarding their drug of choice.

    What I posted in the past and was vilified for was about consuming a "moderate" level of 2 or 3 alcoholic drinks a day and how that's fairly strongly linked to cancer. In this case it appears to be the result of pancreatic inflammation and heavy drinking though the article didn't define what amount of alcohol a heavy drinker was consuming. The good news here for the folks with the dual addictions to both tobacco and alcohol, if you want to interpret it as "good", is that doing both doesn't appear to raise your pancreatic cancer risk over doing just one. So in the meantime “Let’s feast and drink, for tomorrow we die!”

    Cigarette smoking is already a well-known risk factor for pancreatic cancer. Heavy alcohol intake may induce chronic inflammatory changes that are also linked with cancer, Anderson said.The combination of chronic smoking plus drinking had no stronger effect on pancreatic risk than either habit alone, the researchers found.

  12. #12
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    I bet you if they did a study of people who breathed on a regular basis would have a much higher chance of getting cancer than people who chose not to breath.
    The rationalizations in this thread are priceless! keep 'em coming!

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    So apparently...I'm not the only maniac with the temerity to present the evidence about the correlation between beer (and alcohol) and cancer to the beer drinkers regarding their drug of choice.

    What I posted in the past and was vilified for was about consuming a "moderate" level of 2 or 3 alcoholic drinks a day and how that's fairly strongly linked to cancer. In this case it appears to be the result of pancreatic inflammation and heavy drinking though the article didn't define what amount of alcohol a heavy drinker was consuming. The good news here for the folks with the dual addictions to both tobacco and alcohol, if you want to interpret it as "good", is that doing both doesn't appear to raise your pancreatic cancer risk over doing just one. So in the meantime “Let’s feast and drink, for tomorrow we die!”
    Sorry to open a can of worms with the thread but I'm thinking this may be related to the chemical differences of the drinks rather than the alcohol part of the equation. A puzzle needing a solution?
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  14. #14
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    The rationalizations in this thread are priceless! keep 'em coming!

    Walking out your front door greatly increases you chance of death and cancer.

    Source:
    Klurejr
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16
    The vast majority of people die of cardiovascular disease (heart attacks & strokes) rather than pancreatic cancer.

    Overall risk of pancreatic cancer is about 9 people out of 100,000. Suppose if moderate drinking doubles the risk of pancreatic cancer to 18 people out of 100,000 that leaves 99,982 people dying from something else (mostly cardiovascular disease).

    Numerous studies have shown time & again for decades that moderate drinking significantly reduces overall mortality by up to 30% compared to people who abstain. In particular, regular moderate drinking vastly lowers the risk of cardiovascular disease, the most common cause of death.

    More info here: www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/AlcoholAndHealth.html

    Now in someone who has a strong family history of pancreatic cancer or alcoholism, they need to reconsider drinking. Otherwise, there's no question in my mind it's healthy, the evidence is overwhelming.

  16. #16
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by ancient rascal View Post
    Sorry to open a can of worms with the thread but I'm thinking this may be related to the chemical differences of the drinks rather than the alcohol part of the equation. A puzzle needing a solution?
    One of the stories I posted about was specifically about beer and stomach cancer. So there may be something specifically about beer that makes it worse for health than other forms of alcohol. The carbonation was talked about and we know that in carbonated soft drinks made with HFCS you get high amounts of reactive carbonyls forming that are known to be damaging to human tissue and they inhibit hormones that reduce hunger. So maybe something like that may happening in beer too. It's known that a lot of bad chemistry goes on that adversely affects beer flavors. Whatever the case, you've got a bunch of people here who don't want to hear anything bad about their chosen hobby and legal buzz.

  17. #17
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Whatever the case, you've got a bunch of people here who don't enjoy a negative Nancy coming into a beer forum trolling and trying to scare people away from their chosen hobby and legal buzz.

    Fixed that for ya!
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  18. #18
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    The vast majority of people die of cardiovascular disease (heart attacks & strokes) rather than pancreatic cancer.

    Overall risk of pancreatic cancer is about 9 people out of 100,000. Suppose if moderate drinking doubles the risk of pancreatic cancer to 18 people out of 100,000 that leaves 99,982 people dying from something else (mostly cardiovascular disease).

    Numerous studies have shown time & again for decades that moderate drinking significantly reduces overall mortality by up to 30% compared to people who abstain. In particular, regular moderate drinking vastly lowers the risk of cardiovascular disease, the most common cause of death.

    More info here: www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/AlcoholAndHealth.html

    Now in someone who has a strong family history of pancreatic cancer or alcoholism, they need to reconsider drinking. Otherwise, there's no question in my mind it's healthy, the evidence is overwhelming.
    Among actual causes of death alcohol is far behind tobacco but at no. 2 it's still no slouch at killing people.



    The info. you posted states that the healthiest level of alcohol intake was 1-2 drinks per day and that was all pretty old info. More recent studies have found that any more than one drink a day is harmful. I don't want to spoil the fun but there it is.

    From your link:

    A standard alcoholic drink is:

    A 12-ounce can or bottle of regular beer
    A 5-ounce glass of dinner wine
    A shot (one and one-half ounces) of 80 proof liquor or spirits such as vodka, tequila, or rum either straight or in a mixed drink.

  19. #19
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Walking out your front door greatly increases you chance of death and cancer.

    Source:
    Klurejr
    It's not just a river in Egypt is it? Thanks.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    University of Michigan study

    Beer drinkers presented with pancreatic cancer earlier than those who drank other types of alcohol, such as wine or hard liquor although when adjusted for the amount of alcohol consumed, the type of alcohol did not affect the age of presentation. Now after seeing this it looks like there is nothing special about what is in beer. Looks like it is totally linked to the "adjusted amount of alcohol consumed". Showing up in the beer drinkers more because in general they are drinking more alcohol ? Never would have bothered to post it up had I seen this above study
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  21. #21
    DLd
    DLd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,536
    Actually, a recent study suggests the link between light drinking and cancer in all of those studies may be weaker than previously thought, if it exists at all. Basically, people tend to under-report how much they actually drink, so the incidences of cancer in those studies are likely due to heavy drinkers who lied about how much they drink.

    Medscape: Medscape Access

    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    So apparently...I'm not the only maniac with the temerity to present the evidence about the correlation between beer (and alcohol) and cancer to the beer drinkers regarding their drug of choice.

    What I posted in the past and was vilified for was about consuming a "moderate" level of 2 or 3 alcoholic drinks a day and how that's fairly strongly linked to cancer. In this case it appears to be the result of pancreatic inflammation and heavy drinking though the article didn't define what amount of alcohol a heavy drinker was consuming. The good news here for the folks with the dual addictions to both tobacco and alcohol, if you want to interpret it as "good", is that doing both doesn't appear to raise your pancreatic cancer risk over doing just one. So in the meantime “Let’s feast and drink, for tomorrow we die!”
    Fall is here. Woo-hoo!

  22. #22
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,416
    Worrying too much about getting cancer is known to cause cancer... I don't have any sources to site though.

  23. #23
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by OCtrailMonkey View Post
    Worrying too much about getting cancer is known to cause cancer... I don't have any sources to site though.
    There could be something to that and I can't cite studies either but I don't worry about it. I just drink one beer a day, though I admit going totally crazy with two or three a day once in a great while like at Christmas or on special occasions.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    541
    I guess I fall in between tl1 and the rest of you. I acknowledge that drinking beer most likely* increases the risk of certain cancers, but I'm willing to accept that risk because I enjoy drinking beer.

    *I believe all links between alcohol and cancer are based on epidemiological studies. I won't dismiss them out of hand, but it's the weakest form of evidence. If you look at the study I posted above, the results were the opposite. Hard liquor was worst and beer/wine didn't have a significant effect.

  25. #25
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    This thread is gaining momentum......

    TL1 we have gotten into this many times before. Too much of anything will kill you, and everything worth having has some sort of negative side effect, beer=cancer, bikes=injury, women=insanity (joking ladies... mostly ) etc...
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by ancient rascal View Post
    Sorry to open a can of worms with the thread but I'm thinking this may be related to the chemical differences of the drinks rather than the alcohol part of the equation. A puzzle needing a solution?
    Cans of worms have been linked to colo-rectal cancer.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by DLd View Post
    people tend to under-report how much they actually drink,
    That's me.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Get her on the phone / email

    What exactly is she implying ? Is it the beer or the amount of alcohol consumed. IMO ... the article is a bit vague. Michelle Ann Anderson MD | UofMHealth.org Paging ... Dr. Anderson to the white Mtbr courtesy phone please !
    Last edited by ancient rascal; 10-18-2012 at 10:00 AM.
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  29. #29
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    This thread is gaining momentum......

    TL1 we have gotten into this many times before. Too much of anything will kill you, and everything worth having has some sort of negative side effect, beer=cancer, bikes=injury, women=insanity (joking ladies... mostly ) etc...
    I think postulating that kind of all encompassing relationship between anything worth having and any required negative side effects is just as much @ss-pulling speculation as saying that there are incredibly negative effects from drinking microgram amounts of beer or alcohol. And sorry folks but everything does not cause cancer either. Broccoli just isn't causing very much cancer these days. These types of thinking are really just more rationalizing. Air to breathe, for example, is really worth having for humans but there aren't any negative side effects to breathing it unless there's a bunch of other toxic things like tobacco smoke mixed in with it.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Among alcohol is far behind tobacco but at no. 2 it's still no slouch at killing people.



    The info. you posted states that the healthiest level of alcohol intake was 1-2 drinks per day and that was all pretty old info. More recent studies have found that any more than one drink a day is harmful. I don't want to spoil the fun but there it is.

    From your link:

    A standard alcoholic drink is:

    A 12-ounce can or bottle of regular beer
    A 5-ounce glass of dinner wine
    A shot (one and one-half ounces) of 80 proof liquor or spirits such as vodka, tequila, or rum either straight or in a mixed drink.
    The graph you posted shows not the actual causes of death but a comparison of activities that contribute to death. There is no question that heavy drinking kills and unfortunately alcoholism is not uncommon. We are discussing moderate beer consumption here, not excessive consumption.

    I would be interested to read the recent studies you refer to that show that more than one drink a day is harmful. If you can, please post a link to these studies.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    114

    Moderate alcoholism can make u a better rider!!

    Potential Health Benefits of Moderate Drinking

    Moderate drinking can lower heart attack risk and blood pressure and increase good cholesterol....

    Bombs away!!!

  32. #32
    Paper Mill Aleworks
    Reputation: JFryauff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,484
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    The graph you posted shows not the actual causes of death but a comparison of activities that contribute to death. There is no question that heavy drinking kills and unfortunately alcoholism is not uncommon. We are discussing moderate beer consumption here, not excessive consumption.

    I would be interested to read the recent studies you refer to that show that more than one drink a day is harmful. If you can, please post a link to these studies.
    You better take that sense and rational thinking elsewhere partner.
    This is the Beer Forum!
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject. - Winston Churchill

  33. #33
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by JFryauff View Post
    You better take that sense and rational thinking elsewhere partner.
    This is the Beer Forum!
    Hear Hear!

  34. #34
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    I would be interested to read the recent studies you refer to that show that more than one drink a day is harmful. If you can, please post a link to these studies.
    There's been a few very recent meta studies that analyzed a number of other studies and drew conclusions from that about the effects of light drinking.

    Background There is convincing evidence that alcohol consumption increases the risk of cancer of the colorectum, breast, larynx, liver, esophagus, oral cavity and pharynx. Most of the data derive from studies that focused on the effect of moderate/high alcohol intakes, while little is known about light alcohol drinking (up to 1 drink/day).

    Patients and methods We evaluated the association between light drinking and cancer of the colorectum, breast, larynx, liver, esophagus, oral cavity and pharynx, through a meta-analytic approach. We searched epidemiological studies using PubMed, ISI Web of Science and EMBASE, published before December 2010.

    Results We included 222 articles comprising ∼92 000 light drinkers and 60 000 non-drinkers with cancer. Light drinking was associated with the risk of oropharyngeal cancer [relative risk, RR = 1.17; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06–1.29], esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) (RR = 1.30; 95% CI 1.09–1.56) and female breast cancer (RR = 1.05; 95% CI 1.02–1.08). We estimated that ∼5000 deaths from oropharyngeal cancer, 24 000 from esophageal SCC and 5000 from breast cancer were attributable to light drinking in 2004 worldwide. No association was found for colorectum, liver and larynx tumors.

    Conclusions: Light drinking increases the risk of cancer of oral cavity and pharynx, esophagus and female breast.

    Light alcohol drinking and cancer: a meta-analysis

    I think it's important to realize that the major cancer causing alcohol metabolite called acetaldehyde can be neutralized by certain nutritional supplements like N-Acetyl Cysteine (NAC) but to do so one would first have to leave the indignant "tin foil hat" accusing denial behind and admit there's actually a cancer problem with drinking alcohol.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Cans of worms have been linked to colo-rectal cancer.
    Monsanto's can of worms ... winner / loser ! How Genetically Modified Corn Is Creating Super Worms | ThinkProgress
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Now, suppose the risk of some cancers goes up a little bit with alcohol consumption, but the risk of cardiovasular disease goes down, to a greater extent?
    And consider that cardiovasular death occurs more frequently?
    Suppose your personal profile suggests you are more likely to have cardiovascular risk than risk of cancer, based on family history, lipids etc.

    My point is that deciding the best recommendation, based on data, is complicated, and not necessarily to abstain.

    If you focus on all cause mortality, instead of cancer or heart disease, you might find a logical solution. That seems like a good approach.


    [Alcohol intake--a two-edged sword. Part 2: Protective effects of alcohol and recommendations for its safe use].
    [Article in German]
    Ströhle A, Wolters M, Hahn A.
    Source
    Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Lebensmittelwissenschaft und Humanernährung, Hannover. stroehle@nutrition.uni-hannover.de
    Abstract
    Excessive alcohol consumption causes numerous complications. However, alcohol does not only show adverse side effects: Moderate alcohol consumption improves the lipid profile as well as the insulin sensitivity and reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, diabetes mellitus type 2 and gall stones. Further, total mortality is decreased. Weighing benefits and risks women should limit alcohol consumption to 10-12 g alcohol/day and men to 20-24 g alcohol/day. Pregnant and breastfeeding women should not drink alcohol at all.
    [Alcohol intake--a two-edged sword. Par... [Med Monatsschr Pharm. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    I think postulating that kind of all encompassing relationship between anything worth having and any required negative side effects is just as much @ss-pulling speculation as saying that there are incredibly negative effects from drinking microgram amounts of beer or alcohol. And sorry folks but everything does not cause cancer either. Broccoli just isn't causing very much cancer these days. These types of thinking are really just more rationalizing. Air to breathe, for example, is really worth having for humans but there aren't any negative side effects to breathing it unless there's a bunch of other toxic things like tobacco smoke mixed in with it.
    I again find myself pained to try and follow your logic. I try - but miss your point. Let me comment on 2 points you made:

    1) People postulate and make hazard assessments all the time. All your "free will" in life is postulating based on consequence. Judging relative risk is something each person does every day. People may not understand all the variables in the equation, but calling it "just as much @ass pulling" is flat out wrong. Disagreement with your point of view is not a universally accepted definition of right or wrong.

    2) The pesticides on broccoli could be a hazard. I'd bet too much broccoli could be a hazard. Air can be a hazard. Dose makes the poison. Always.
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  38. #38
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    I again find myself pained to try and follow your logic. I try - but miss your point. Let me comment on 2 points you made:

    1) People postulate and make hazard assessments all the time. All your "free will" in life is postulating based on consequence. Judging relative risk is something each person does every day. People may not understand all the variables in the equation, but calling it "just as much @ass pulling" is flat out wrong. Disagreement with your point of view is not a universally accepted definition of right or wrong.
    What else is new? It ain't exactly rocket science debauch. No one can just pull a blanket statement that "anything worth having has some sort of negative side effect" out of their butt. It may mesh with the predominant Western Protestant conservative mindset that any pleasure must necessarily come with at least an equal amount of pain but it clearly can not be found to be universally demonstrable like for example the laws of gravity are. I wouldn't accept a little "negative side effect" like cancer just to have a few beers or drinks. On what planet would anyone without a drinking problem find that proposition acceptable?

    Besides that, the damaging effects of alcohol caused, cancer causing acetaldehyde can be minimized to near zero by ingesting certain sulfur containing supplements and vitamins before drinking, making your Puritan "relative risk" assessment to enjoy beer but accept a cancer risk in the process look pretty ridiculous.

    Quote Originally Posted by debaucherous View Post
    2) The pesticides on broccoli could be a hazard. I'd bet too much broccoli could be a hazard. Air can be a hazard. Dose makes the poison. Always.
    I have no idea how you imagine that is in conflict with what I said. I think you're simply trying to be pompously contentious...again.

  39. #39
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Now, suppose the risk of some cancers goes up a little bit with alcohol consumption, but the risk of cardiovasular disease goes down, to a greater extent?
    And consider that cardiovasular death occurs more frequently?
    Suppose your personal profile suggests you are more likely to have cardiovascular risk than risk of cancer, based on family history, lipids etc.

    My point is that deciding the best recommendation, based on data, is complicated, and not necessarily to abstain.

    If you focus on all cause mortality, instead of cancer or heart disease, you might find a logical solution. That seems like a good approach.




    [Alcohol intake--a two-edged sword. Par... [Med Monatsschr Pharm. 2012] - PubMed - NCBI
    I'm not convinced that the positive cardiovascular effects of alcohol consumption can't be replicated without the cancer risk by other practices like say tai chi. If one simply wanted to continue a drinking habit and rationalize a health benefit for it that probably doesn't sound like much fun though.

    Heart disease. A 53-person study at National Taiwan University found that a year of tai chi significantly boosted exercise capacity, lowered blood pressure, and improved levels of cholesterol, triglycerides, insulin, and C-reactive protein in people at high risk for heart disease. The study, which was published in the September 2008 Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, found no improvement in a control group that did not practice tai chi.

    Heart failure. In a 30-person pilot study at Harvard Medical School, 12 weeks of tai chi improved participants' ability to walk and quality of life. It also reduced blood levels of B-type natriuretic protein, an indicator of heart failure. A 150-patient controlled trial is under way.

    Hypertension. In a review of 26 studies in English or Chinese published in Preventive Cardiology (Spring 2008), Dr. Yeh reported that in 85% of trials, tai chi lowered blood pressure — with improvements ranging from 3 to 32 mm Hg in systolic pressure and from 2 to 18 mm Hg in diastolic pressure.

  40. #40
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by JFryauff View Post
    <applies tinfoil hat> Paging TL1...paging TL1...<applies tinfoil hat>
    You, sir, are a prophet and a gentleman. Cheers!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tucoramirez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    94
    Problem with these studies are finding good research subjects.Round up some guys that drink only beer and have no other environmental risks? Pint of beer a day raises cancer risk by fifth | Science | The Guardian

  42. #42
    ******
    Reputation: monzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,990
    We're all going to die eventually from something. Why worry what that something is? I live it up and only really concern myself with immediate and foreseeable consequences. For instance, if I drink all of these beers tonight, is that hangover tomorrow going to suck really bad at work or just kind of bad?
    Quote Originally Posted by Tone's View Post
    Id scrap the passion forum all together, its a breeding ground for unicorn milkers, rainbow chasers and candy cotton farters.

  43. #43
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    I think postulating that kind of all encompassing relationship between anything worth having and any required negative side effects is just as much @ss-pulling speculation as saying that there are incredibly negative effects from drinking microgram amounts of beer or alcohol. And sorry folks but everything does not cause cancer either. Broccoli just isn't causing very much cancer these days. These types of thinking are really just more rationalizing. Air to breathe, for example, is really worth having for humans but there aren't any negative side effects to breathing it unless there's a bunch of other toxic things like tobacco smoke mixed in with it.
    Air = a mix of substances mostly nitrogen and oxygen (99% combined) which is harmless to the human body. The less than 1% remaining substances (argon, co2, polutants) can cause health risks in high doses.

    Broccoli = A 100% plant, though if non-organic can have trace elements of pesticides, and if served normally could contain 1% to 3% salt and butter, which can cause health risks in high doses.

    Beer = a mix of ingredients composed mostly of water (90% to 97%) which is harmless to the human body. The remaining 3% to 10% (alcohol, hops, spices) can cause health risks in high doses.

    Edit: BTW what is a.ss pulling?

    Quote Originally Posted by monzie View Post
    We're all going to die eventually from something. Why worry what that something is? I live it up and only really concern myself with immediate and foreseeable consequences. For instance, if I drink all of these beers tonight, is that hangover tomorrow going to suck really bad at work or just kind of bad?
    I like how you think though i try to concern myself with some consicuences that are not-so immediate.
    Last edited by Guerdonian; 10-19-2012 at 07:59 AM.
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  44. #44
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Another point. I tried figuring it out but cant find a good and accurate number relating to ALL cancer directly linked to alcohol.

    I would be willing to wager that deaths related to drunk driving, alcoholism (non-cancer related) and just the "YOLO" stupidity under the influence, would vastly out number the deaths linked to alcohol induced cancer. For example apx 47,000 are related to these causes. (source= Alcohol Related Injuries and Deaths in the US | Recovery First)

    My Point? one can argue that the deaths and dangers related to irresponsible drinking are much higher than cancer.
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Physician and Father story

    Forgot all about this one but I have told it many times. 13 years ago I got a checkup from a well known doctor in Los Gatos. I stopped drinking beer a few weeks ahead of the visit so I could pass with flying colors...I thought. After looking at my blood work he asked how much I drank. I said a few beers a day and more beers on the weekend. He remarked ... Ah a "maintenance drinker" like my Father was. To make the story short he told me his Father died of a rare lung cancer. His dad never smoked but the doctor was convinced that the drinking contributed to the cancer and death of his Father. Like my silly ass thread...another beer story we may never get the answer to.
    Last edited by ancient rascal; 10-19-2012 at 09:22 AM.
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  46. #46
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    Air = a mix of substances mostly nitrogen and oxygen (99% combined) which is harmless to the human body. The less than 1% remaining substances (argon, co2, polutants) can cause health risks in high doses.
    Actually, too much air results in respiratory alkalosis via hyperventilation. Which can be dangerous.

    +1 that just about anything, in excess, can be dangerous.

  47. #47
    i'm schralping yer thread
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    941
    What is your opinion of risk factor with regards to beer and:


    1) Fireroad climbs


    IMG_3534 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    2) Technical trail feature construction


    IMG_3036 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    3) Cable-lock-assisted tree-hucking


    IMG_3977 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    3) One-handed chainless racing (I think that's a porter in the cup, if that is a significant variable)


    Flowtron Chainless Smackdown by emailsucks98, on Flickr

  48. #48
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by GeePhroh View Post
    What is your opinion of risk factor with regards to beer and:


    1) Fireroad climbs


    IMG_3534 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    2) Technical trail feature construction


    IMG_3036 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    3) Cable-lock-assisted tree-hucking


    IMG_3977 by emailsucks98, on Flickr

    3) One-handed chainless racing (I think that's a porter in the cup, if that is a significant variable)


    Flowtron Chainless Smackdown by emailsucks98, on Flickr
    I wish I could give you more rep again, what an EPIC post!


    Here is the long short of this entire discussion, too much of anything can cause death and or cancer. People who are vegan can still die of heart disease and or cancer. 99% of us in the beer forum could care less about these facts and would rather discuss the complexities of a barrel aged barley-wine so please stop posting about cancer.
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  49. #49
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    I wish I could give you more rep again, what an EPIC post!


    Here is the long short of this entire discussion, too much of anything can cause death and or cancer. People who are vegan can still die of heart disease and or cancer. 99% of us in the beer forum could care less about these facts and would rather discuss the complexities of a barrel aged barley-wine so please stop posting about cancer.
    I got em for ya! Great post!

    to the rest +1
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  50. #50
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post

    Edit: BTW what is a.ss pulling?
    It's when you pull a made up statement out of your rectum which makes it stinkier than pulling it from thin air.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    It's when you pull a made up statement out of your rectum which makes it stinkier than pulling it from thin air.
    Speaking of pulling on things. Maybe its time to pull the plug on this thread ? Prolly should have not put this one up ! Yes or No ?
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  52. #52
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by jtmartino View Post
    Actually, too much air results in respiratory alkalosis via hyperventilation. Which can be dangerous.

    +1 that just about anything, in excess, can be dangerous.
    That is actually from too much rapid frantic breathing which is usually caused by an anxiety problem like drinking too much alcohol often is. Normal breathing of umcontamimated air carries no negative effects. Yet another rationalization.


    Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

  53. #53
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    Another point. I tried figuring it out but cant find a good and accurate number relating to ALL cancer directly linked to alcohol.

    I would be willing to wager that deaths related to drunk driving, alcoholism (non-cancer related) and just the "YOLO" stupidity under the influence, would vastly out number the deaths linked to alcohol induced cancer. For example apx 47,000 are related to these causes. (source= Alcohol Related Injuries and Deaths in the US | Recovery First)

    My Point? one can argue that the deaths and dangers related to irresponsible drinking are much higher than cancer.
    So that makes alcohol related cancer all good then?

    Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

  54. #54
    ******
    Reputation: monzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,990
    Tl1: jtmartino said "Actually, too much air results in respiratory alkalosis via hyperventilation. Which can be dangerous."

    Via=by way of
    Hyperventilation=rapid, frantic breathing

    You said "That is actually from too much rapid frantic breathing which is usually caused by an anxiety problem like drinking too much alcohol often is. Normal breathing of umcontamimated air carries no negative effects. Yet another rationalization."

    You basically just corroborated his post, why exactly do you think he's wrong?
    Quote Originally Posted by Tone's View Post
    Id scrap the passion forum all together, its a breeding ground for unicorn milkers, rainbow chasers and candy cotton farters.

  55. #55
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    It's when you pull a made up statement out of your rectum which makes it stinkier than pulling it from thin air.
    I just let them fly, my stank don't stank to me

    Quote Originally Posted by ancient rascal View Post
    Speaking of pulling on things. Maybe its time to pull the plug on this thread ? Prolly should have not put this one up ! Yes or No ?
    Heck No, this keeps things interesting around here, its the internet, one can't take it seriosly! Keep it! it will get derailed shortly enough and end up with a bunch of kitty gif's or unicorn pictures...

    Edit: TL1 is common around here, he is like that crazy vegan friend that is fun to invite to meat bbq's.

    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    So that makes alcohol related cancer all good then?
    You lost me on this one. GUESS WHAT !?!?!?! TL1 its almost 4:00, and i am going to a local watering hole right after i get off work! I am going to cheers to you and your concern for my health,
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  56. #56
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by monzie View Post
    Tl1: jtmartino said "Actually, too much air results in respiratory alkalosis via hyperventilation. Which can be dangerous."

    Via=by way of
    Hyperventilation=rapid, frantic breathing

    You said "That is actually from too much rapid frantic breathing which is usually caused by an anxiety problem like drinking too much alcohol often is. Normal breathing of umcontamimated air carries no negative effects. Yet another rationalization."

    You basically just corroborated his post, why exactly do you think he's wrong?
    Not at all. It's not too much air per se. It's caused by too much, too fast breathing of air, upsetting the balance of inhalation and exhalation blood gases. I'm lovin the never ending rationalizations to avoid the obvious fact that drinking "moderate" amounts of alcohol are related to dna damage that creates bodily conditions favorable to inducing cancer.

  57. #57
    ******
    Reputation: monzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,990
    I'm not rationalizing anything, I couldn't give a **** about the consequences; I know what they are and I--as an educated adult--still choose to drink, sometimes to excess.

    What you are doing however is arguing semantic minutiae to avoid saying you and jtmartino agree on a point irrespective of your stances on cancer and drinking linkage. That's fine you two disagree but, call a spade a spade.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tone's View Post
    Id scrap the passion forum all together, its a breeding ground for unicorn milkers, rainbow chasers and candy cotton farters.

  58. #58
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    Heck No, this keeps things interesting around here, its the internet, one can't take it seriosly! Keep it! it will get derailed shortly enough and end up with a bunch of kitty gif's or unicorn pictures...
    What about a kitty that IS a unicorn?





    /end thread
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  59. #59
    ******
    Reputation: monzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,990
    Woah! Best picture ever. [/thread] indeed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Tone's View Post
    Id scrap the passion forum all together, its a breeding ground for unicorn milkers, rainbow chasers and candy cotton farters.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    I'm not convinced that the positive cardiovascular effects of alcohol consumption can't be replicated without the cancer risk by other practices like say tai chi. If one simply wanted to continue a drinking habit and rationalize a health benefit for it that probably doesn't sound like much fun though.

    That's a silly argument. The benefits of tai chi haven nothing to do with the discussion. The point is that all cause mortality goes down with moderate drinking.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    The real problem with beer is that it extends your life so much it gives cancer more time to develop.

  62. #62
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    That's a silly argument. The benefits of tai chi haven nothing to do with the discussion. The point is that all cause mortality goes down with moderate drinking.
    Not according to the latest meta analysis studies that said anything more than one drink a day carried definite cancer and other disease risks. That was my point that you don't need to accept the disease risks of alcohol to get the supposed cardiovascular benefits. Like I said though if you're just looking for a reason to keep drinking, the cardiovascular benefits may be enough to do it for you. On that subject, I think the benefits of that are caused simply by allowing people to relax a bit in this crazed zombie monkey house of a world.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Not according to the latest meta analysis studies that said anything more than one drink a day carried definite cancer and other disease risks. That was my point that you don't need to accept the disease risks of alcohol to get the supposed cardiovascular benefits. Like I said though if you're just looking for a reason to keep drinking, the cardiovascular benefits may be enough to do it for you. On that subject, I think the benefits of that are caused simply by allowing people to relax a bit in this crazed zombie monkey house of a world.
    The link I posted is an analysis from September 2012. Got something more recent than that?
    And you seem to be missing the point about total mortality.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post

    Besides that, the damaging effects of alcohol caused, cancer causing acetaldehyde can be minimized to near zero by ingesting certain sulfur containing supplements and vitamins before drinking, making your Puritan "relative risk" assessment to enjoy beer but accept a cancer risk in the process look pretty ridiculous.

    Can you site any scientific references to support this statement?

  65. #65
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by monzie View Post
    I'm not rationalizing anything, I couldn't give a **** about the consequences; I know what they are and I--as an educated adult--still choose to drink, sometimes to excess.

    What you are doing however is arguing semantic minutiae to avoid saying you and jtmartino agree on a point irrespective of your stances on cancer and drinking linkage. That's fine you two disagree but, call a spade a spade.
    You're actually the one arguing "semantic minutiae". The point was made regarding "anything worth having" having mandatory "negative side effects" and I used air as an example of such a thing that didn't. If one is hyperventilating or breathing air too rapidly it's not an example of air being bad in itself and having neg. side effects but of not processing it correctly or misusing it. Drinking enough alcohol to induce conditions favorable for inducing cancer conditions doesn't involve what had been thought of as (2-3 drinks) misusing it but using it "normally". I have never had any negative effects from breathing air btw. As a lifelong asthmatic I have had negative side effects from time to time from not getting enough of it though.

  66. #66
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    I just let them fly, my stank don't stank to me

    Heck No, this keeps things interesting around here, its the internet, one can't take it seriosly! Keep it! it will get derailed shortly enough and end up with a bunch of kitty gif's or unicorn pictures...
    It's amazing how many people can't handle mere words, especially when they're not hateful or ignorant words. On that subject all you neg-reppers can kiss my furry @ss. Not one of you has had one single intelligent thing to say in response to my posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    Edit: TL1 is common around here, he is like that crazy vegan friend that is fun to invite to meat bbq's.
    I LOVE BBQ but we know charring meat creates carcinogens too.


    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    You lost me on this one. GUESS WHAT !?!?!?! TL1 its almost 4:00, and i am going to a local watering hole right after i get off work! I am going to cheers to you and your concern for my health,
    Hope you had a good one!

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    The real problem with beer is that it extends your life so much it gives cancer more time to develop.
    True dat ... If it keeps someone from driving their car off a cliff during a depressed time in their life. Maybe not the best example but you get the picture!
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  68. #68
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    5,301
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    It's amazing how many people can't handle mere words, especially when they're not hateful or ignorant words. On that subject all you neg-reppers can kiss my furry @ss.
    Personally I own up to my negative mod reps, so if you get one from me you know it is from me. I don't favor the way one can hide behind a negative rep on this site.

    Not one of you has had one single intelligent thing to say in response to my posts.
    Have you ever thought that is because your posts lack any sort of sense to begin with.... What I mean by that is you lack sense in your troll like posts. You don't see us going into an MMA forum and posting links to studies about how getting punched and kicked in ones head repeatedly can lead to long lasting health problems..... It may be true, but if we did that we would get punched and kicked in the head for purposely irritating the main user-base of that kind of forum.

    Every-time I see a stupid post about how something may or may not be yet another cause of cancer I immediately disregard it as yet another un-proven statistic.

    Please, please go troll in the Clydesdale forums, go tell them that they can't be overweight and ride MTB because it leads to cancer and see if you get warm reception there......
    Ride Bikes, Drink Craft Beer, Repeat.

    Know these before you post:
    MTBR Forum Posting Rules
    e-bike sub-forum rules

  69. #69
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    The link I posted is an analysis from September 2012. Got something more recent than that?
    And you seem to be missing the point about total mortality.
    The link you posted translates into 2 drinks of "normal strength beer" a day for men and one drink a day for women, correct me if I'm wrong. So...not sure what point you're trying to make. Other studies have stated any more than one drink a day is a problem.

    [Alcohol intake--a two-edged sword. Part 2: Protective effects of alcohol and recommendations for its safe use].

    [Article in German]
    Ströhle A, Wolters M, Hahn A.
    Source

    Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Lebensmittelwissenschaft und Humanernährung, Hannover. stroehle@nutrition.uni-hannover.de

    Abstract

    Excessive alcohol consumption causes numerous complications. However, alcohol does not only show adverse side effects: Moderate alcohol consumption improves the lipid profile as well as the insulin sensitivity and reduces the risk of cardiovascular events, diabetes mellitus type 2 and gall stones. Further, total mortality is decreased. Weighing benefits and risks women should limit alcohol consumption to 10-12 g alcohol/day and men to 20-24 g alcohol/day. Pregnant and breastfeeding women should not drink alcohol at all.

  70. #70
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    Personally I own up to my negative mod reps, so if you get one from me you know it is from me. I don't favor the way one can hide behind a negative rep on this site.


    Have you ever thought that is because your posts lack any sort of sense to begin with.... What I mean by that is you lack sense in your troll like posts. You don't see us going into an MMA forum and posting links to studies about how getting punched and kicked in ones head repeatedly can lead to long lasting health problems..... It may be true, but if we did that we would get punched and kicked in the head for purposely irritating the main user-base of that kind of forum.

    Every-time I see a stupid post about how something may or may not be yet another cause of cancer I immediately disregard it as yet another un-proven statistic.

    Please, please go troll in the Clydesdale forums, go tell them that they can't be overweight and ride MTB because it leads to cancer and see if you get warm reception there......
    I post about any negative effects related to drinking beer based only on scientific evidence. It's the "beer" forum not the "post only shiny, happy thoughts about beer forum" so anything related to beer is fair game. I do drink beer and I love it and I have never told anyone, especially you, not to drink beer but I'm not putting blinders on and ignoring the evidence about it either. Did you ever think that what you imagine to be trolling is all in your mind because you just don't want to face reality and you're extremely irritated with anyone that doesn't post only happy shiny thoughts about beer?

  71. #71
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Can you site any scientific references to support this statement?

    Yes I do but since you've been a bit rude I think I'll make you look it up yourself if you're really that interested in the topic. I will tell you for starters that N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is the most commonly administered antidote to substances that damage the liver in overdose like alcohol, acetaminophen, sedatives etc. Take it an hour before drinking and the amount of acetlyaldehyde produced in your body is drastically reduced.

  72. #72
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    The graph you posted shows not the actual causes of death but a comparison of activities that contribute to death. There is no question that heavy drinking kills and unfortunately alcoholism is not uncommon. We are discussing moderate beer consumption here, not excessive consumption.

    I would be interested to read the recent studies you refer to that show that more than one drink a day is harmful. If you can, please post a link to these studies.
    If JAMA is going to call these things actual causes of death, I'll take their word for it. I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV.

    Context Modifiable behavioral risk factors are leading causes of mortality in the United States. Quantifying these will provide insight into the effects of recent trends and the implications of missed prevention opportunities.
    Objectives To identify and quantify the leading causes of mortality in the United States.
    JAMA Network | JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association | Actual Causes of Death in the United States, 2000

  73. #73
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by JFryauff View Post
    You better take that sense and rational thinking elsewhere partner. This is the Beer Forum!
    Indeed because those ignoring the mounting scientific evidence linking alcohol and cancer at the two or three drinks per day level are the ones displaying "sense and rational thinking" presumably.
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    If JAMA is going to call these things actual causes of death, I'll take their word for it. I'm not a doctor nor do I play one on TV.
    Please re-read the title of the graph you posted (the title is in the link but not in your post), it is not a graph depicting actual causes of death but comparative causes, or in other words they compare some causes that contribute to death. Also note, they do not include obesity or sedative lifestyle which are huge contributors to disease, and obesity is on par with smoking as a contributor to disease & death. Lastly, the graph is not from JAMA but NCI.

    Since you were not able to produce any of these meta-analysis studies, I did a Medline search looking for them. I am sincerely interested in reading them. Unfortunately, I kept on running into study after study, after study showing health benefits of light to moderate drinking. There were also a couple studies from China that did not show health benefit, but also showed no harm in elderly Chinese who drink moderately vs those who do not.

    As part of my profession I review and subscribe to many of the major, peer-reviewed medical journals. Have been doing so for 15 years and can't recall seeing one meta-analysis that claimed moderate drinking increased mortality.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    The link you posted translates into 2 drinks of "normal strength beer" a day for men and one drink a day for women, correct me if I'm wrong. So...not sure what point you're trying to make. Other studies have stated any more than one drink a day is a problem.
    So we agree that moderate drinking (2 normal beers/day) on average does not increase risk of earlier death?
    Last edited by smilinsteve; 10-20-2012 at 06:53 PM.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Yes I do but since you've been a bit rude I think I'll make you look it up yourself if you're really that interested in the topic. I will tell you for starters that N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is the most commonly administered antidote to substances that damage the liver in overdose like alcohol, acetaminophen, sedatives etc. Take it an hour before drinking and the amount of acetlyaldehyde produced in your body is drastically reduced.
    I don't think I've been rude, I think I've just stated my point of view, in my usual and sometimes hilarious way.


    You mentioned NAC previously and I am honestly interested what real evidence is available on these benefits you talk about.

    I figure I could do the research, but you are talking like you have this info on the tips of your fingertips, and it is common good forum etiquette to be able to site references for claims you make. I know I would.

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Question for Vitabrew

    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    Please re-read the title of the graph you posted (the title is in the link but not in your post), it is not a graph depicting actual causes of death but comparative causes, or in other words they compare some causes that contribute to death. Also note, they do not include obesity or sedative lifestyle which are huge contributors to disease, and obesity is on par with smoking as a contributor to disease & death. Lastly, the graph is not from JAMA but NCI.

    Since you were not able to produce any of these meta-analysis studies, I did a Medline search looking for them. I am sincerely interested in reading them. Unfortunately, I kept on running into study after study, after study showing health benefits of light to moderate drinking. There were also a couple studies from China that did not show health benefit, but also showed no harm in elderly Chinese who drink moderately vs those who do not.

    As part of my profession I review and subscribe to many of the major, peer-reviewed medical journals. Have been doing so for 15 years and can't recall seeing one meta-analysis that claimed moderate drinking increased mortality.
    Can you share your opinion on Dr. Anderson's article ? Beer Drinking May Speed Pancreatic Cancer Onset
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by ancient rascal View Post
    Can you share your opinion on Dr. Anderson's article ? Beer Drinking May Speed Pancreatic Cancer Onset
    Sure, would be glad to.

    First the title of the article is not in concert with the info given in the body of the text, but we all know we need an attention grabbing title to get people to read. Unfortunately, if one only reads the title it is horribly misleading.

    The salient part of the article is this: Comparing beer, wine and hard liquor, the team found that beer lowered the age of developing pancreatic cancer most, Anderson said. When she compared beer drinkers to non-beer drinkers, the effect was statistically significant; however, when she considered other variables that may affect cancer onset, the effect disappeared.

    In other words, when one accounts for other risk factors for pancreatic cancer such as obesity, being African American, family history of pancreatic cancer, (all are well known risk factors for pancreatic cancer), etc... then there is no significant lowering of the age of onset of pancreatic cancer.

  79. #79
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,416
    This thread is getting annoying. Just like the "eating garbage before a ride" thread. Go join some medical forum and throw your pathetic attempts at being some sort of life changing influence in there. Don't visit the beer forum if you don't drink beer because we don't want you here. I assume the OP wasn't reaching out to d-bags who want to preach a bunch of garbage. Shut up and go start a non-beer thread and perhaps invite the vegan folks to it.

  80. #80
    Hi.
    Reputation: jtmartino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    That is actually from too much rapid frantic breathing which is usually caused by an anxiety problem like drinking too much alcohol often is. Normal breathing of umcontamimated air carries no negative effects. Yet another rationalization.


    Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2
    Correct that it's not from too much air, but rather too much CO2 exhalation. It can be induced without anxiety, however. People can voluntarily hyperventilate at any given time.

    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Not at all. It's not too much air per se. It's caused by too much, too fast breathing of air, upsetting the balance of inhalation and exhalation blood gases. I'm lovin the never ending rationalizations to avoid the obvious fact that drinking "moderate" amounts of alcohol are related to dna damage that creates bodily conditions favorable to inducing cancer.
    It's not a rationalization, it was just a fun comment in the line of logic that states "everything in moderation." Including breathing.

    As you already know, and have posted about, the increased cancer risk is somewhat offset by the decreased risk of heart disease and related disorders. And the studies delivering this information are all meta-analyses, which can be open to interpretation (or poor analysis.)

  81. #81
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Were still going eh? See, if it weren't for TL1 and his individual views this thread would have never gotten this far. 3

    Here is something too help out:
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  82. #82
    Sup
    Reputation: Burnt-Orange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,696
    If the beer is free I will be there
    MMMMMMMMMMMMMM beer

    Sj
    Last edited by Burnt-Orange; 12-11-2012 at 12:45 PM.
    I am slow therefore I am

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    These last two posts

    I am divinely shell shocked and pleasantly surprised ! I think we are gonna leave it as a flawed survey and that beer is no better or worse than other drinks unless Dr. Anderson wants to weigh in. Maybe someone living in Michigan on this thread can help out and contact her ?
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  84. #84
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Guerdonian View Post
    Were still going eh? See, if it weren't for TL1 and his individual views this thread would have never gotten this far.
    If it were just my individual opinion without any scientific basis, I wouldn't post it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Beer and cancer ?-unicorn-kitty.jpeg  


  85. #85
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    So we agree that moderate drinking (2 normal beers/day) on average does not increase risk of earlier death?
    Not really. The subject was cancer not earlier death. Also, whatever cardioprotective health benefits beer may impart to some drinkers are not likely to apply universally.

    ABSTRACT

    Aims Most, but not all, epidemiological studies suggest a cardioprotective association for low to moderate average alcohol consumption. The objective was to quantify the dose–response relationship between average alcohol consumption and ischaemic heart disease (IHD) stratified by sex and IHD end-point (mortality versus morbidity).

    Methods A systematic search of published studies using electronic databases (1980–2010) identified 44 observational studies (case–control or cohort) reporting a relative risk measure for average alcohol intake in relation to IHD risk. Generalized least-squares trend models were used to derive the best-fitting dose–response curves in stratified continuous meta-analyses. Categorical meta-analyses were used to verify uncertainty for low to moderate levels of consumption in comparison to long-term abstainers.

    Results The analyses used 38 627 IHD events (mortality or morbidity) among 957 684 participants. Differential risk curves were found by sex and end-point. Although some form of a cardioprotective association was confirmed in all strata, substantial heterogeneity across studies remained unexplained and confidence intervals were relatively wide, in particular for average consumption of one to two drinks/day.

    Conclusions A cardioprotective association between alcohol use and ischaemic heart disease cannot be assumed for all drinkers, even at low levels of intake. More evidence on the overall benefit–risk ratio of average alcohol consumption in relation to ischaemic heart disease and other diseases is needed in order to inform the general public or physicians about safe or low-risk drinking levels.
    The cardioprotective association of average alcohol consumption and ischaemic heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis - Roerecke - 2012 - Addiction - Wiley Online Library

  86. #86
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by OCtrailMonkey View Post
    This thread is getting annoying. Just like the "eating garbage before a ride" thread. Go join some medical forum and throw your pathetic attempts at being some sort of life changing influence in there. Don't visit the beer forum if you don't drink beer because we don't want you here. I assume the OP wasn't reaching out to d-bags who want to preach a bunch of garbage. Shut up and go start a non-beer thread and perhaps invite the vegan folks to it.
    Yet you made a conscious choice to click on it. Brilliant. I know comfortable ignorance is very desirable to many people, it's the human condition but this is actually the kind of rude and ignorant post that strongly motivates me to post more on the subject.

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    Yet you made a conscious choice to click on it. Brilliant. I know comfortable ignorance is very desirable to many people, it's the human condition but this is actually the kind of rude and ignorant post that strongly motivates me to post more on the subject.
    This thread is like the Howerd Stern haters deal. If you hate him so much why do you keep listening to him. Answer ... Hater says....We want to see what he says next !
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  88. #88
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    Quote Originally Posted by Vitabrew View Post
    Please re-read the title of the graph you posted (the title is in the link but not in your post), it is not a graph depicting actual causes of death but comparative causes, or in other words they compare some causes that contribute to death. Also note, they do not include obesity or sedative lifestyle which are huge contributors to disease, and obesity is on par with smoking as a contributor to disease & death. Lastly, the graph is not from JAMA but NCI.

    Since you were not able to produce any of these meta-analysis studies, I did a Medline search looking for them. I am sincerely interested in reading them. Unfortunately, I kept on running into study after study, after study showing health benefits of light to moderate drinking. There were also a couple studies from China that did not show health benefit, but also showed no harm in elderly Chinese who drink moderately vs those who do not.

    As part of my profession I review and subscribe to many of the major, peer-reviewed medical journals. Have been doing so for 15 years and can't recall seeing one meta-analysis that claimed moderate drinking increased mortality.

    The JAMA article had no graph, it was just the same topic. Whether these lifestyle choices are or aren't "actual causes or not was the point. The JAMA article says they are. And I did post an article regarding a meta-analytical study about light drinking and cancer. Perhaps you chose to ignore it?

  89. #89
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,097
    Tl1 has an response for it all... and this thread is gaining speed.

    Grab a drink boys this has potential..
    "Any wheel size is better than sitting at a computer all day." -Myself

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,091
    I'm 40 years old and have been a "moderate" beer drinker for the past 10 years (2 to 3 beers a night, sometimes more). I've managed to live longer than 100% of people in the same age group or younger, throughout the history of the world (God bless their souls), who who have died from non beer drinking related illnesses. Just sayin'.......

  91. #91
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    This study pegs the optimal median alcohol consumption for health at half a drink a day.

    Abstract

    Objective To estimate the impact of achieving alternative average population alcohol consumption levels on chronic disease mortality in England.

    Design A macro-simulation model was built to simultaneously estimate the number of deaths from coronary heart disease, stroke, hypertensive disease, diabetes, liver cirrhosis, epilepsy and five cancers that would be averted or delayed annually as a result of changes in alcohol consumption among English adults. Counterfactual scenarios assessed the impact on alcohol-related mortalities of changing (1) the median alcohol consumption of drinkers and (2) the percentage of non-drinkers.

    Data sources Risk relationships were drawn from published meta-analyses. Age- and sex-specific distributions of alcohol consumption (grams per day) for the English population in 2006 were drawn from the General Household Survey 2006, and age-, sex- and cause-specific mortality data for 2006 were provided by the Office for National Statistics.


    Results The optimum median consumption level for drinkers in the model was 5 g/day (about half a unit), which would avert or delay 4579 (2544 to 6590) deaths per year. Approximately equal numbers of deaths from cancers and liver disease would be delayed or averted (∼2800 for each), while there was a small increase in cardiovascular mortality. The model showed no benefit in terms of reduced mortality when the proportion of non-drinkers in the population was increased.

    Conclusions Current government recommendations for alcohol consumption are well above the level likely to minimise chronic disease. Public health targets should aim for a reduction in population alcohol consumption in order to reduce chronic disease mortality.




    What is the optimal level of population alcohol consumption for chronic disease prevention in England? Modelling the impact of changes in average consumption levels -- Nichols et al. 2 (3) -- BMJ Open

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Dang ... got to go to work

    Don't forget about Vitabrew. He's gonna have more to say ! Good to see were having some fun with this deadly serious thread !
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,091
    The fact that beer drinkers live until their 80s and 90s shows how unreliable some of the "beer will kill you sooner than you will die otherwise" studies are. Here is one story about a 101 year old man who drinks beer and runs marathons! I'll bet you part of the reason this guy is still alive is BECAUSE of his beer consumption!

    101-Year Old Dude Who Drinks Beer and Runs Marathons Is Bro as Sh*t - BroBible.com

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Broccoli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5,764
    You know who will die of cancer? People who are too righteous.

  95. #95
    Sup
    Reputation: Burnt-Orange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,696
    I think life expectancy is 90% genetics and 10% lifestyle
    And to all of those who agree I will raise a glass and drink to that

    Sj
    I am slow therefore I am

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    816
    Logic problems everywhere.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    I was gonna stop by and see you, but the Jehovas witnesses came by. When they left I started drinking. Voicemail from Paul

  97. #97
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,851
    How best to use this relatively new information about beer and cancer? Not sure but I don't think guilt ever helps anything so if you get cancer after years of slammin' beers I wouldn't beat yourself up for the beer drinking, it may or may NOT be related. If you're maybe looking for a way of improving long term health, cutting back to one or two a day and using anti-alcohol supplements before drinking might not be a bad idea. If you just want to drink beer, who am I to say anything about it? Go for it! Anyway, I'm not BSing anyone, not pushing any agendas or trying to market a product to you, so you can be sure of that much anyway.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,613
    Quote Originally Posted by tl1 View Post
    How best to use this relatively new information about beer and cancer? Not sure but I don't think guilt ever helps anything so if you get cancer after years of slammin' beers I wouldn't beat yourself up for the beer drinking, it may or may NOT be related. If you're maybe looking for a way of improving long term health, cutting back to one or two a day and using anti-alcohol supplements before drinking might not be a bad idea. If you just want to drink beer, who am I to say anything about it? Go for it! Anyway, I'm not BSing anyone, not pushing any agendas or trying to market a product to you, so you can be sure of that much anyway.
    So now 1 or 2 is ok? I sense a subtle shift in position.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Klurejr View Post
    haha, no kidding, when I saw the title i figured it had to be him again.


    If beer caused cancer there would of been cancer outbreaks going back way into history, beer has been around a long time, cancer is a relatively new thing.
    Actually, we are just able to detect cancer better now, so the statistics are going to be skewed.

    That all said. I like beer, I've had cancer. Hell, I've had both at the same time, and I'm still alive

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,151

    Remember folks

    My post is not as much beer and cancer as it is ... beer and "pancreatic cancer" The doctor is an expert in the specialty of Pancreatic, etc. Not in all forms of cancer. We still don't know if this study/survey she did holds water. OK ... the beer and cancer title was a bit of a hook ... I admit it. The curiosity about it for me is genuine. -AR
    Suicide by single speed. Work in progress.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •