I was relatively a normal social drinker but in 2012 I came across an episode of Dr. Oz in which he recommended red wine - a glass a day for health. So I systematically poured a cup (not a glass) of Merlot. Since then I have not gone more than five days without wine/beer or alcohol of some sort.
3 Likes
I think its safe to say Iām here because of me, myself and nobody else.
12 Likes
I donāt remember her sources, but Holly Whitaker shared on Instagram the other day some of the newest study on how this is false and how hard it is methodologicaly to make this statement true. This for say that thereās to many variable to people drinking red wine everyday to make the corellation of healthiness to the wine (for example, socioeconomic status).
Anyways, fuck this Dr. For ruining lives.
And whoās actually funding the research!
7 Likes
I had a college professor, biology I think, actually say that up to a six pack a day was good for the body. I ran with that! It was a good excuse, as an alcoholic I could turn anything into a good excuse to drink more.
6 Likes
So a six-pack of six-packs must be six times as good.
I love science!
5 Likes
There is a country song by Justin Moore called why we drink.
He literally lists off every single excuse for why people drink. This sun is up, the sun is setting. You had a good day, or a bad one. Because your friends are around or you are lonely.
Literally so many excuses. Iāve listened to it and gotten into so many rants about it to Ben.
As an alcoholic you are right we could turn anything into an excuse to drink.
8 Likes
Iāll drink to that!
Ginger beer of course!
5 Likes
I think i used that exact logic as well
2 Likes
I donāt think anyone is here because of Dr. Oz. I think some people perhaps used Dr. Oz as an excuse to justify drinking so they feel less guilty drinking
5 Likes
There is nothing like āa scienceā who has opinions. Only researchers and their subjectivity. And yes what they find depends on their hypothesis, but their findings are limited by one principal thing : the methodology. Ones who are be able to read those firsts articles you cited and see in which methodology design theyāve been realized will see easily what informations they are putting aside. For example if Iām making a research on impact of ACT on depression, but I only include in the sample who does not have any symptoms of anxiety, eating disorders, addictive behaviours, traumas, or any comorbidity , and then my research on this sample prove the therapy to be effective in comparaison to a control group - do you think this study wouldāve āfindā the effectiveness of ACT for depression? Nope, it would not because it would have exclude what most people suffering from depression are also suffering: it wouldāve removed the context of the individuals suffering. It would only find the benefit of ACT for āpure depressive peopleā who actually are rare af. Same goes for the studies trying to shows the benefits of wine consumption on meta-analysis and observational studies when removing the context of the individuals who are consuming a wine daily : itās mostly people with higher economic status and more educated people who are drinking āmoderatelyā so they show a better health on the long run, not because of the wine itself but because of all the context theyāre in. And not to mention that theses meta analysis are also removing from sample people who suffers from mental health problem or other kind of physical disease. And then some more biological studies cite theses later to prove their interest in studying the benefits of alcool on a biological levels, and then find some antioxidants and stuff that are good for certain part of your health, but removing anyone of the sample who consumed in the trial more than the prescripted amount of booze or just arenāt following the study in the long term or if they do only the high socio economic statuer stays in the study. Therefore the data are just so twisted to fit into the limitation of the methodological design that the result arenāt even relative to the reality we live in.
All this to say, alcool is bad and thereās some study that proves it in a legit way. I havenāt seen yet any real study showing the contrary that can be related to real life settings.
Maybe alcool daily is good for controlled lab rats. Not for human being living free.
1 Like
Sorry lol, just came out of the gym and kinda lost it on this science thingā¦
1 Like
Lol. Dr. Oz is a doctor that has/had a tv show or 2. Kinda like Oprah, but about medical stuff.
I actually saw him on the news this morning.
Edit, I only said LOL because itās so easy for me to forget that people have different stuff on tv all over the world
4 Likes
Oh snap! We did away with cable this year. But could never cut the whole TV chord.
So kudos to you madam 
1 Like
no but if I donāt stop eating cakes soon Iāll be here bc of Dr oetker 
1 Like
I know years and years ago my grandmother wound up in the hospital because her doctor recommend a glass of wine a night and she would forget to eat and became dehydrated etcā¦no connection to Dr Oz but same principle.
I guess I should have known better but I didnt.
1 Like
HeHe, 
or maybe even 36 times as good, depends on how you look at itā¦ See what I did there? 
#I 
mathematics! 
Can I at least get a like, itās been a long dayā¦ Good night.
10 Likes
Of course ā¦ but how many lives have been ruined without being saved? I didnāt meant us really.
And I was really just frustrated I think lol.
2 Likes
The first thing I always think about when it comes to āDr.ā Oz was how he was brought to task by the U.S. senate for misrepresenting some weight loss supplements. I have to admit though when I saw the title heading for this thread, I thought you meant that Dr. Oz had recommended this app/site.
5 Likes