New Dietary Guidelines Abandon Longstanding Advice on Alcohol 114
An anonymous reader shares a report: Ever since the federal government began issuing the Dietary Guidelines in 1980, it has told Americans to limit themselves to one or two standard alcoholic drinks a day. Over time, the official advice morphed to no more than two drinks a day for men, and no more than one for women. No longer [non-paywalled source].
The updated guidelines issued on Wednesday say instead that people should consume less alcohol "for better overall health" and "limit alcohol beverages," but they do not recommend clear limits. The guidelines also no longer warn that alcohol may heighten the risk of breast cancer and other malignancies. It is the first time in decades that the government has omitted the daily caps on drinking that define moderate consumption -- standards that are used as benchmarks in clinical studies, to steer medical advice, and to distinguish moderate from heavy drinking, which is unquestionably harmful.
The new guidance advises Americans who are pregnant, struggle with alcohol use disorder or take medications that interact with alcohol to avoid drinking altogether. The guidelines also warn people with alcoholism in the family to "be mindful of alcohol consumption and associated addictive behaviors." They do not, however, distinguish between men and women, who metabolize alcohol differently, nor do they caution against underage drinking. The guidelines also no longer include a warning that was in the last set issued in 2020: that even moderate drinking may increase the risk of cancer and some forms of cardiovascular disease, as well as the overall risk of dying.
The updated guidelines issued on Wednesday say instead that people should consume less alcohol "for better overall health" and "limit alcohol beverages," but they do not recommend clear limits. The guidelines also no longer warn that alcohol may heighten the risk of breast cancer and other malignancies. It is the first time in decades that the government has omitted the daily caps on drinking that define moderate consumption -- standards that are used as benchmarks in clinical studies, to steer medical advice, and to distinguish moderate from heavy drinking, which is unquestionably harmful.
The new guidance advises Americans who are pregnant, struggle with alcohol use disorder or take medications that interact with alcohol to avoid drinking altogether. The guidelines also warn people with alcoholism in the family to "be mindful of alcohol consumption and associated addictive behaviors." They do not, however, distinguish between men and women, who metabolize alcohol differently, nor do they caution against underage drinking. The guidelines also no longer include a warning that was in the last set issued in 2020: that even moderate drinking may increase the risk of cancer and some forms of cardiovascular disease, as well as the overall risk of dying.
RFK (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
With a generous side helping of heroin-infused brainworms.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
If JFK was your cousin, odds are you'd probably look good too
Re: (Score:2)
My dad is mid-80s and looks younger than RFK jr, facially and with his shirt off but less muscle mass
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Tim Walz looks so much healthier, lol.
Re: (Score:2)
And gear. Lot's of gear, no way that guy isn't on it.
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer scotch with my beef, but I guess that means I'm just a commie.
Maybe they need it⦠(Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
No separate rules for women? (Score:4, Funny)
Don't you know that if a document mentions the word "women", it's woke? And if it's not in Times New Roman font, it's woke? And if I stub my toe in the night, it's on that fucking woke nightstand? And any hint of wokeness means you have to clutch your pearls for at least four hours!
Re:No separate rules for women? (Score:5, Funny)
Depending on how badly you stub your toe, everyone in the house or (where applicable) neighboring apartments may be woke.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
*tips hat* That is the funniest thing I've read on Slashdot ... for a long time. Thanks. *goes and gets cloth to wipe coffee off my screen*.
Re: (Score:2)
And any hint of wokeness means you have to clutch your pearls for at least four hours!
Only women wear pearls so clutching them is woke.
Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
Due to Trumps tariffs other countries aren't consuming much American alcohol suddenly. Those producers are in financial pain so out comes a study saying it is healthy to drink more alcohol. Seems politically motivated to me.
Re:Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe. I live in Ontario, the world's largest buyer of alcohol, and all US alcohol imports have been stopped. Definitely having an effect, especially in Kentucky... no US bourbon being sold here.
Re:Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:5, Informative)
Maybe. I live in Ontario, the world's largest buyer of alcohol, and all US alcohol imports have been stopped. Definitely having an effect, especially in Kentucky... no US bourbon being sold here.
It's been theorized that Canada's import decline has a lot to do with why Jim Beam, which has a hand in pretty much all bourbon distilling, is shutting down its main distillery in Kentucky for all of 2026 [npr.org].
Re: Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:2)
"I live in Ontario, the world's largest buyer of alcohol..."
Wisconsin has entered the chat...
Re: Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Wisconsin has entered the chat...
Ontario has about 2.5 times the population of Wisconsin so even if you are higher per capita you would quite possibly be lower in total units.
Re: Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:2)
Iâ(TM)ve given up bourbon, and thatâ(TM)s a sacrifice Iâ(TM)m willing to make. Plus Okanagan Spirits BRBN makes a fantastic Old Fashioned.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Alcohol producers are in trouble (Score:5, Interesting)
Alcohol consumption is way down due to younger generation preferring cannibus, and older generation using fat drugs (GPL1s reduce the urge for alcohol similar to other drugs). Has nothing to do with politics, this started well before Trump season 2.
Yeah, alcohol consumption has been in a generation long decline regardless of who is in office because drinking habits have changed for the population at large. Trade wars don't help, but the biggest issue is that the young just don't see the point in drinking. Bars and clubs have been steadily closing for years now. All dating is done online via the Internet and none of the kids are meeting in clubs anymore. Women used to go to clubs to get noticed. Now they have Instagram for that, and it's killing the club scene. As the club scene goes, drinking goes.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe in the USA, but not in general. In fact in Europe alcohol consumption is only slightly declined from its absolute peak in 2019 (6 years ago doesn't account for any generational change). In fact the number of different breweries and distilleries in Europe reached a peak only 2 years ago and the bar scene is grew back to pre-COVID bankruptcy figures. Most drinking in Europe isn't done by women in clubs.
I have no knowledge of what you weirdos in the USA are doing though so you may be right in that contex
Re: (Score:2)
Alcohol consumption is way down due to younger generation preferring cannibus
Or just that the younger generation doesn't have the money to blow on alcohol.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine a post that is further than the truth. Alcohol is cheap. Yes, there are fancy beverages, but throughout soooo much of history (including our own times) there have been poor drunk people because there are many affordable alcoholic drinks. They continue to be drunk because it is affordable.
If consumption is down, it is due to other reasons, not the cost.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
If you drink at home or at a house party, sure, alcohol isn't very expensive. Going out to drink at restaurants and clubs is pretty expensive.
But I say that without knowing the numbers of why or where people drink.
Re: (Score:2)
Going out to drink at restaurants and clubs is pretty expensive.
Disney actually has $46 drink [allears.net] at one of their newest bars. I thought it was a joke at first.
Re: (Score:2)
Alcohol is cheap.
Your idea of cheap obviously isn't the same as mine.
It's a little over $8 just for a 12 pack of Coke at most of the local grocery stores. That's a non-alcoholic drink and the price is already to the point where I'm not really feelin' it. Then I look over at the prices on beer and it it's like fuck that, I'm glad I don't drink.
Granted, cheap fortified "bum wines" might still be a thing, but there's a reason they're called bum wines.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I guarantee you the weed habit is more expensive than the alcohol habit.
Start with £25:
spend it on alcohol in a pub, it'll last less than an evening...
spend it on alcohol from the supermarket, it'll last maybe a week...
spend it on weed, it'll last at least a week...
(ofc, depending on your location, ymmv)
Re: (Score:1)
gemini, yearly imports of alcoholic beverages from the us in canada
year us->canada canada-us
2023 ~$1.0 Billion CAD ~$1.3 Billion CAD
2024 ~$1.1 Billion CAD ~$1.4 Billion CAD
2025 (est) ~$400 - $500 Million CAD ~$1.3 Billion CAD
source?
Primary Data Sources
The Distilled Spirits Council of the United States (DISCUS): Specifically their 2025 Mid-Year Report, which documented the 85% collapse in spirit exports to Canada in Q2 2025.
The Wine Institute: Their 2025 factsheets tracked the 30% decline in wine exports and the historic flip from a trade surplus to a trade deficit with Canada for the first time in 36 years.
U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC) DataWeb: Official U.S. Census Bureau merchandise trade statistics (specifically HTS codes 2204, 2205, and 2208).
Statistics Canada (StatCan): Monthly reports on International Merchandise Trade (Table 12-10-0011-01) which recorded the retaliatory "Buy Canadian" shifts and provincial inventory backlogs.
Figure,Source Reference
$1.1 Billion CAD (2024),"Association of Canadian Distillers / Wine Institute. Reflects the total retail value and shipments during the last ""normal"" trade year."
85% Drop (Spirits),DISCUS 2025 Mid-Year Report. Highlights exports falling below $10M USD in a single quarter for the first time in decades.
$161 Million Loss,USDA / Foreign Agricultural Service. Estimated export value lost by U.S. producers between March and September 2025.
$80 Million Inventory,Ontario Ministry of Finance. Reports on U.S. alcohol stock being held in LCBO warehouses but withheld from sale during the dispute.
Current Status (Early 2026)
While federal retaliatory tariffs were officially lifted on September 1, 2025, most data from late 2025 suggests that trade has not "snapped back." Many Canadian provincial liquor boards have not yet resumed full re-ordering of U.S. brands, opting instead to clear existing backlogs or continue promoting European and domestic alternatives.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Has nothing to do with politics, this started well before Trump season 2."
Nonsense, it is nothing but flattery of Trump who makes clear that he is not a drinker. All they stopped short of is endorsing snorting of Adderall instead, something Trump does do. Nothing to do with health, it is pure politics.
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense, it is nothing but flattery of Trump who makes clear that he is not a drinker.
This will be the only good thing I'll say about King Orange. He saw his older brother die from alcohol abuse and decided he would never drink. Whether you think that is a reasonable choice is irrelevant. He saw what happened and made the decision, and has stuck to that decision, not to drink alcohol.
Re: (Score:1)
"Has nothing to do with politics, this started well before Trump season 2."
Nonsense, it is nothing but flattery of Trump who makes clear that he is not a drinker. All they stopped short of is endorsing snorting of Adderall instead, something Trump does do. Nothing to do with health, it is pure politics.
Huh? Young people are drinking less alcohol and the government is conspiring to de-stigmatize drinking alcohol, in order to flatter Trump, who... [checks quoted post] does not drink alcohol? Truly the logic is dizzying.
I wonder if there is anything that happens which isn't due to Trump? The last time we saw someone with this much dastardly control over the fabric of reality was when Bush created Hurricane Katrina to kill poor people in New Orleans.
It's not cannabis (Score:1)
The younger generation is flat broke.. they can't even afford to have House parties because they don't have houses and you can't make too much noise in an apartment especially when you have three or four roommates. Bars are out of the question way too expensive.
They're also quite a bit more level-headed. It's not that as a whole there on interest
Re: (Score:2)
Bullhockey. The young *always* find ways to party. Especially if they're poor. Been there, done that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait...there's a study?
Because I'm pretty sure they just tossed out a new recommendation they pulled out of their ******.
Remember, we need Gold Standard Science and Randomized Double-Blind Clinical Trials for crazy stuff like vaccines and birth control. But for things like alcohol and public health we use Good Ol' Common Sense(tm) around this country!
Damn good point (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it is, and since Trump doesn't drink alcohol (we assume is true since we also know he lies) you know it's bad advice.
Realistically, any reformulating of food dietary guidelines should be done at the macronutrient level.
Instead of saying "eat 2 servings of meat per day" say, you require 2 servings (6 oz/170g) of food containing Vitamin B12, D3 and Iron, which is easier from 170g of meat rather than 12 servings (72 oz, 1020g) of bread or sushi (nori/seaweed has B12.)
Creatine and Carnosine are only i
Re: (Score:2)
Coffee certainly does have nutritional value
Re: (Score:2)
It's worse then that. Gen Z as a generation is drinking much less on average then any prior generation. That's basically a death sentence for the alcohol industry with no new customers.
https://time.com/7203140/gen-z... [time.com]
https://news.gallup.com/poll/6... [gallup.com]
That's a shame (Score:2, Insightful)
All those multitudes of people who consult government tables to guide their consumption of various products, including alcohol, will now be lost in the darkness.
And the doctors who act as passthroughs for that guidance will also be completely without specific guidance - they couldn't possibly just keep saying what they've been saying for years.
Re: (Score:1)
It's like I've been blinded! I haven't had a sip in weeks, but now I don't know what my limit is or when to stop!
Re: (Score:2)
All those multitudes of people who consult government tables to guide their consumption of various products, including alcohol, will now be lost in the darkness.
It doesn't help that medical researchers can't seem to agree on alcohol outside of "too much is bad". Kind of hard to issue any guidance when one group of doctors say that research indicates a glass of wine may have benefits while another group of equally distinguished doctors says nope, there are no good amounts, period, and you should completely abstain.
Re: (Score:3)
Except much of the research that looks at whether alcohol causes xxxx (cancer, heart disease, obesity, etc) uses the 2oz (etc) standard. So while we aren't running trials looking at 2oz versus 4oz versus 8oz, we are often using none versus 2oz and we see a difference at that breakpoint. Repeating the research to try and find the exact point between 0-->2 seems excessive (and certainly not something the liquor industry is going to pay for!)
Re: (Score:2)
All those multitudes of people who consult government tables to guide their consumption of various products, including alcohol, will now be lost in the darkness.
And the doctors who act as passthroughs for that guidance will also be completely without specific guidance - they couldn't possibly just keep saying what they've been saying for years.
Exactly. Given how radically the recommendations have changed over my lifetime, this is not going to get me upset. I've long since believed the people coming up with these guidelines are a bunch of clowns recommending their personal preferences with much less experimental evidence than you're lead to believe. They're also motivated to remove any health risk and ignore any pleasure one might get from butter, beer, or anything else.
I think this is actually a good object lesson in why value is subjective. The
The regime wants fewer, poorer people (Score:3, Insightful)
They want to destroy social trust domestically in order to isolate you, take your money (via the national sales tax masquerading as tariffs), take your vote so you can't fight back, and - if you're not a steady milk cow ready to be led around by the nose, they want you to die.
And if you're not white, their kind of Xian or attached to things like the franchise, well, they want worse for you.
This year is make-or-break for Freedom in the US, and probably a big chunk of Europe. These fuckers need to be out of power and in jail.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yup. The midterms are the litmus test. If they are free, fair and respected, then democracy in the United States is not quite dead yet. Otherwise... welcome to the Fascist States of Amerika.
Re: (Score:2)
Well for one they are incoherent, these do not strike me as the type of people to have a plan, as much as theyd like you to think they do. The military has plans, the admin does not.
Or if we want to take them with some of their contradictions they want fewer of *certain people* since so many of them are always talking about birth rates but they don't want immigration to bolster the population.
Re: (Score:1)
A very good summary of the current state of affairs. If they can't profit from you, they want you to die.
Look a People's faces, when you go out. (Score:3, Interesting)
Going to Grocery Store, Walmart, or Costco.
I observe people's faces .expressions.. I see glum faces mostly. Not often seeing intact families smiling and laughing.
Perhaps the grim faces point to stress/depression in their lives.
And follow-on, the reason of why they are drinking alcohol.
So, in actuality, it's reasonable to associate stress and depression to mortality rates, and cancer. The alcohol consumption is verily a secondary signal to stress and depression. Our society as a whole, is not well.
Re: (Score:2)
It explains Russia, for sure, where alcohol is a leading reason the life expectancy for a male is 65.6 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh no, Russia and alcohol have a centuries long complicated relationship.
Re: (Score:3)
No, it has been going on for a long time. The Special Military Fiasco probably exacerbated both the low life expectancy and the level of alcoholism in Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
Not often seeing intact families smiling and laughing.
The reason you're not seeing families smiling and laughing is because you're not living in a Disney movie. Mundane daily activities are boring and in real life people generally aren't going to break out into a song about their trip to the market. [youtube.com]
New Dietary Guidelines (Score:2)
"You know what? The world is going to shit anyway. Just sorta/kinda limit the alcohol intake, and try to go easy on the heroin. I mean, we get it if you have to. We need something to take the edge off too. Just try not to OD, unless you really want to."
The stats on drinking are incredible (Score:2)
60% of the US population are essentially non-drinkers.
10% have 2 drinks weekly
10% have 1 drink daily
10% have 2 per day - a level i've never managed for more than 2 weeks
and the final 10%? SEVENTY FOUR WEEKLY!!
I think i might have managed that a very long time ago in a one month period. Exactly ONCE.
source is "Paying the Tab" by Philip Cook, 2007
For everybody out there who voted Trump (Score:3, Interesting)
I understand 2016 and why people might have voted for Trump out of confusion and desperation.
But by 2020 let alone 2024 you knew.
So what was it specifically that made you give up on science?
Only retard right wing they all are refuse (Score:1)
To listen to science. COVID-19 and all other illnesses would go away tomorrow if everyone understood the science of vaccines and got vaccinated, but, well, here we are.
COVID was not started by a lab leak and vaccines are ultra safe and ultra effective. Only right wing nutbars doubt that.
Also, Abortion is a form of medical care. The American civil war was fought over slavery. I am tired of arguing these points with people who refuse to acknowledge reality. If you're a Republican vote or you're either somebod
Re: (Score:2)
These posts just demonstrate how stupid MAGA people are. Reposting these quotes doesn't make the OP look bad, quite the opposite.
Re:Only retard right wing they all are refuse (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, 15-year-olds do not get bottom surgery. This is just scare-mongering by MAGA extremists.
Secondly, yes: Gender-affirming surgery is settled science and is approved by all competent medical associations.
You want to know who gets a lot of gender-affirming surgery? In the United States, cisgender men with a condition called gynecomastia develop breasts due to a hormone imbalance. This is a completely benign and harmless condition and yet every year, over 24,000 men have them removed. Nobody says "why are these guys mutilating their bodies and removing perfectly healthy tissue!!!" even though they are doing it precisely because they are experiencing gender dysphoria.
Re: (Score:1)
They never announced the suspension of bottom surgeries, MAGAtard.
They announced the suspension of gender-affirming care which includes puberty blockers, hormones, and top surgery.
Only right-wing perverts immediately drool over imagining children's genitalia.
Re: (Score:1)
Fucking liar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
She was 18 at the time of the surgery, or at most a few weeks shy of 18.
Re: (Score:1)
Under 18. Legally a child.
Fucking liar.
Re: (Score:2)
Anorexia is a life-threatening condition. If people keep starving themselves, they will die. So if you don't want them to die, you have to stop them from starving themselves.
Gender-affirming care is the opposite: It makes people live healthier lives. Not to mention, decades (close to a century) of research has shown that it's almost always impossible to "fix" trans people's imaging. So you are proposing an intervention that we know almost never works rather than one that we know does often work.
I bel
Re: (Score:1)
You're overly concerned with the genitals of children.
Re: (Score:2)
You guys really need to get a better whataboutism.
Re: (Score:2)
There have been at least 8 vaccine recalls since 1958, If you want specifics, search for RotaSheild from 1998, or Pandemrix from 2009. That doesn't even begin to count the drugs that never made it out of clinical trials.
Re: (Score:2)
8 vaccine recalls in almost 70 years sounds like a pretty good track record, to be honest. How many food recalls have there been in that time to block deadly food poisoning? I would guess hundreds.
Wait you have to go back to 1958 (Score:1)
And you do understand that most drugs don't make it out of clinical trial because they didn't do anything not because they hurt anything....
I get that anti-vax is an important identity marker for the Republican party now because the Republican party is so destructive to the economy but still..
Re: (Score:2)
I understand 2016 and why people might have voted for Trump out of confusion and desperation.
Or giving him the benefit of the doubt. (I didn't vote for him, but could see this as an argument - then.)
But by 2020 let alone 2024 you knew.
Exactly.
Obligatory Simpsons quote... (Score:5, Funny)
"To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems" – Homer Simpson
Oh No! (Score:4, Insightful)
There are real policy changes to be outraged over. This is not it. This is middling rewording on a website.
/yawn
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Policy is being generous. Trump does not have policy, he is a con man, a rapist and a criminal.
In related news... Get your diseases here! (Score:2)
The HHS CDC Childhood Immunization Recommendations Fact Sheet [hhs.gov] says (as of 2026/01/07 anyway):
The updated CDC childhood immunization schedule: ...
3. Ensures that all the diseases covered by the previous immunization schedule will still be available to anyone who wants them
I'm guessing they mean the vaccines for the diseases are still available, but that's not what it says.
To be fair, maybe RFK, Jr. is going all-in on immunity through actual infection.
(Three more years... *sigh*)
Re: (Score:2)
Three years? You're at least a decade too optimistic. We're stuck with these morons, at least the ones that survive, for the rest of their lives..
Re: (Score:3)
Whats quite depressingly funny is they said the US gives "67 shots" but all they did was look at the 2024 schedule and then proceed to add all the numbers, like they counted "1st, second and 3rd dose" as adding 1+2+3 = 6
They treat their supporters with zero respect.
Re: (Score:3)
Whats quite depressingly funny is they said the US gives "67 shots" but all they did was look at the 2024 schedule and then proceed to add all the numbers, like they counted "1st, second and 3rd dose" as adding 1+2+3 = 6
They treat their supporters with zero respect.
Yup. For example, I got MMR-II and TDAP boosters at the same time in 2019, which covers 6 things, but it was only 2 shots, one in each arm. The Trump administration and, especially, RFK, Jr are gaslighting people to make them afraid for some reason. Don't know what the endgame is with regard to tricking people into not getting vaccinated. Having more people get sick and die? ...so they won't live long enough to get Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid?
Granted, vaccines don't guarantee you won't get
Re: (Score:2)
From what I can tell Trump personally still believes in vaccination but he's not the type of person to take a stance unpopular with his base.
The formula for this admin and Republicans for a long while has been "if Democrats support a thing we must oppose a thing" and even if that opposition is turning out false then they will do whatever they can to bend reality to make it true. To me that framing has a lot of predictive power even if when it seem just so stupidly simple.
Dietary guidelines are useless.. (Score:1)
...for maintaining health
They do, however, give insights into what industries influence/bribe politicians
Honestly... who cares about this stuff (Score:5, Insightful)
Who, in your entire life, has ever said when you asked them if they wanted to go out for a drink, "let me check what the FDA has to say about that"
No one reads any of this crap. Anyone who does pays it no heed. Everyone knows drinking a lot is bad for you. Some do it anyway. News at 11. What you do or do not put in guidelines like this is meaningless.