Regularly Drinking Alcohol After 60 Linked to Early Death

Abstain probably the best choice.

Confidence intervals for the risk ratio range from 1.01 to 1.35. That is very close to "no statistically significant effect found", as a relative risk of 1.0 is simply "that's what the average is". For comparison's sake, if memory serves, the risk ratios for tobacco use are around 40. I would guess that the relative risk for heart disease vs. obesity would be at least ten.

The trouble with trying to make decisions based on low relative risk ratios like this is that it greatly increases the odds that other factors are influencing the results.

Consuming modern alcoholic beverages is a wisdom issue. Those Christians who insist on drinking alcoholic beverages show foolish judgment, for themselves and their families.

Wally, given that it's the same species of yeast and the same species of grapes and barley, we can expect that the strength of modern, undistilled alcoholic beverages is about the same as those of ancient days. This is witnessed by Greek accounts of people dying from drinking too much Judean wine in Bible times.

So when it's the same species of person drinking a beverage of about the same strength of beverage, how would we say that it was OK back then, but foolish now?

Second question; given that Proverbs uses the word "fool" to describe the person doing sinful actions, what precisely is the difference between an allegation that something is a "wisdom" issue vs. a "sin" issue--except perhaps to allow one to cast aspersions on having a drink despite the Bible not stating that doing so is sin?

One reason foolish: Do any Christians who drink wine (or even liquor [like Carl Trueman]) dilute their alcoholic beverage like 1st century Christians did? If not, then they are drinking a beverage much stronger and therefore foolish. They are also setting examples for their children/grandchildren that it's OK to drink alcoholic beverages as long you can "handle it". But you don't know you can "handle it" until you try it. Then if you can't "handle it", you've got a problem. Foolish. Solution: Don't Drink. Simple. We have MANY more safer choices for beverages than 1 st cent Christians. To insist of drinking alcoholic beverages regardless of the potential effect on those you say you love is foolish. Not hard to understand.

The entire book of Proverbs is about wisdom. The fool contrasts with that wisdom. The foolish person is about more than sin. Fool also describes behavior which is not immediately sinful but is not wise, such as certain types of speech (babbling, speaking your mind) which can become sinful.

Putting yourself and others at risk of alcohol addiction by your example is foolish. Defend consuming alcoholic beverages all you wish. Drink your wine as often as you wish. When your grandchildren take your example further than you intended, you will see the foolishness and, unfortunately, the sin.

Wally, I'm going to push back on the notion that the ancients diluted their wine for a few reasons. First of all, Isaiah 1:22 suggests ("your wine is mixed with water") that doing so was actually seen as a bad thing in the time of Isaiah. That is one of very few clear examples of mixing wine in Scripture, and another is in Proverbs 23, where the "hero at mixing wine" is working to get people drunk.

Historically, the evidence for mixing wine is stronger among Greeks (who often loved to get very drunk) that it is among Hebrews, and when we go to today, what we find is that you won't finding too many drunks whose drink of choice is a good wine or a well crafted microbrew, or even a top shelf liquor drunk neat.

What you will see is things like Bud Light, White Claw, and other "alcopops" where either inexpensive wine or bottom shelf liquor (cheap, rotgut) are mixed with fruity sodas and the like. More or less, if you're trying to get drunk, you want something inexpensive that doesn't hit the wallet too hard, and that goes down easily. You don't want anything like taste to interfere.

So counter-intuitively, it's easier to avoid drunkenness by drinking things at full strength, and with good quality. Really, if you look at the "finely toned physiques" at Wal-Mart and such, we might suggest that using cheap food as "fix-a-flat" for hunger is a fast route to gluttony, diabetes, and getting to know your cardiologist on a professional basis.

One other correction to make is that the data suggest that very few people have alcohol problems or alcoholism somehow "sneak up" on them. Rather, the CDC/NIH have been noting for close to half a century that the key risk factor for alcoholism is not drinking per se, but "binge drinking" of four or more drinks in a sitting (2 hrs. I believe). In other words, dependency and problems occur when one intentionally gets about to the legal limit for driving in the US or higher.

Finally, let's not forget that among Scripture's references to wine, about a third are indeed warnings about drunkenness, but a second third references wine as an ordinary fixture in life, and a final third talks of the blessings of wine. So let's not ignore two thirds of the evidence, including of course John 2.

Back to the topic, a final note is that the dangers of wine in moderation are, actually, about half that of significant portions of red meat and cured meats. For some odd reason, however, I don't hear too many sermons about the dangers of ham, bacon, and steaks. I'd suggest as well that there are certain dietary fixtures where Scripture would tell us "it's OK to take a little bit of risk here, but use your head."

Bert, the suggestion that red meat might be bad for you could be fighten words here in Sout Akota. (; wink

My doctor insists that red meat is bad for me and I should stop eating it. I've cut back, but when a delicious burger comes my way it's going to get eaten.

JD, one of the best dining experiences I ever had was at the Alpine Inn located in Hill City, SD. Their bacon-wrapped filet mignon was so good, my wife and I went back a 2nd night, and we were only in SD for a week! SD definitely knows how to do red meat! :)