Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Beer's More Dangerous Than Heroin (because 16 neo-prohibitionists say so)

Heard about the English "study" that says beer is more dangerous than heroin?

Horseshit. My friend and colleague Jay Brooks takes a look at the actual article from The Lancet and neatly disassembles it. Check it out.

Please, everyone: don't read the headlines. Read the science. In this case, you'll find it's sadly lacking.

4 comments:

Cooking Lager said...

you might like this take

http://petebrown.blogspot.com/2010/11/main-reason-professor-nutt-is-bad-for.html

Joe Stange said...

"About as scientific as a bunch of blokes in a pub working out a top ten list of shaggable birds."

Good stuff from Pete, as usual.

Matt Aquiline said...

Why do you call them neo-phohibitionists? I thought the reason Nutt was fired was because he wanted to legalize Marijuana. That would make his motive for this to be to claim marijuana is safer than alcohol, which is legal, therefore, we should legalize marijuana. I think you have his "logic" backwards, but I could be wrong.

Lew Bryson said...

I call them neo-pros because the group was largely made up of anti-alcohol types, as I understood it. Nutt may have a darker reason: he's created a synthetic alcohol that purports to give the 'whoopee' of booze without the negatives...is he trying to sell it? Dunno.
Besides, I can't imagine anyone in his former job being fired for wanting to cut down on alcohol sales/use.