Hey Stanton, thanks for sharing this because I was wondering how this was possible. If you click the link that is shared in the Filter article and read the actual Lancet study, it is saying that if you drink below 100g per week (must less than what is currently recommend), then you "might" live longer than someone who doesn't drink at all, but when you go pass that 100g mark, you are going to die sooner than someoen who doesn't drink at all. Click the link and read this specifically below DIRECTLY from the study:

"By contrast, increased alcohol consumption was log-linearly associated with a lower risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0·94, 0·91–0·97). In comparison to those who reported drinking >0–≤100 g per week, those who reported drinking >100–≤200 g per week, >200–≤350 g per week, or >350 g per week had lower life expectancy at age 40 years of approximately 6 months, 1–2 years, or 4–5 years, respectively. "

So this is saying that the more you drink, the SHORTER your life is. The study isn't saying that if you drink you'll live longer than someone who doesn't drink at all. Also, the article ends it with this clear interpretation of the data that explains that point.

Please read below:

"Interpretation

In current drinkers of alcohol in high-income countries, the threshold for lowest risk of all-cause mortality was about 100 g/week. For cardiovascular disease subtypes other than myocardial infarction, there were no clear risk thresholds below which lower alcohol consumption stopped being associated with lower disease risk. These data support limits for alcohol consumption that are lower than those recommended in most current guidelines."

The last line SUPPORTS what we're saying at AINYF. "These data supports limits for alcohol consumption that are LOWER than those recommended in most current guidelines."

Thanks for sharing this information, as it helps a new article that I'm workng on.