Good news: More evidence alcohol is good for your health. Bad news: The average person metabolizes only about one drink per hour.
That’s what I cannot figure out: Why do people go to bars and drink a six-pack over a two-hour period and expect to drive home? Back when I met friends for Happy Hour, I was very careful to limit my drinks to one an hour with another 30-60 minutes break before driving home.
My main concern with alcohol is that it became a taboo. Children hate to see their parents drinking, and they give it a negative connotation. Due to the strict laws, youngsters cannot legally drink until they are 21, and underage drinking is punishable and frowned upon. That is the reason when they go to college they lose their head when they see a bottle of alcohol. American society has taken drinking to extremes, either drink until get wasted or not drink at all. Moderation and being comfortable about alcohol is the only way to make this “problem” less harmful.
It isn’t the bar that is necessarily bad. Its that the bar encourages you to drink more. I think having a manageable drink while at a bar watching the game could greatly reduce stress and increase health benefits.
The problem is not the drink itself, is how you drink it, exactly what happens with guns. A gun will never kill anyone by itself, for alcohol won’t kill unless you over do it. The deaths from drunk driving is not the alcohol’s fault, it’s the driver’s fault that decided that after drinking a bottle of wine he was fit to drive.
It doesn’t constitute a drink, it constitutes a substance abuse. It is not a rocket science. I cannot comprehend how some people believe that a 44-ounce cup filled with vodka (enough to kill a bear) is one cup. The article calls for moderation, I call for common sense.
“Secretary Sebelius, you have stated that “There is absolutely no evidence, and every economist will tell you this, that there is any job-loss related to the Affordable Care Act.”
And what about the lady who says, “thanks to ObamaCare, I quit my job!”
It’s just that they didn’t tell you that 2.5 million of the 4 million new jobs would come from people leaving the work force and making their old jobs available.
“…claims made on The Dr. Oz Show that low calorie sweeteners cause food cravings and weight gain are misleading and contrary to a large body of scientific research.”
It is unbelievable that one of the opinion leaders in the healthcare industry can mislead his public like Dr. Oz did. I would have thought that a program that is focused on healthy life style and that recommends different treatments should at least be approved by a regulating body that can verify the information that is distributed through those types of shows.
The questions by Chairman Dave Camp are completely valid. Those are questions that the administration must know the answer to and must be able to support the decision they have made. Chairman Camp is expressing his concerns about the program, and if Sebelius knows the program, she must be capable of answering, perhaps not convince them of the program, but at the very least satisfy them, proving that the administration is not improvising with this reform.
Good news: More evidence alcohol is good for your health. Bad news: The average person metabolizes only about one drink per hour.
That’s what I cannot figure out: Why do people go to bars and drink a six-pack over a two-hour period and expect to drive home? Back when I met friends for Happy Hour, I was very careful to limit my drinks to one an hour with another 30-60 minutes break before driving home.
My main concern with alcohol is that it became a taboo. Children hate to see their parents drinking, and they give it a negative connotation. Due to the strict laws, youngsters cannot legally drink until they are 21, and underage drinking is punishable and frowned upon. That is the reason when they go to college they lose their head when they see a bottle of alcohol. American society has taken drinking to extremes, either drink until get wasted or not drink at all. Moderation and being comfortable about alcohol is the only way to make this “problem” less harmful.
Well drinking alcohol is good for health at a certain level. Drinking at a bar probably shows no good for health.
It isn’t the bar that is necessarily bad. Its that the bar encourages you to drink more. I think having a manageable drink while at a bar watching the game could greatly reduce stress and increase health benefits.
I do not think beer is as healthy as wine. Do people usually drink wine at a bar while watching the game?
The problem is not the drink itself, is how you drink it, exactly what happens with guns. A gun will never kill anyone by itself, for alcohol won’t kill unless you over do it. The deaths from drunk driving is not the alcohol’s fault, it’s the driver’s fault that decided that after drinking a bottle of wine he was fit to drive.
Yes. everything would be bad if you over do it..
The article suggests that one or two drinks is fine. However, when your pouring alcohol into a big gulp cup, that no longer constitutes as one drink.
It doesn’t constitute a drink, it constitutes a substance abuse. It is not a rocket science. I cannot comprehend how some people believe that a 44-ounce cup filled with vodka (enough to kill a bear) is one cup. The article calls for moderation, I call for common sense.
The statement “A glass is no more than 1 ounce” doesn’t make much sense either, and must have been a typo. An ounce of alcohol, maybe.
“Secretary Sebelius, you have stated that “There is absolutely no evidence, and every economist will tell you this, that there is any job-loss related to the Affordable Care Act.”
And what about the lady who says, “thanks to ObamaCare, I quit my job!”
http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/25/news/economy/obamacare-job/
“Democrat leaders promised that ObamaCare would “create 4 million jobs, 400,000 jobs almost immediately,”
Yeah… They are probably hoping for a mulligan on that one.
It’s just that they didn’t tell you that 2.5 million of the 4 million new jobs would come from people leaving the work force and making their old jobs available.
“…claims made on The Dr. Oz Show that low calorie sweeteners cause food cravings and weight gain are misleading and contrary to a large body of scientific research.”
Its all about ratings. The higher the better.
It is unbelievable that one of the opinion leaders in the healthcare industry can mislead his public like Dr. Oz did. I would have thought that a program that is focused on healthy life style and that recommends different treatments should at least be approved by a regulating body that can verify the information that is distributed through those types of shows.
I think that there must be a reason behind Dr. Oz’s claims. Who paid him to say that fallacy?
The questions by Chairman Dave Camp are completely valid. Those are questions that the administration must know the answer to and must be able to support the decision they have made. Chairman Camp is expressing his concerns about the program, and if Sebelius knows the program, she must be capable of answering, perhaps not convince them of the program, but at the very least satisfy them, proving that the administration is not improvising with this reform.