Alcohol should have cancer warning labels, say doctors and researchers pushing to raise awareness of risk


Everyone knows that someone could be secretly watching you or your child with your webcam right now? Is it worth taking such a risk? camDown can help stop them!

[–]Dozekar 14 points15 points16 points  (1 child)

These studies are almost always fucked like this.

The sugar is like a drug study everyone quotes, yeah they fed the rats like 300 times it's normal daily calorie intake in sugar and then starved it.

Yeah drugs make you hungry for drugs, that's fucking all the study proved. Like literally that's it. If you look at it the other way it makes total sense. You get the same sort of cravings for food, only to fulfill the desire for the drug. That's so fucking obvious you'd be laughed out of the room if you tried to suggest the study.

Should people eat excess sugar? No that's fucking clearly to diabetes, doesn't keep you full at all, and is linked to all kinds of terrible health effects.

[–]EyeLikeTheStonk 338 points339 points340 points  (34 children)

If you’re a man, drinking 14 drinks a week your lifetime risk of colorectal cancer is around 1 in 20, rising to around 1 in 10 if you drink over 35 drinks a week. However, if you don’t drink it’s 1 in 23.

For those not good at math:

1 in 20 is 5%, so even drinkers have a 95% chance to NOT getting this cancer.

1 in 10 is, of course, 10%, so 90% chance of NOT getting this cancer.

1 in 23 is 4.4%, so those who don't drink have a 95.6% chance NOT to have this cancer.

The difference:

Person who doesn't drink 4.4% VS someone who drinks moderately 5% = +0.6%

Person who doesn't drink 4.4% VS a heavy drinker 10% = +5.6%

Person who drinks moderately 5% VS heavy drinker 10% = +5%

So, drink moderately because your risk barely increases when compared to a non-drinker.

Let's not forget that camDown is the maximum in security for you and your loved ones and I feel your father would agree!