> European countries having say a beer or a glass of wine with lunch is normal.

It's not a historical constant.

Alcohol consumption in Europe started to skyrocket after he WWII and it peaked around 60s (25 liters of pure alcohol per person per year in France) and has gradually declined. In the last decade or so the consumption has fallen dramatically. Now it's something like 12.5 liters per year in France. Still twice the rest of the world.

That 'European alcohol culture' (socially accepted constant consumption) comes with heavy cost. Most harm from alcohol use (by numbers) falls to heavy users who are are not seen as alcoholics. Differed diseases, neglect of children, fetal alcohol syndrome, etc.

Some statistics from France. Prevalence of alcohol use disorders and alcohol dependence (%), 2010* first number is disorder percentage, second is alcohol dependence

    Males               8.8 , 4.7
    Females             2.5 , 1.3
    Both sexes          5.5 , 2.9
    Europe              7.5 , 4.0

source: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/publications/global_alcoh...

Sounds like you are cherry picking your start date of course during ww2 wine and beer production was supressed in Europe.

Point I was making was that the consumption and culture around alcohol is not constant. There have been fluctuations over the centuries.

Youth today in Europe are realizing that constant 'moderate' consumption is not healthy and are cutting it back. They want to live long healthy lives.

The older generation of functional European alcoholics is represented by Jean-Claude Juncker, The President of the European Commission. Hist typical drunk uncle behaviour will not be tolerated in the future: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPgiI46FCDU

Pint baby from 90's is good example of how irresponsible European alcohol culture was: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GahWcnBvnSA

Juncker's level is a lot more than one beer or a glass of wine with lunch, though.

He is no George "Ugandan Discussions" Brown is he

Maybe he's just Tired and Emotional.

I've recently moved to Europe and if there is something that I personally dislike is the higher amount of alcohol in both social and work life in general.

At least in the country I live, it's quite accepted to mandate your day with a high volume of coffee, cigarettes then cool down with alcohol.

And I am coming from NYC.

edit: missing word

The counterbalanec to it is that Europeans, generally speaking, know how to temper it with an active lifestyle. Few people I know sit at home on the weekend in front of the TV. People are out running, cyclicing, taking part in spartan races, climbing mountains, kayaking, sailing, skiing, flying aircraft etc. Granted, I live in a rich part of the world, but at least here, there is a great emphasis on an active life, both physically and mentally (think travel, museum tours, live music and operas etc). People well into their eighties are active. This kind of vitality about life is not as common in the states in my experience.

Plus they generally consume less sugar. In America sometimes it’s literally not been possible for me to order a drink that didn’t come with refined sugar. No milk, no soda water, no coconut water; just soft drinks as far as the eye can see.

Was in the US a few times, can confirm. Mostly in conference spaces, but, things like breakfast / lunch was heavily sugared bread / pastries, mid-afternoon snack was corn chips (the name escapes me atm, doritos?) covered in sauce (which I assume must've been intended as melted cheese?), that kinda thing. A colleague ordered a salad at a restaurant, he got a huge bowl of pasta salad.

Nachos :)

I hope if you ever have the chance, you try good "gourmet" nachos.

That is correct only for the middle and higher classes. The working and lower classes are unfortunately still apt to drinking and sedentary lifestyles. It is definitely getting better, though.

> it's quite accepted to mandate your day with a high volume of coffee, cigarettes then cool down with alcohol

One of these things is not like the other: Consuming even high volumes of coffee isn’t only completely safe, it probably has some health benefits. The negative effects of coffee (mostly due to roasting and the associated creation of carcinogens) are routinely exaggerated: https://medium.com/wintoncentre/coffee-and-cancer-what-starb...

> Consuming even high volumes of coffee isn’t only completely safe

Just my own anecdatum, but I was drinking 4-6 cups of drip coffee a day and it added ~15mmHg to my blood pressure, putting me in a dangerous range. I still drink it now and then but I wouldn't say "even high volumes are completely safe".

Depends how much you drink. I realised my mistake after drinking 2 lites of double-strength coffee daily at work for a few months because it was free in my first post graduation job. I have to make a conscious effort to not repeat that.

Fair enough, everything in moderation. Two litres strikes me as truly exceptional. That said, even that amount probably doesn’t have averse long term health effects if you ensure sufficient water and electrolyte uptake to offset its diuretic effect (another very noticeable side-effect is withdrawal but that’s short-term).

> Two litres strikes me as truly exceptional.

That's ~6 can-sized coffees a day.

Split that into 3 in the morning and 3 in the afternoon and it doesn't seem "truly exceptional" to me. Perhaps a tad overindulgent, but I could hit a handful of people with a bread roll from where I'm sitting who would qualify.

Double strength coffee. I was taking three or four times the level that starts causing noticeable anxiety.

No, that is actually a hell of a lot of coffee.

Coffee also effects your BP

Which country are living in?

I'm from Denmark, and while we certainly do enjoy beer, it's not an everyday thing for most people, which also goes for the other Nordic countries. Similarly, my girlfriend is German, and while they do drink beer more often, they're actually quite good at moderation.

We're visiting Spain (Malaga) right now, and a glass of wine and maybe a glass of sherry is the most I've seen the majority here drink, and it's not an everyday thing. Mostly they drink sangria or tinto de verano if they drink anything alcoholic, in other words significantly watered down wine.

> […] in all European countries having say a beer or a glass of wine with lunch is normal.

That's about as meaningful as saying that having a glass of wine or beer with lunch is normal in all countries in the world. Europe is not one homogeneous culture; even at the country-level you'll see huge discrepancies between regions.

Drinking during the lunch on a working day is rare in the Netherlands (it's certainly not condoned at the office).

> That's about as meaningful as saying that having a glass of wine or beer with lunch is normal in all countries in the world.

Really? It's illegal in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Brunei, parts of India, Iran, Kuwait, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and Yemen.

Surely you can see some variation between different regions of the world.

That's exactly his point. It may be commonplace in Spain or France, but not in the Netherlands or Denmark. So absolutely not all of Europe.

Where in Europe would the reaction be anywhere near as negative as in the countries listed above?

That wasn't the point. The point was that a beer or glass of wine with lunch every day isn't the norm in all of Europe.

Europe is not a monoculture, as some people seem to believe.

Maybe 20 years ago, and maybe still in some parts of Europe, but these days most workplaces have a strict no-alcohol policy.

This highly depends on the type of company you work for. There almost never is a strict no-alcohol policy in most small to medium-sized companies (who make up the majority of the workforce) in Europe.

It's generally a legal thing in the US.

If you have alcohol at the company, the company winds up liable if something happens. If you simply buy a round at a bar or shop, the liability is the establishment's.

And, if you think the US is bad, try Canada. One of the senior VP's at a company I knew threatened to fire the director of HR because there was no beer at an all-hands meeting. :)

> these days most workplaces have a strict no-alcohol policy

I’d be curious where you’re working because this definitely isn’t true in the UK (Friday afternoon pints at work are customary), nor in France (most canteens stock wine for lunch). And in Germany, at least in academia, having a drink in the afternoon at work is also often acceptable.

In Germany all the companies I've worked in have a strict no-alcohol policy. But it's relatively recent (~10-15 years).

I work in mid-sized Berlin startup. At least among startups, beer, and sometimes wine, in the fridge is completely normal.

Where I work it‘s not regularly consumed with lunch (kein Bier vor Vier applies) but it does happen on occasion.

cite there may well be displinary consequences for being drunk at work but not for going out to lunch and having a drink with lunch.

And whilst not as many companies have on premises bars any more go to almost every company in silicon roundabout and they will have beer in the fridge.

Maybe not, but that quickly becomes an hour long + lunch and usually people don't take more than half an hour for lunch - because if they take longer they have to work longer.

And your point is??

As a Salaried employee (as 99.9 % of hn readers are) I quite often took more than an hour for lunch - then again I used to get into the office 20 mins earlier than almost everyone.

I don't think having a glass of wine at lunch or dinner can damage your health; in fact I recall reading somewhere that it's actually healthy. The problems start when you go over that.

This is a myth, I've seen bunch of meta-analysis related to alcohol usage done recently which show that even light usage of alcohol is harmful.

IIRC the amount of wine that is beneficial is very small, less than a glass and perhaps less than what many would think, and over that amount it becomes detrimental.

That depends on your definition of a glass.

Most people will pour a much to large portion, if told to put a glass of wine.

As others have said, this is a myth and you are wrong. Alcohol is carcinogen and there is no reason to expect that there is safe level of consumption.

There are some studies that show small cardiovascular benefits for men, they are not counting the overall mortality. Alcohol industry has very effectively propagated these studies into news. Metastudies don't show any health benefits.

It is really damn tasty, though. If you drink smaller amounts of quality stuff of course, instead of chugging shots like a college fratdouche.

I'm sure Jamon Iberico Bellota is also bad for me in various ways, but it's also possibly one of the most delicious foods in the world, so I'll take whatever minor detrimental effects it may have.

I believe that study hadn’t accounted for wine drinkers in general having much better health to start off with.

Once that was taken into account moderate wine consumption also showed a health impact

One thing your other replies have not yet mentioned is these studies did not account for why some people don’t drink. Once you account for alcoholics with lots of preexisting damage turning teetotal, the effect is reversed.