> Anecdotally I know a lot of really old people who still drink.

I know someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes a day who is almost 100 years old. Smoking is good or you!

Not what I said...however, I personally do know a lot more people who have actually died from health issues directly related to smoking: heat attacks, emphysema, lung cancer.

This comment adds nothing to the discussion.

The world is full of people who strongly and honestly believe anecdotes are more important than statistics and statistics are meaninglessly astrological in nature. Its a very popular set of beliefs, majority in some areas.

The problem is that how well anyone's particular life circumstances fit into a statistical model (or not) can be a very difficult thing to discern. There is a combinatorial explosion of factors that everyone is subject to, and most epidemiological statistics can address and account for a handful of them at a time. So what ends up happening is folks look at the statistics, shrug, and continue their own n=1. The best they can do is be honest with themselves about "how is that working out for you?"

"hows that working out for you" has been completely replaced in society due to social media with "how many updoots will I get?"

The world is full of people like you who thinks that making this comment ensures you're intellectually superior to others.

I, of course, know what statistics is and how to interpret it , I'm aware drinking isn't especially good for ones health and other aspect of ones life, which is why I'm currently...not drinking.

I'm also aware how silly it is to worry about it and make absolutely claims like "No level..blah".

No level of C02 from fossil fuels is good for us anymore; However, I'm certain you'll get in your car and drive or on a plane and fly soon enough.

The point I'm trying to make is that what matters one minute often seems inconsequential the next, regardless of statistics.

For example, the WHO provides quite shocking statistics on the dangerous of food fires and other heating / cooking methods which are used in my neighborhood: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/household-a..., it freaks me out but I can't do much about it or my neighbors use of a wood stove. Should I move?

So while I think it's been obvious for sometime, alcohol is bad for ones health, smoke is also bad for ones health, is there anything really new or wise in this bulletin from the WHO, I don't think so really.

Have a read of this on the WHO's website:

FACT: Alcohol-based sanitizers are safe for everyone to use

Alcohols in the sanitizers have not been shown to create any relevant health issues. Little alcohol is absorbed into the skin, and most products contain an emollient to reduce skin dryness. Allergic contact dermatitis and bleaching of hand hair due to alcohol are very rare adverse effects. Accidental swallowing and intoxication have been described in rare cases.

So in this case, my body will adsorb alcohol, but in this case it's ok because it's on another page separate from the one we're discussing?

> believe anecdotes are more important than statistics and statistics

Yes look at the current world, media, and western societies

The next level up are people that have no actual understanding of statistics, empirical reasoning, and the weaknesses therein but have learned that if you throw certain science-y words together your arguments will tend land better.

Disagree, today I learned what Shōchū is

Neither does yours, neither does mine.

Nothing matters we will all die eventually.

For every of those is several people who died at 60 from liver disease

It’s happening to a lot of younger adults in their 30s now too.

You don't actually know if alcohol is the cause, it might be all the other shit that we've put into the environment to, such as PFOAs, PFOS, Microplastics, air polltion and more and more...

For the people I knew, there is no doubt in my mind. Only mentioning because until people I knew died, I thought liver disease only struck as you approached your 50s/60s.

> You don't actually know if alcohol is the cause

On an individual basis, no. But on a macro, yes. We can pretty directly attribute a large % of liver-related deaths directly to alcohol.

don’t let anecdata bamboozle you

Don't let andsoitis bamboozle you...

The thing they have in common is that they still have social connections, including with you. People who are alone for stretches of time have a lot more risk from falls, etc

Sometimes I drink with that person, and they might socially drink with others, so it might even be fair to say in this case, it's a positive then?

I just have a real problem with talking in absolutes.

It's possible to accept the risk of alcohol as being worth it. I do when I choose to drink. But it's always going to be worse than not drinking, ceteris paribus. If you're able to replace the drinking sessions with tea, or a game, that's probably better for health. Maybe that's not possible, maybe there's something unique about the effect of alcohol, even in small quantities.