when data can be misleading
ABCNorman Swan: And Tegan, you're looking into another unnecessary nutrient; alcohol. But increasingly in recent years that evidence has become a lot weaker, and that's actually part of what our study shows, is that over 70% of the reviews on alcohol harms published since 1993, over 70% of them use non-drinkers as the comparison group, which can cause biased results due to that sick-quitter effect. Tegan Taylor: Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're looking at deaths from alcohol, presumably we're focusing on people who have at some stage in their life drunk quite heavily. Peter Sarich: So the study shows that over 70% of previous reviews on alcohol and risk of death at lower levels of alcohol consumption, may have been biased due to this sick-quitter effect issue. Tegan Taylor: Given that you're saying that we've been underestimating the harm of alcohol for potentially 30 years, are our guidelines still fit for purpose, if they're based on this evidence?
History of this topic
The dueling science behind how alcohol affects your health
Live MintDiscover Related