A scary government report implies that drinking is manifestly reckless

A coalition of alcohol-related trade groups slams a new report from a federal advisory panel.

The ICCPUD report paints a decidedly more alarming picture than a recent review from the National Academies of Sciences , Engineering, and Medicine .

The question of whether and how much to drink ultimately comes down to a value judgment that weighs individual risks against benefits.

Authors of ICCPUD report say research "may under-estimate alcohol-related risk" John Sutter : Authors never consider the possibility that methodological problems might result in findings that exaggerate risk posed by moderate drinking.

Authors say data that inform official advice about alcohol may be systematically biased toward finding health risks at relatively low levels of consumption.

There is a crucial, policy-relevant difference between an "involuntary risk" from air pollution and a voluntary risk such as the potential health hazards of drinking.

Peter Bergen : In a free society, the former is the government's business, while the latter is not.

He says the ICCUPD 's comments suggest that decisions about drinking depend on what "the public, "society," or the government deems "acceptable" Bergen says people may choose to continue drinking regardless of what the Dietary Guidelines say.