Following on from yesterday's news of a ramping up of the prohibitionist assault on booze, you might be interested - or, more likely, staggered - to read this document from an EU-funded anti-alcohol group, published in December (emphases mine).
Using the European Food Standards Authority guidance on exposure for human consumption of carcinogens in food and drink products, with a margin of exposure set at 1,000, no one should drink more than about 50 milligrams of alcohol a day, equivalent to 20g or two drinks a year.
Currently, Europeans drink about 27 grams a day, some 540 times the exposure level. Ignoring alcohol’s cancer causing role, and just considering other health outcomes, no one should drink more than about 0.3 grams of alcohol a day, equivalent to 9g or about one drink a month. Currently, Europeans drink about 90 times the exposure level.Now, please someone try to make an argument that these people are remotely rational human beings because it's not - I repeat, not - a parody.
This project - I'm sure you won't be surprised to find out - is heartily encouraged by the EU ... using your taxes.
The AMPHORA project has received funding from the European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under grant agreement nº 223059 - Alcohol Measures for Public Health Research Alliance (AMPHORA).It also won't come as much of a shock that four of their 'collaborating institutions' are from the UK.
They go on to make some recommendations, notably these.
6. All alcohol beverage containers should carry consumer warnings that alcohol is a toxic substance, and in particular a carcinogen.So, a skull and cross bones on every bottle of wine, then (and plain packaging, no doubt).
7. Low risk guidelines for drinking alcohol are, in general, too generous for health safety and should, in general, be reviewed downwards.To 'one drink a month' or 'two drinks a year' presumably.
And there we all were thinking that the current guidelines of 8 cans of Stella per week (less for women) were ridiculously low!
It's not about health with alcohol either; it's about eventual prohibition but with better planning than last time, no matter how much they lie that it isn't.
* Image above was promotion of this documentary series on PBS in America, I can heartily recommend it as I did in my review of 2011
16 comments:
"two drinks a year"
Bloody hell. I'm long since dead then. I do that in less than one hour
50 milligrams a day - so after you've used some mouthwash and, allowing for the no doubt soon to be revealed "ability of alcohol to permeate skin and enter the bloodstream" a quick splash of aftershave, that's it? Well I hope they are going to insist that alcohol based mouthwash and all perfumes and the like that are alcohol based start to carry prominent "making yourself smell nice causes cancer and will kill you" labels, and ban the advertising of the same, and make the manufacturers all adopt "plain packaging" etc. etc.
Ha! Nothing is too bizarre or totalitarian for these people to contemplate, so I wouldn't rule it out.
TFE, your name is on ze list for denormalisation. ;)
Good luck to them. I haven't been normal for years. They're far too late.
"This SHOULD awaken them from their tunnel-vision induced slumber."
You're a half glass full kinda person, I can tell. ;)
Dear Rursus
Don't hold your breath.
DP
Dear Mr Puddlecote
Let us sincerely hope that neither the EU nor the health fanatics ever discover how dangerous oxygen is.
I dare say we would soon be regaled with "there is no safe level of oxygen inhalation ..."
Or something.
Oxygen in plain pack with health warnings and graphic images of oxygen damaged organs?
Can't wait ...
DP
Remember the great move to ban Dihydrogen Monoxide?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3erdgVVTw
Step right up. You too can work for Stantonitis Glands,
glorified mechanic and “professor of medicine” [wink, wink].
Job requirements:
You must be neurotic and bigoted, and have strong lying
skills, hopefully with some “creative flair”.
http://tobacco.ucsf.edu/two-tobacco-control-research-positions-available-work-professor-stanton-glantz-ucsf
I'd be hesitant to let Stanny work on my BICYCLE! LOL!
Re the 20g/year limit. I just did some figuring based on the "Average Small Bar" model I set up in Brains (p. 265 if anyone wants to check my quickie in-the-head math here! LOL!) and discovered that if you were simply hanging out in normal poorly-ventilated smoke-free bar you would be forced to ingest that amount of alcohol vapor (evaporating from drinks at a rate of 1g/hour/drink) in the air you'd be breathing in the course of just two months at 8 hours a day.
Think of the poor WORKERS in those places! Obviously they need to be closed down, or the menus changed to substitute healthy asbestos-free triple-distilled spring-water. For variety, the water could be served in different size cups, and perhaps flavored with a small slice of fruit. Everyone could have fun. Everyone could be happy. And everyone would be safe and healthy.
Who could possibly object?
- MJM
So. I suppose that bottle of Lambs navy I had yesterday would REALLY flip them out.
FckuEU!
It is very difficult to take the document seriously. I'm still not sure if it isn't an elaborate joke. This level of caution would spell the end of grilled meat for example. 0.2 kg of bbq sausgage is carcinogenically equivalent to 8 hours of passive smoking. Michael also makes a very good point regarding employee exposure.
Always look on the bright side of life! *whistle* :)
I wonder how many anti-smokers who are so paranoid about all the 'dangerous' stuff in SHS will cope with this news? With any luck most will keel over with heart attacks, seeing as they are at the pub more now that it is smoke free!
amazing information.....thanks for sharing this information...
buy cheap sildenafil citrate 100mg
Post a Comment