If I stop drinking does that decrease risk of cancer?
I’ve been drinking for 7 years. Typicall I’ve only drank 3-4 drinks a year. If I stop drinking now, would that help decrease chances of cancer? If it does will it take a long time?
Edit: from the articles, in case you don’t have time to read them:
“We cannot talk about a so-called safe level of alcohol use. It doesn’t matter how much you drink—the risk to the drinker’s health starts from the first drop of any alcoholic beverage”
Exactly. I put on sunscreen indoors and people think I'm being dramatic. Same people ask me how I manage to look almost 20 years younger then I am. Sunlight is poisonous.
Which fallacy is the one where you cite a paper that doesn't say what you claim it does?
The optimum level of sun exposure for vitamin D production does not mean that level is "safe." You're trading vitamin D for cancer risk. Your claim about alcohol didn't make any cost / benefit analysis. It was only that there is no safe level. You paid no regard to how small the risks were, only that there was any risk.
You can get vitamin D from your diet or supplements. You can get skin cancer and retinal cancer from the sun.
Literally just existing breathing is slowly killing you. I couldn't be bothered to be scared of literally everything I do or not do in the risk it "could kill me" we all die anyways. May as well do it on your own terms.
But the WHO didn't write a report that breathing ages you (because it requires the passage of time), this risking age-related health problems and ultimate, inevitable death.
As a non-drinker who has seen the ravages of alcohol abuse in several loved ones, I completely understand the "no level is safe" guideline.
That said, 3-4 drinks per year is far below any measure of alcohol use that is seriously studied, where researchers look at drinking at the "amount per week" level. 3-4 drinks per year is essentially on the level of being a non-drinker.
this is basically not understanding what “risk” means. if you have a 1% risk of developing cancer, and by doing something (ie drinking) you double relatively-wise that risk, it’s still only 2% of risk. would you stop drinking and enjoying alcohol and living a happier life for a mere 1%?
all the numbers I’m using are totally random, but it shows that saying “it increases the risk” although technically correct doesn’t mean shit and it’s just fearmongering and a basic inability of understanding information.
How do you know? Do you know OP’s medical records? Do you know if he has a genetic propensity to develop cancer or not?
You can’t generalize in that way without information.
We all know anecdotal cases of people who smoked or drunk heavily and lived long lives. And people who were non-smokers and died young from second hand smoke. You don’t know how your body will tolerate a substance you put in it. Some people can deal with things that other can’t.
So saying “negligible in terms of the actual increase of risk” without actually having all the information about a person is a really bold thing to say, in my opinion.
Sounds like the American equivalent of pot. I brew beer and have customers who drink 50L kegs every week and have for years, try doing that with asbestos and live...