• jdr@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    Come on, you have to say it’s positively correlated rather than causative that’s the whole point of the thread.

    This isn’t a hill I want to die on, but I don’t think it’s a meaningful claim without a bit more nuance.

    • GreyEyedGhost@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Well, the WHO puts it in the same category as tobacco. Is tobacco just strongly correlated to cancer? And I don’t need to say it is causative, because The Lancet did.

      You can stack that data up against your anecdotes however you like.

      • myyass@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        I wonder if this is something that changed over time. As in preservatives and all sorts of chemicals being added to tobacco or alcohol. For example, I can smoke Japanese cigarettes without a problem. I’ve smoked Vietnam era MRE cigarettes, Old Ukrainian unfiltered cigarettes. But I can’t smoke US made ones since around 2007, they make me sick and taste like ash.

      • jdr@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Did you read that paper? I don’t believe it supports your argument.

        The mechanism by which smoking causes e.g. lung cancer and the significant rate at which it does so is well understood. I’m not convinced the same can currently be said of alcohol.