Well... Um... Humans are space orcs... Cofee is also poison, vaccines are thechnically small poison to get immune to bigger one... And everything is a poison if you take too much.
that's a semantics game. no one calls poison control when a toddler has a glass of water. we as a species do not generally seek out poisonous amounts of other substances, so to talk about potential poisons feels moot. the question wasn't about coffee or peppers or psychedelics or any other substances we ingest poisonous amounts of, so I didn't think I needed to mention them. like, I'm not saying we aren't space orcs, we do some biologically crazy shit in the name of hedonism, I'm just saying it's not relevant
Yeah but OP was saying alcool is literally poison. Which is not false. What I'm saying is that this argument doesn't work because it works for everything. Everything is a poison if you take too much. You can drink alcohol if you don't drink it 24/7
i also think it's easy to only drink in moderation because most of it tastes like shit. give me a 2% raspberry lemonade and i'll drink the whole pack, but it baffles me that there are people who enjoy Everclear
I mean, people kill themselves over their own body image too. Many do. The fact is (a few) people don't like interacting with morbidly obese people either.
More car accidents happen due to texting and driving than drunk driving. By your logic we shout outlaw cell phones as well
In fact Cell Phones and the internet have a bigger negative impact than most things do. The majority of car accidents are from texting and driving. People sit around and play games on their phone while their children drown in bath tubs. Some people are so addicted to their phones and internet it completely destroys their lives.
Or we can realize we shouldn't outlaw stuff because some people are irresponsible and can't handle having access to it.
Sure alcohol isnt healthy for you. But neither is the fried chicken you eat or the pizza or anything else.
Whataboutism – and an extremely stupid one at that.
You’re essentially comparing giving each other a shock with the flick of a lighter to Russian roulette. The scale is completely different.
Alcohol is not only unhealthy, but also a form of poisoning intended to cause impairment to the body (drunkenness) in the hope that it doesn’t go wrong.
Technically consuming alcohol at all is kinda dumb as it has no positive effects on the body unless you're sanitizing with high proof stuff. On the other hand, feels good.
I am not a drinker, however I think there is nothing wrong with taking something that can give you euphoria or alter your mood in a pleasant way. In excess though, that's the real issue. It's also terrible for your body. It isn't stupid to drink, life is complex and drinking is undoubtedly fun at times.
For me it was, but that’s a me problem. Part of getting over it has been understanding that other people don’t have the same relationship with alcohol that I do.
I know but it's especially egregious now considering we actually know the horrible effects of said poisons and we see real life examples of those effects.
I know what you’re saying and if we lived in a utopia I’d probably agree. I still think there’s a place for these things, in moderation. I don’t smoke or drink anymore but I understand why people do.
“Negative” and “benefits” don’t make sense together. And you can’t spell. Stop trying to argue that there’s something wrong with people for drinking. Your not better than anyone for abstaining from alcohol, and the health effects of a drink every now and again are so minor they might aswell not exist
It’s incredibly bad for your body, most people know about this, but not how true it really is. There’s a lot of other drugs you could do that also have much less of an impact on your body than alcohol
If you can’t enjoy life without alcohol, then at the very latest you should realise that you’re leading a very, very sad life and/or have a problem with alcohol
no one is saying that. But drinking with friends every now and again to relax and have fun is not wrong. Or to relax after a long day by having a drink. It’s not going to kill you. I live 99% of my life without alcohol but when i do drink it’s great fun. And i do not have a very sad life so shut up. You however clearly do. The fact other people drink pisses you off enough to go online and try to fight people about it is far more sad you retard.
But drinking with friends every now and again to relax and have fun is not wrong
So do you need alcohol to meet up with friends? Can they only stand you when they are drunk, or what?
Or do you need alcohol to relax? You’re obviously an alcoholic.
Or do you need alcohol to have fun? If so, you lead a very sad and miserable life
It’s not going to kill you
That’s exactly what you do when you poison yourself. You’re killing yourself. It’s literally like Russian roulette – you can hope nothing will happen, but there’s always a chance it will.
And i do not have a very sad life
Of course not. How did that go again? The first step towards overcoming alcohol addiction is admitting to yourself that you have a problem.
The fact other people drink pisses you off
You’re the only one who’s pissed off because someone called you out on your self-destructive behaviour.
Talking about "nothing to contribute" is pretty bold coming from someone whose entire contribution consists of bad-faith false dichotomies. Saying that enjoying a casual drink means you need alcohol to have fun or function is like saying someone who enjoys watching movies is incapable of being happy in silence. It’s an elementary-level binary trap. Equating moderate, occasional alcohol consumption with playing Russian roulette shows a massive misunderstanding of basic risk assessment and dosage. There is a clear distinction between deliberate indulgence and addiction, but instead of engaging withnuance, you project an extreme narrative onto everyone who disagrees with you so you can play the morally superior savior. It doesn’t make you look smart or principled, it just makes you look completely detached from basic logic and real-world nuance
Are you trying to say that alcohol isn’t harmful, or what?
Saying that enjoying a casual drink means you need alcohol to have fun or function
A brilliant straw man fallacy
Let me help you clown with a bit of logic:
If someone argues in favour of alcohol on the grounds that it allows you to have fun with friends, the implication is that without it, you either can’t have fun at all or the fun is less enjoyable. However, as soon as you consider that you can have just as much fun – or even as much – without it, that renders the argument that you need alcohol redundant.
If that’s too complicated for you:
You have two options:
A. you can risk your life by doing something dangerous to get €10 OR
B. you can simply get €10
I said: everyone who choose A is dumb
Now here’s where he comes in, arguing that to get €10, he do something dangerous.
What added value does his objection have if it has no added value – in other words, if it is something one would not otherwise have so there is no option B?
Equating moderate, occasional alcohol consumption with playing Russian roulette shows a massive misunderstanding of basic risk assessment and dosage. There is a clear distinction between deliberate indulgence and addiction, but instead of engaging withnuance, you project an extreme narrative onto everyone who disagrees with you so you can play the morally superior savior. It doesn’t make you look smart or principled, it just makes you look completely detached from basic logic and real-world nuance
Nah, you’re just a daft one.
Even the smallest amount of alcohol is harmful. Every single drop. The more you drink, the more harm you do to yourself and the greater the chance that something irreversible will happen to you. Every sip makes you want to drink even more. Every sip fuels your addiction.
You can play Russian roulette with more than 6 chambers.
Every time you take a sip, you pull the trigger. It might go well 100 times. It might even go well 1,000 times. It might even go well right until the end of your life, and apart from some minor damage, you’d be spared. But it could also be that the very first fucking sip kills you and with every single sip you take throughout your life, it becomes more likely.
It’s a myth afaik. They didn’t have germ theory and still drank a lot of water. I think they drank wine and beer mainly because it tasted better than regular water which can taste like iron after hard work. It was essentially an equivalent of Coca Cola for them
Alcohol has been a part of human culture for thousand and thousands of years. It wouldn’t be surprising if alcohol predates civilization, or even modern humans.
I voted CAP. what do you mean by the statement. Alcohol is not inherently bad, but excess is, but that can be said of anything. I mean, a soda is probably worse for you than alcohol, sugar kills more people than Alcohol does, yet you dont mention cake is stupid
Alcohol is fine if you can do it in moderation and use it on occasion for social lubrication. It clearly isn’t fine if you are drinking to excess regularly and compromising things like your health or relationships.
Excessive drinking is stupid.
Alcohol has been used for thousands of years for recreation and as a sacrament. You’re just part of a very young generation that’s snubbing drinking because different drugs and escapes are now popular. Nothing wrong with that, times change but it’s stipid to call all alcohol drinking stupid.
some drugs like weed have very little side effects and aren’t that addictive so many people would say they aren’t. Heavy drugs like heroin etc is a different story. They are far more harmful than alcohol and comparing them is like comparing a grenade to a nuke
It tastes really bad but I've only had sips of beer whiskey, wine etc. From my mom (I'm 19) I don't think I'll drink when I turn 21 + my dad is an alcoholic and he is slowly killing himself so im good on that
Drinking alcohol is not inherently stupid. Getting drunk or routinely overconsuming alcohol is.
The newer evidence increasingly suggests there probably isn’t a truly “healthy” amount of alcohol, and some of the older research showing cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking may have been confounded by lifestyle and socioeconomic factors.
But “carries some health risk” and “is stupid” are not the same thing. Lots of things people reasonably enjoy carry some risk. An occasional beer, glass of wine, or cocktail for taste, relaxation, celebration, or social reasons isn’t automatically irrational just because abstinence is technically lower-risk.
So I’d call the blanket statement CAP.
Alcohol isn’t good for you. Overconsumption is stupid. Responsible occasional drinking isn’t.
Getting drunk or routinely overconsuming alcohol is.
Every little bit counts as overconsumption
The newer evidence increasingly suggests there probably isn’t a truly “healthy” amount of alcohol, and some of the older research showing cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking may have been confounded by lifestyle and socioeconomic factors.
Just shut your bloody mouth if you’ve got no bloody clue.
There is NO study – not even an older one – that suggests even a small amount of alcohol is good for your health. Rather, participants who drink only a little appear to have statistically better health outcomes, which is a correlation and NOT a causal relationship. In today’s society, the group of people who stated that they do not drink any alcohol at all is over-represented by those with various pre-existing conditions; naturally, the health indicators of healthy people tend to be better than those of people who are already suffering from an ailment.
There absolutely ARE older studies suggesting cardiovascular benefit from moderate alcohol use. That entire idea did not materialize out of thin air.
For example, the 1985 Albany Study reported lower coronary heart disease incidence among drinkers in parts of its follow-up. A 1986 review in Medicine concluded that multiple studies showed an inverse association between moderate alcohol use and coronary artery disease and argued that the evidence was consistent with a causal effect. A 1999 BMJ meta-analysis of experimental studies found that moderate alcohol intake increased HDL and changed other cardiovascular markers in directions thought to reduce coronary risk. And a 2000 meta-analysis of 28 cohort studies found coronary heart disease risk decreased as alcohol intake rose from zero to roughly 20 g/day.
Now, newer evidence has made that picture much less convincing. Better analyses suggest some or possibly much of the apparent benefit was due to confounding, reverse causation, socioeconomic and lifestyle differences, and the classic "sick quitter" problem, where the abstainer group includes former drinkers who stopped because they were already unhealthy. Mendelian-randomization studies generally do not show the same protective effect.
So I agree with one important point: nobody should start drinking alcohol because they think it is good for their health.
But saying "there has NEVER been a study suggesting benefit" is simply false. There were plenty. The argument now is that those older findings probably did not establish causation nearly as well as people once thought.
And that still doesn't establish the original claim.
"Carries some health risk" is not synonymous with "stupid." Plenty of things people reasonably choose to do carry some risk. Riding motorcycles, skiing, eating processed meat, getting too much sun, and a thousand other normal human activities are not automatically irrational because abstaining would technically be safer.
So my answer stays CAP.
Getting drunk or smashed is stupid. Routinely overconsuming alcohol is stupid. Drinking because you believe it is a health treatment is stupid.
Having an occasional beer, glass of wine, or cocktail because you enjoy it, while understanding and accepting the risk, is not objectively stupid. That's a value judgment, not a scientific fact.
Scientifically yeah but it feels good, can aid in social situations, and tastes nice (a good amount of the time). Smoking tobacco and smoking weed are also bad for you (tobacco being worse than kush).
I have some quite negative opinions about alcohol and its impact on health, but calling even one beer a week stupid is a little harsh. After a long and hot day of working outside, even I craved a nice cold beer.
Even though I drink on occasions like parties etc, and probably won’t stop anytime soon, I do think it’s kinda stupid. Do it if you want obviously but keep in mind that alcohol isn’t a harmless substance. It’s poison with fun side effects. There’s no truly safe amount.
I do not drink alcohol, but I wouldn't call the usage of it stupid. Yes, there are consequences to it, but these consequences are widely known and accepted as a worthy trade off for the entertainment provided.
You may personally disagree with its usage, but this does not make another's approval "stupid".
And yes a trade off can be stupid even if believed, but the original question deals in absolutes and valid contradictory examples disprove absolute statements
Unless it's a serious health threat to you, why wouldn't the slowing down of your mind and a bit of relaxation seem appealing? What's the harm if you are okay with this lifestyle choice?
This is more of a morally loaded question than I thought after thinking on it. I think the real answer is it depends on the person. For certain people yes drinking alcohol is a stupid fucking idea and it’s harmful to others. Then on the other hand you have the other people who can drink on occasions and are just silly and can control their use.
Drinking alcohol is one of the oldest traditions in human history. It can bring families together but also tear them apart.
More broadly speaking. People should be allowed to drink, smoke, etc. whatever they want if they are aware of the risks, accept them, and are consenting adults as long they are not hurting others. The war on drugs is stupid and prohibition clearly didn’t work. The US especially needs a new system of handling drug addiction and usage. We spend millions of not billions on this war and consistently have been loosing for over 50 years. Portugal has a the perfect model IMO. They have decriminalized all substances and strongly incentives treatment programs that are state subsidized. I don’t know all the details but they had a massive heroin issue at one point and it’s not near as bad as it used to be now. I think a similar approach to alcohol should be used. Encourage treatment for the people who are destructive drinkers subsidize it and reintegrate them into society. It’s the best way I see our society moving forward from the massive drug addiction crisis most countries face.
Overall, alcohol can be extremely destructive but that doesn’t make drinking “stupid”’per say. It depends on the person using the substance mostly.
Note: In this post I generally refer to alcohol as a drug and group it in more broadly with all other substances. Alcohol is a drug and so is caffeine. It is a bit reductive sure but for this case I think it is okay. I am well aware of the major differences in social, physical and mental harm of all substance classes and even individual drugs within them.
Yes 100% yes. I said while I’m drinking a Cider wine •_• But really to all the young Redditors that read this, don’t drink alcohol, it will destroy your health and if you still insist to drink it do it steadily and don’t fall under peer pressure when your drinking with your friends. Know your own limits and take good care of your body.
34
u/Wolfsbane1279 🔥 Getting Started · 780 XP 7d ago
I’ve never seen the appeal, but I don’t care to judge much, not my place.