Recent studies suggesting that alcohol consumption in moderation can be beneficial have come under scrutiny by a team of scientists from the University of Victoria. Psychologist Tim Stockwell and epidemiologist Jinhui Zhao led a meta-analysis of 107 scientific studies, involving over 4 million participants and 425,000 deaths, to investigate the association between alcohol consumption and all-cause mortality. They found that studies which were considered high-quality – based on factors such as excluding former drinkers from the reference group, having younger cohorts, and not controlling for socioeconomic status – yielded very different results compared to lower-quality studies.
One of the key issues identified by Stockwell and Zhao is the problem of ‘abstainer bias’ in many studies that claim health benefits from moderate drinking. This bias arises when individuals who abstain from alcohol due to health reasons are included in the control group, even though they may have been heavy drinkers in the past. This can skew the results and make moderate drinkers appear healthier in comparison. By stratifying studies based on age and excluding former or occasional drinkers from the reference group, the researchers were able to identify this bias and its impact on the findings.
Stockwell emphasizes that their meta-analysis showed no completely ‘safe’ level of drinking when it comes to all-cause mortality. Even low-volume drinkers, considered to be drinking in moderation, showed a higher relative risk of death in high-quality studies. The idea that moderate drinking can extend life or improve health outcomes is challenged by these findings, suggesting that the risks associated with alcohol consumption may outweigh any potential benefits.
The relationship between alcohol consumption, smoking, and socioeconomic status is another important factor to consider when studying its impact on mortality. Some studies have found that adjusting for smoking status can alter the perceived benefits of moderate drinking, as smoking and alcohol use are often linked. Furthermore, the researchers suggest that the association between alcohol-related mortality and socioeconomic status needs further investigation, as high alcohol consumption may pose a greater risk to individuals with lower socioeconomic status.
The criticism faced by Stockwell and Zhao from the International Scientific Forum on Alcohol Research (ISFAR) highlights the contentious debate surrounding alcohol research. While the researchers raise valid concerns about the quality of studies supporting the health benefits of alcohol, they also acknowledge the challenges of navigating the complex landscape of alcohol research funding. The involvement of industry bodies and organizations with vested interests in promoting alcohol use adds another layer of complexity to the debate.
The myth of moderate drinking as a protective factor against mortality is called into question by the findings of Stockwell and Zhao’s meta-analysis. By exposing the flaws in research methods used to support this claim, the researchers challenge the prevailing narrative around alcohol consumption and its health effects. Moving forward, it is essential to conduct more rigorous studies that account for potential biases and confounding factors, in order to provide a more accurate picture of the risks and benefits associated with alcohol use.
Leave a Reply