Alcohol podcast

[Bubblesofearth]

I think of myself as a light but frequent drinker so this short film on the BBC player caught my eye. About 3:30min in our chap takes his first drink. A few times afterwards this is described as one drink. No information was given about the alcohol content so the reasonable assumption IMO is that it is the amount normally associated with the description of 'one drink'. Plenty of references out there to tell us what that is - about 350mls of 5% lager for example.

The experiment then goes on to describe the effects of this one drink and I'm scratching my head thinking they seem out of proportion to what I would regard as normal. The guy is clearly well on the way to being drunk. After one drink? I'm getting more and more irritated that the amount alcohol consumed is not given - surely it must be ore than one drinks worth?

Then a clue - at 6:50 mins into the film the blood alcohol of the subject is given as 0.12. A bit of Googling reveals this would result from a chap of his approximate size having consumed 5 or 6 drinks!

Maybe it's me but this seems like deliberate obfuscation, maybe with the agenda of trying to make out that one drink is worse for you than it actually is? Dunno but something is off about this way of presenting stuff. Seems to happen more and more these days IMO.

Rant over

BoE

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p ... c_team=BBC

[Mike4]

Hmmm I need a TV licence to watch that.

But yes I recognise what you describe and that other doctory bloke does it too, in his R4 programme "Just One Thing". Never quantifies the dose of whatever it is he is ramping this week, or cites the source of his assertions. Drives me demented!

(Speeling edit.)

[kempiejon]

Hmmm I need a TV licence to watch that.

But yes I recognise what you describe and that other doctory bloke does it too, in his R4 programme "Just One Thing". Never quantifies the dose of whatever it is he is ramping this week, or cites the source of his assertions. Drives me demented!

(Speeling edit.)

Michael n=1 Moseley is not a scientist he's an author yet his shows are trotted out as factual. He did PPE at Oxford, worked as a banker and is not a medical doctor. He is however, as Captain Science puts it, a very successful grifter. I have noticed that the BBC are taking away some of his time but seems he's on more often. I'm sure his shows used to be 40 minutes long, at least they've cut him down to 14 mins these days.

https://twitter.com/_captainscience/sta ... 1287500800

[DeepSporran]

Michael n=1 Moseley is not a scientist he's an author yet his shows are trotted out as factual. He did PPE at Oxford, worked as a banker and is not a medical doctor. He is however, as Captain Science puts it, a very successful grifter. I have noticed that the BBC are taking away some of his time but seems he's on more often. I'm sure his shows used to be 40 minutes long, at least they've cut him down to 14 mins these days.

https://twitter.com/_captainscience/sta ... 1287500800

I believe he went to medical school after doing PPE and working as a banker. Whether he spent much time actually doctoring after qualifying I don’t know.

[kempiejon]

I believe he went to medical school after doing PPE

Then I do the gentleman a disservice. I will amend my model.

[bungeejumper]

I believe he went to medical school after doing PPE

Then I do the gentleman a disservice. I will amend my model.

According to the infallible Wikipedia, he studied medicine and psychology, but it doesn't say that he qualified as a doctor. (Which might be a different thing, I wouldn't know.) Anyway, he swiftly abandoned both of them - apparently before being allowed to put any patients at risk. And then went into his media career.

Anybody remember Gillian McKeith, the poo woman? Called herself a doctor, and so she was. She had a correspondence-course PhD from the Clayton College of Natural Health in Birmingham, Alabama, which has since gone out of business. You can fool some of the people some of the time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillian_McKeith#:

She is a member of the American Association of Nutritional Consultants, but this association runs no checks on the qualifications of its members; this allowed British physician Ben Goldacre to register his dead cat for the same membership held by McKeith.

In February 2007, she agreed to stop using the academic title "Doctor" in advertisements, after a complaint to the UK's Advertising Standards Authority. Responding to criticism that her use of her qualifications in linguistics and language and international relations, subjects entirely unrelated to diet and nutrition, are misleading to the public, McKeith said she was challenging orthodox medical opinions.

Yeah, right. A holistic approach. Give your guts a good talking to, and maybe a discourse on politics. You'll be feeling better in no time.

BJ

[Dove21]

Goldacre is at the opposite pole of scientific integrity IMHO. Masterful at skewering lazy journalism in its serial misrepresentation of scientific data. Sort of forerunner of Tim Harford on R4.

Dove

[bungeejumper]

Goldacre is at the opposite pole of scientific integrity IMHO. Masterful at skewering lazy journalism in its serial misrepresentation of scientific data.

That sounds okay to me. Given that the so-called professional medical association the poo doctor touts on her CV has a dead cat for one member, and also (I believe) a hamster?

Mind you, people in glass houses shouldn't walk around in the nude. Bernard Manning once managed to get himself onto the (highly reputable) British Association for Counselling. As a race and sexual affairs counsellor! Oops. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/mann ... 21152.html

BJ