Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 187
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ancient rascal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3,607

    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
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  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
    540
    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
    4,127
    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.

  6. #6
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,083
    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
    3,607

    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
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  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
    2,850
    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
    2,850
    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
    3,607
    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?
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  14. #14
    Beer Please! SuperModerator
    Reputation: Klurejr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,127
    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.

  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
    2,850
    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
    4,127
    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.

  18. #18
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,850
    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
    2,850
    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
    3,607

    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
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  21. #21
    DLd
    DLd is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    1,329
    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!”
    Can't wait for the snow to melt and the dirt to dry

  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
    2,850
    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
    540
    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
    2,083
    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
    8,605
    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
    8,605
    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
    3,607

    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.
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  29. #29
    tl1
    tl1 is offline
    Bicyclist
    Reputation: tl1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,850
    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
    2,850
    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
    3,607
    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
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    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
    807
    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
    2,850
    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
    2,850
    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
    2,083
    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
    2,083
    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
    3,607

    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.
    Still searching for my red headed hairdresser Tiffany. "Economic Mother Nature" ... Knocks at door! -AR

  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
    839
    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
    4,127
    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.

  49. #49
    Beer Me!
    Reputation: Guerdonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,083
    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
    2,850
    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.

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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