Report claims one alcoholic drink a day could be bad for the heart

By James Wallin contact

- Last updated on GMT

Related tags: Alcoholic beverage

The latest study contradicts previous advice that 12 to 25 units a week could be good for the heart
The latest study contradicts previous advice that 12 to 25 units a week could be good for the heart
New research published by the British Medical Journal has claimed a single alcoholic drink a day could be enough to increase the risk of heart disease.

The author of the report said the study disproved the theory that low to moderate consumption of alcohol was good for the heart.

Jan Casas, professor of epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said the study used data from more than 260,00 participants in 56 studies.

He said even light drinkers could reduce their risk of coronary heart and blood pressure.

He said: “We expect these finding will help to simplify policymaking about alcohol consumption. There was this issue about whether consumption of low to moderate consumption was good for your heart. This study shows this is simply not the case.”

Prof Casas said previous studies had been hampered by the fact that participants in studies often under-reported how much they drink.

To get around the problem the researchers studied people who carry a genetic variant which means they can only consume a few drinks a week.

The chief medical officer, Sally Davies, is conducting a review of the guidelines on how much alcohol is safe to drink. The current advice recommends women drink no more than two to three units of alcohol a day while men should not exceed three to four.

Related topics: Legislation

Related news

7 comments

Show more

Same Epidemiology

Posted by Robert Feal-Martinez,

This is the same meta analysis con used by the anti smoking lobby to convince HMG to ban smoking in public places.

You select the research that will give you the result you want, The authors of this piece all but admit this.

Junk science.

Report abuse

TAXPAYERS

Posted by Kevin O'Connor,

Taxpayers, that's what we are in this industry. Billions of it.
"Heathcare" by the NHS is far more dangerous and life threatening

Report abuse

You want 'Nanny'.

Posted by david,

Strange term ‘the Nanny State’. It is generally understood as describing a government or its policies which are overprotective or interfering unduly with personal choice.

But the views of the health professional expressed in the BMJ do not reflect government policy nor, I would suggest, are they ever likely to. They are rather extreme cautionary views of alcohol which can be adopted or rejected out of hand by those they are aimed at. They would certainly have no impact upon my personal alcohol consumption, and certainly do not inhibit or 'nanny' CHOICE.

But let’s not ignore the fact that personal choice and liberties in respect of alcohol are so unrestrained by government in the UK, pressurised by the pro-alcohol lobby, as to allow its subjects to drink alcohol in sufficient quantity as to almost inevitably self-inflict serious adverse health consequences.

So, where ‘Nanny’ will be called upon is to provide the necessary care under the taxpayer-funded NHS - including the replacement of cirrhosis-riddled livers.

Report abuse