SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Study: Abstaining from alcohol significantly shortens life
New research shows that those who imbibe are less likely to die prematurely than those who stay dry.
Tue, Aug 31 2010 at 1:53 PM
Related Topics:
Photo: Al404/Flickr
A newly released study shows that regular drinkers are less likely to die prematurely than people who have never indulged in alcohol. You read that right: Time reports that abstaining from alcohol altogether can lead to a shorter life than consistent, moderate drinking.
Surprised? The tightly controlled study, which looked at individuals between ages 55 and 65, spanned a 20-year period and accounted for variables ranging from socioeconomic status to level of physical activity. Led by psychologist Charles Holahan of the University of Texas at Austin, it found that mortality rates were highest for those who had never had a sip, lower for heavy drinkers, and lowest for moderate drinkers who enjoyed one to three drinks per day.
Of the 1,824 study participants, only 41 percent of the moderate drinkers died prematurely compared to a whopping 69 percent of the nondrinkers. Meanwhile, the heavy drinkers fared better than those who abstained, with a 60 percent mortality rate. Despite the increased risks for cirrhosis and several types of cancer, not to mention dependency, accidents and poor judgment associated with heavy drinking, those who imbibe are less likely to die than people who stay dry.
A possible explanation for this is that alcohol can be a great social lubricant, and strong social networks are essential for maintaining mental and physical health. Nondrinkers have been shown to demonstrate greater signs of depression than their carousing counterparts, and in addition to the potential heart health and circulation benefits of moderate drinking (especially red wine), it also increases sociability.
While it’s always important to drink responsibly, this is one study that warrants raising a glass.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- Student science experiment finds plants won't grow near Wi-Fi router
- How to get a second crop of tomatoes -- for free
- 10 cats made famous by YouTube
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- Food fraud: 10 counterfeit products we commonly consume
- 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
- Bras don't actually work, says French study
- 9 habits that may do more harm than good
- The weirdest and wackiest animal discoveries of 2011
- 5 mind-bending facts about dreams
From our sponsor
NEWSLETTER
Advertisement
The world looks flat but isn't. We can't see germs but they exist. Scientific truth is often counter-intuitive. So no, your 'common sense' is not enough to refute anything.
Scientific research can be politicized and bias. Slavey was justified by 'scientific research'. It is not always so objective, nor should it dictate 'common sense'.
"Common sense" has suggested to millions of people that slavery was a natural condition, that women's brains were too delicate to withstand education, that their religion is the only legitimate one, and that drinking alcohol is the dangerous and immoral consumption of a poison.
Criticize science, close your eyes tightly, cover your ears and hope that the overwhelming evidence will disappear. And while you're at it, wish upon a star.
One drink is relaxing. Drunk driving is stupid. God does not enter the picture. moderation is the key.
Did anyone else read the sub-title? "New research shows that those who imbibe are less likely to die than those who stay dry."
"less likely to die than those who stay dry" - Does this mean that drinkers are immortal? I thought that everyone died?
lol
Clever, but I think they mean 'on any given day'.
haha good catch. but technically that statement is just saying drinkers have a better chance of being immortal, not that they all are
Why is it that young women who are social drinkers tend to be grossly overweight? I've seen them in my family and in friends. Also, the men folk tend to be sitters who sit around drink and when they don't have a drink, they tend to be dull and miserable.
Think twice before you start "social" drinking. One needs to find out who "paid" for this so called study. I'll bet you a drink that it was paid by someone associated with a company that sells alcoholic beverages.
Maybe someone should have done this study earlier, before my father died from alcoholism-induced cirrhosis at the age of 66.
I'm sorry for your loss. However, had he consumed in moderation he could reasonably have expected to live longer than abstainers. Alcohol abuse is always to be avoided.
Unfortunately, I can't access the study. Common sense tells me this article is disinformation - whether it's misreporting, or reporting a flawed study - but I can't determine that for myself. Wish it were available to the general public!
Again - 'common sense' has no place in scientific truth. Some true things are obvious, and some true things are not obvious at all.
Did you 'read' this study?
The study also stated that "even after controlling for nearly all imaginable variables", the claim that moderate drinkers lived longest remained true.
Pay the puppets enough money and they'll say ANYTHING!
You can't dismiss or trivialize the findings of hundreds of medical medical studies so easily. One reason is that about 90% of all the research is paid for by the Federal government.
I'm afraid that you'll have to accept the fact that drinking a little alcohol generally improves health and helps people live longer.
90% of statistics are complete rubbish
Hmmmmm. I think the statistics on which you base that assertion are complete rubbish! :-))))
Turns out toxins make you live longer..... hehe thats stupid. correlation doesnt prove causation. the article hits on the key points- social ties and positive outlook are key variables in this study, and have gone unaccounted for. thats bad science. the fact that they have ignored personality type and social connectivity invalidates their results.
Pages