Posted on 10/08/2018 6:29:52 PM PDT by vannrox
And people rage over pot.
When liquor is a known killer.
That was me about 2 AM this morning............I came back from the dead.
I wonder if it’s the alcohol that leads to cancer, or if it’s what people add or mix into their alcohol? Also, what about the carbs or sugar? People need to add their drinks into their count and if they like a lot of wine a day, they need to eat very low carb the rest of the day. So you can’t tease out the cancer risk unless you know if they are compensating for hugely sugary alcoholic drinks by holding off other carbs.
Actually, this has been known for at least 30 years through population studies. Groups who don’t drink any alcohol live longer than groups who consume even moderate amounts. Of people who do drink, those who drink 3 or fewer glasses of red wine live the longest.
The problem with previous studies is that the abstinent groups also had other healthy lifestyle choices that made it difficult to assign their better health to alcohol abstinence.
I, personally, have gone with the study that said moderate-to-heavy drinkers with good nutrition have cleaner arteries than the population as a whole.
Marin county or Mendocino ?
“Earlier” as in before sunset?
Study Researchers are bad for EVERYONES health. They have yet to be right on anything.
Pure nonsense. Tell it to all the French as Italians who drink wine with 2 meals per day.
Ah, but the lack of drinking wine can result in “Kansas syndrome”, in which you show no symptoms and appear quite healthy, and then you die.
“Anyway, I’m 70 next month & don’t give a rat’s patootie about these New Puritans and their prohibitionist demands. Retirement isn’t all fun and responsibility to others goes on.”
I’m 70 this month, and I couldn’t agree more.
Talking with my doctor recently and discussing an issue, I said so I’m not going to die?
He looked at me and said all of my patients are going to die.
We had a good laugh.
Margarine is healthier than butter.
Eggs are bad for you.
High carb, low fat diets are good for you.
Artificial sweeteners are healthier than natural cane sugar.
Drinking coffee is bad for you.
All the above were, at various times, previously touted by the “experts”. And all were later, at some point, refuted by other “experts”.
Neither. The Niagara wineries. :)
Hah. I’m not THAT lonely... (at least not yet). :P
Exactly, it is marketing only.
#25. Ever seen a skinny Italian? They drink wine with almost every meal, have cheese, pasta, veggies, olive oil, and bread, bread, bread.
As for the study and people at or over 75, by then who gives a damn about having a drink a day. It’s the scientists and psychologist who are killing us with their stupidity and badly controlled studies.
Bon appetite!
And I'm no 'spert..............
I don't have T.V. anymore...not that I watched that sheet...anyway.
Many popular, low-priced brands of wine sold in California contain illegal and dangerously high levels of poisonous arsenic, according to a class-action lawsuit filed March 19 in California Superior Court.
The suit claims dozens of California wineries are violating state law by knowingly producing, marketing and selling arsenic-contaminated wine. Independent testing showed the wine contained up to five times the maximum amount the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows for drinking water.
Some of the popular wine brands named in the lawsuit include Franzia, Ménage à Trois, Sutter Home, Wine Cube, Charles Shaw, Glen Ellen, Cupcake, Beringer and Vendage. The wines named in the lawsuit are primarily white or blush varietals including moscato, pinot grigio and sauvignon blanc that are priced under $10.
“These wineries have long known about the serious health risks their products pose to customers,” said Brian Kabateck, managing partner of Los Angeles–based law firm Kabateck Brown Kellner, which filed the suit. "Yet instead of reducing the exposure to acceptable levels, the defendants recklessly engage in a pattern and practice of selling arsenic-tainted wine to California consumers."
Arsenic is an odorless, colorless and highly toxic poison known to cause illness and death when ingested. Some of the long-term health effects of arsenic exposure include various types of cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, medical experts say.Many popular, low-priced brands of wine sold in California contain illegal and dangerously high levels of poisonous arsenic, according to a class-action lawsuit filed March 19 in California Superior Court.
The suit claims dozens of California wineries are violating state law by knowingly producing, marketing and selling arsenic-contaminated wine. Independent testing showed the wine contained up to five times the maximum amount the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) allows for drinking water.
Some of the popular wine brands named in the lawsuit include Franzia, Ménage à Trois, Sutter Home, Wine Cube, Charles Shaw, Glen Ellen, Cupcake, Beringer and Vendage. The wines named in the lawsuit are primarily white or blush varietals including moscato, pinot grigio and sauvignon blanc that are priced under $10.
“These wineries have long known about the serious health risks their products pose to customers,” said Brian Kabateck, managing partner of Los Angeles–based law firm Kabateck Brown Kellner, which filed the suit. "Yet instead of reducing the exposure to acceptable levels, the defendants recklessly engage in a pattern and practice of selling arsenic-tainted wine to California consumers."
Arsenic is an odorless, colorless and highly toxic poison known to cause illness and death when ingested. Some of the long-term health effects of arsenic exposure include various types of cancer, cardiovascular disease and diabetes, medical experts say.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.