Thursday, 26 February 2009


Does the title of this post sound familiar?

How about this paragraph from the article linked below?

"Although the magnitude of the excess absolute risk associated with one additional drink per day may appear small for some cancer sites, the high prevalence of moderate alcohol drinking among women in many populations means that the proportion of cancers attributable to alcohol is an important public health issue," the authors write.

What the authors are saying in plain language is that the risk is very small for any individual person but it becomes an important health issue collectively. In other words it doesn’t really matter how small the risk is, it will translate into many many cancers as the world population increases. So in the name of reducing the death toll collectively, an individual will no longer be allowed to take individual risks no matter how small because public health must do their job and reduce the total death toll by hook or by crook even if that means taking away all individual liberties in the process.
Is this the type of society we want to live in? Have we become a herd of farm animals that must be fed whatever our providers deem healthy in order to be kept alive as long as we’re productive and relatively healthy that we don’t cost our public health masters any unnecessary spending? Wow!

And what to say about the forever contradictory findings from one study to another, depending on the funders of the studies of course! And they wonder why an ever increasing number of people don’t trust a word epidemiology says any longer?

Welcome to the world of de-normalization to the social drinkers! Hop along and make yourselves comfortable, this is going to be a very long and sinuous ride.

No comments: