Alcoholism comes with great burdens on society and is definetely an issue. But in the communication we need to talk about how “risk” is used as a term in the scientific discourse and public discourse. Both scientifically and by common sense it is obvious, that there is a huge gap in the health effects of alcohol between someone who drinks a beer or two on the weekend and someone who drinks 10 bottles a day accompanied with a bottle of vodka.
In the same wake, someone who smokes at a party every few weeks has an entirely different risk than someone who smokes two packs a day.
I’m a bit worried, that by creating a misunderstood communication about the dangers of alcohol, we end up in a 1990/2000s style anti Drug propaganda, where risks were broadly exaggerated and people ended up taking the entire program for the joke it was.
Western society is in no way closer to that point. What you’re reading is the counterpoint to “a glass of wine a day is good for your health” when in fact it’s not. People ask “how much can I drink without it affecting my health” and the honest answer is nothing. You’re obviously right that any substance is more dangerous the higher the amount. You also can’t tell beforehand what the exact risk is because this is a statistical question. But just because the outcome is not perfectly predictable doesn’t mean there’s no risk.
Alcoholism comes with great burdens on society and is definetely an issue. But in the communication we need to talk about how “risk” is used as a term in the scientific discourse and public discourse. Both scientifically and by common sense it is obvious, that there is a huge gap in the health effects of alcohol between someone who drinks a beer or two on the weekend and someone who drinks 10 bottles a day accompanied with a bottle of vodka.
In the same wake, someone who smokes at a party every few weeks has an entirely different risk than someone who smokes two packs a day.
I’m a bit worried, that by creating a misunderstood communication about the dangers of alcohol, we end up in a 1990/2000s style anti Drug propaganda, where risks were broadly exaggerated and people ended up taking the entire program for the joke it was.
Western society is in no way closer to that point. What you’re reading is the counterpoint to “a glass of wine a day is good for your health” when in fact it’s not. People ask “how much can I drink without it affecting my health” and the honest answer is nothing. You’re obviously right that any substance is more dangerous the higher the amount. You also can’t tell beforehand what the exact risk is because this is a statistical question. But just because the outcome is not perfectly predictable doesn’t mean there’s no risk.