MR

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Voyager wrote:

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Who would have guessed it? I figured nondrinkers lived longer for sure!

Monker wrote:

Voyager wrote:

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Who would have guessed it? I figured nondrinkers lived longer for sure!

This is old news, actually. It's been said for years that a glass of red wine every day is healthy. But, it's not necessarily the alcohol that does it...you can get similar results from drinking grape juice. It's the tannins and anti-oxidants in the grape that does it. I'd like to see the study done again but include a group that are non-drinkers but have a glass of grape juice every day.

stevew2 wrote:who in the fuck would want to drink grape juice everyday?

Monker wrote:This is old news, actually. It's been said for years that a glass of red wine every day is healthy. But, it's not necessarily the alcohol that does it...you can get similar results from drinking grape juice. It's the tannins and anti-oxidants in the grape that does it. I'd like to see the study done again but include a group that are non-drinkers but have a glass of grape juice every day.

Rip Rokken wrote:

Monker wrote:This is old news, actually. It's been said for years that a glass of red wine every day is healthy. But, it's not necessarily the alcohol that does it...you can get similar results from drinking grape juice. It's the tannins and anti-oxidants in the grape that does it. I'd like to see the study done again but include a group that are non-drinkers but have a glass of grape juice every day.

LOL, I've thought the same thing. I'm not against drinking at all, but I think some people use studies like that as an excuse or justification to drink each night.

If it's true that heavy drinkers actually live longer and they are satisfied with their quality of life, my hat's off to them. Wish I could, but I can't, and if I tried I guarantee it would shorten my life.

Monker wrote:

Rip Rokken wrote:

Monker wrote:This is old news, actually. It's been said for years that a glass of red wine every day is healthy. But, it's not necessarily the alcohol that does it...you can get similar results from drinking grape juice. It's the tannins and anti-oxidants in the grape that does it. I'd like to see the study done again but include a group that are non-drinkers but have a glass of grape juice every day.

LOL, I've thought the same thing. I'm not against drinking at all, but I think some people use studies like that as an excuse or justification to drink each night.

If it's true that heavy drinkers actually live longer and they are satisfied with their quality of life, my hat's off to them. Wish I could, but I can't, and if I tried I guarantee it would shorten my life.

Exactly. People are mistaking alcohol as the "good" factor that helps you live longer. I just don't believe it is. If it was just the alcohol, why is there a need to add "especially red wine"? It's obvious to me that something else is giving the health benefit.

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Bendovers and blowjobs will blowout your system and kill you, but a little heiny or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Voyager wrote:

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Good advice. I know for a fact that excessive alcohol kills a lot of brain cells. People who drink to get drunk every day usually have worse memory than people who smoke pot every day.

KenTheDude wrote:

Voyager wrote:

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Good advice. I know for a fact that excessive alcohol kills a lot of brain cells. People who drink to get drunk every day usually have worse memory than people who smoke pot every day.

If my neighbor across the street is home, he is in his garage drinking beer and watching TV. Period. That's it, that's all he does. He has his garage set up like a den with a couch, TV, fridge, stereo, etc. He's a shift worker in a chemical plant. He will literally sit in that garage and drink beer after beer all day long and then drive to work and work all night. When he gets home at about 7am, it starts all over again. The dude must spend at least $500 a month on beer alone. I've never seen anything like it.

Rip Rokken wrote:

KenTheDude wrote:

Voyager wrote:

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Good advice. I know for a fact that excessive alcohol kills a lot of brain cells. People who drink to get drunk every day usually have worse memory than people who smoke pot every day.

If my neighbor across the street is home, he is in his garage drinking beer and watching TV. Period. That's it, that's all he does. He has his garage set up like a den with a couch, TV, fridge, stereo, etc. He's a shift worker in a chemical plant. He will literally sit in that garage and drink beer after beer all day long and then drive to work and work all night. When he gets home at about 7am, it starts all over again. The dude must spend at least $500 a month on beer alone. I've never seen anything like it.

Does he ever sleep?

gr8dane wrote:

Rip Rokken wrote:

KenTheDude wrote:

Voyager wrote:

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Good advice. I know for a fact that excessive alcohol kills a lot of brain cells. People who drink to get drunk every day usually have worse memory than people who smoke pot every day.

If my neighbor across the street is home, he is in his garage drinking beer and watching TV. Period. That's it, that's all he does. He has his garage set up like a den with a couch, TV, fridge, stereo, etc. He's a shift worker in a chemical plant. He will literally sit in that garage and drink beer after beer all day long and then drive to work and work all night. When he gets home at about 7am, it starts all over again. The dude must spend at least $500 a month on beer alone. I've never seen anything like it.

Does he ever sleep?

Only when he is at work.

KenTheDude wrote:If my neighbor across the street is home, he is in his garage drinking beer and watching TV. Period. That's it, that's all he does. He has his garage set up like a den with a couch, TV, fridge, stereo, etc. He's a shift worker in a chemical plant. He will literally sit in that garage and drink beer after beer all day long and then drive to work and work all night. When he gets home at about 7am, it starts all over again. The dude must spend at least $500 a month on beer alone. I've never seen anything like it.

Voyager wrote:

gr8dane wrote:

Rip Rokken wrote:

KenTheDude wrote:

Voyager wrote:

BobbyinTN wrote:Everything in moderation. Benders and blowouts will blowout your system and kill you, but a little wine or even whiskey every day will make things run smoother.

Notice, they didn't say alcoholism or getting drunk every day is a good thing.

Good advice. I know for a fact that excessive alcohol kills a lot of brain cells. People who drink to get drunk every day usually have worse memory than people who smoke pot every day.

If my neighbor across the street is home, he is in his garage drinking beer and watching TV. Period. That's it, that's all he does. He has his garage set up like a den with a couch, TV, fridge, stereo, etc. He's a shift worker in a chemical plant. He will literally sit in that garage and drink beer after beer all day long and then drive to work and work all night. When he gets home at about 7am, it starts all over again. The dude must spend at least $500 a month on beer alone. I've never seen anything like it.

Does he ever sleep?

Only when he is at work.

Or at church - LOL!

parfait wrote:Damn. Just found out that Christopher Hitchens got diagnosed with terminal cancer a few weeks back. He was a heavy drinker, but still one the true rational minds and without a doubt one of the best debaters of this century. A brillian person and a true loss for evolutionary and outspoken rationalism.

Voyager wrote:

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?

One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Who would have guessed it? I figured nondrinkers lived longer for sure!

Peartree12249 wrote:

parfait wrote:Damn. Just found out that Christopher Hitchens got diagnosed with terminal cancer a few weeks back. He was a heavy drinker, but still one the true rational minds and without a doubt one of the best debaters of this century. A brillian person and a true loss for evolutionary and outspoken rationalism.

Yes, he was recently interviewed by Anderson Cooper on CNN about his cancer. Here's the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iS1KRbZb0XQ

Voyager wrote:

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?


One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Who would have guessed it? I figured nondrinkers lived longer for sure!

lights1961 wrote:

Voyager wrote:

Why Do Heavy Drinkers Outlive Nondrinkers?


One of the most contentious issues in the vast literature about alcohol consumption has been the consistent finding that those who don't drink actually tend to die sooner than those who do. The standard Alcoholics Anonymous explanation for this finding is that many of those who show up as abstainers in such research are actually former hard-core drunks who had already incurred health problems associated with drinking.

But a new paper in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research suggests that — for reasons that aren't entirely clear — abstaining from alcohol does actually tend to increase one's risk of dying even when you exclude former drinkers. The most shocking part? Abstainers' mortality rates are higher than those of heavy drinkers.
(See pictures of booze under a microscope.)

Moderate drinking, which is defined as one to three drinks per day, is associated with the lowest mortality rates in alcohol studies. Moderate alcohol use (especially when the beverage of choice is red wine) is thought to improve heart health, circulation and sociability, which can be important because people who are isolated don't have as many family members and friends who can notice and help treat health problems.

But why would abstaining from alcohol lead to a shorter life? It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive. And people of lower socioeconomic status have more life stressors — job and child-care worries that might not only keep them from the bottle but also cause stress-related illnesses over long periods. (They also don't get the stress-reducing benefits of a drink or two after work.)

But even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables — socioeconomic status, level of physical activity, number of close friends, quality of social support and so on — the researchers (a six-member team led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin) found that over a 20-year period, mortality rates were highest for those who had never been drinkers, second-highest for heavy drinkers and lowest for moderate drinkers.
(Watch TIME's Video "Taste Test: Beer With Extra Buzz.")

The sample of those who were studied included individuals between ages 55 and 65 who had had any kind of outpatient care in the previous three years. The 1,824 participants were followed for 20 years. One drawback of the sample: a disproportionate number, 63%, were men. Just over 69% of the never-drinkers died during the 20 years, 60% of the heavy drinkers died and only 41% of moderate drinkers died.

These are remarkable statistics. Even though heavy drinking is associated with higher risk for cirrhosis and several types of cancer (particularly cancers in the mouth and esophagus), heavy drinkers are less likely to die than people who have never drunk. One important reason is that alcohol lubricates so many social interactions, and social interactions are vital for maintaining mental and physical health. As I pointed out last year, nondrinkers show greater signs of depression than those who allow themselves to join the party.

The authors of the new paper are careful to note that even if drinking is associated with longer life, it can be dangerous: it can impair your memory severely and it can lead to nonlethal falls and other mishaps (like, say, cheating on your spouse in a drunken haze) that can screw up your life. There's also the dependency issue: if you become addicted to alcohol, you may spend a long time trying to get off the bottle.

That said, the new study provides the strongest evidence yet that moderate drinking is not only fun but good for you. So make mine a double.

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2014332,00.html?hpt=C2#ixzz0yA0Mt7B3

Who would have guessed it? I figured nondrinkers lived longer for sure!

was this study done at last call in a bar???

Voyager wrote:It's true that those who abstain from alcohol tend to be from lower socioeconomic classes, since drinking can be expensive.