US to ‘drop guidance' on daily alcohol consumption limits
Federal health and agriculture officials are reportedly planning to revise the long-standing guidance on daily alcohol consumption limits in the new U.S. Dietary Guidelines.
The new guidelines are expected to include a brief statement encouraging moderation or limiting alcohol intake due to associated health risks.
Currently, the guidelines advise women to consume one drink or less per day and men two drinks or less, with a 'drink' defined by specific volumes for wine, spirits, and beer.
The proposed changes come amidst recent research highlighting a rise in cancer and liver disease deaths linked to alcohol use, with excessive drinking contributing to approximately 178,000 deaths annually.
Critics, such as Eva Greenthal from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, expressed concern that more general language could be unhelpful and obscure the risks of even moderate drinking, particularly for breast cancer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Kristi Noem discharged from hospital as ICE Barbie's sudden illness sparks conspiracy theories
Kristi Noem has been discharged from the hospital after suffering from an allergic reaction - as the coincidental timing of her symptoms sparked online conspiracy theories. The Homeland Security secretary, 53, was rushed to the hospital on Tuesday for what a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told the Daily Mail was an 'allergic reaction.' 'Secretary Noem had an allergic reaction today,' Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said. 'She was transported to the hospital out of an abundance of caution. She is alert and recovering.' On Wednesday, Noem was released from the hospital, according to the Wall Street Journal. But speculation swirled as Noem's hospitalization came just one day after she visited a biosafety lab that has been temporarily shuttered over safety concerns. On Monday, Robert F Kennedy shared a photo of himself, Noem and Rand Paul at the Integrated Research Facility in Frederick, Maryland. 'With @Sec_Noem and @SenRandPaul inspecting the biological hazard labs at Fort Detrick,' Kennedy, the Health and Human Services secretary, wrote. The MAHA Institute - a thinktank supporting Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again initiative - also posted online that the three had earlier visited the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases biosecurity lab at Fort Detrick. Some on X questioned whether Noem had suffered some sort of exposure to hazardous material. 'Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem visited a biological hazard lab the day before she was rushed to [the] hospital over an allergic reaction,' one X user pointed out, calling it 'probably just a coincidence.' Others were not so sure, however. 'She toured the NBACC, a DHS-run facility built after the 2001 anthrax attacks and used during COVID to analyze potential biothreats for the FBI. Now she's suddenly hospitalized,' another X user asked, incredulously. 'This isn't just an allergy,' he asserted. 'What the hell did she come into contact with?' A third X user also asked whether Noem experienced 'biochemical warfare firsthand. 'Biochemical terrorism is something to consider in today's upside down world!' she noted. According to its website, the Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick studies viruses 'causing high-consequence disease' like like Ebola or COVID. One of its major focus areas is to 'mitigate major public heath events related to emerging or re-emerging infectious diseases or biological weapons attacks.' But Kennedy's Department of Health and Human Services ordered an indefinite work stoppage at the facility in April. 'NIH has implemented a research pause—referred to as a safety stand-down—at the Integrated Research Facility at Fort Detrick,' HHS officials said at the time. 'This decision follows identification and documentation of personnel issues involving contract staff that compromised the facility's safety culture, prompting this research pause.' They added: 'During the stand-down, no research will be conducted, and access will be limited to essential personnel only, to safeguard the facility and its resources.' Dr Connie Schmaljohn, the lab's director, was also placed on administrative leave after she allegedly failed to report the incident to other officials. Speaking anonymously, an HHS source revealed to Fox News that the shutdown came after one of the researchers poked a hole in the other's protective equipment during a vicious 'lovers' spat'. As the shutdown continued, Kennedy told a Senate committee last month that the FBI was investigating the incident as a potentially 'deliberate criminal act' because the pathogens the researchers were handling were highly dangerous, according to the Daily Beast. It now remains unclear when the facility may resume, as Democrats push the Department of Health and Human Services for answers. They noted in a letter last week that scientists at the Integrated Research Facility 'study some of the most dangerous pathogens and viruses to prevent, address and eradicate high-consequence and deadly diseases.' The lawmakers added that safety measures there 'are of the utmost importance for our constituents in the surrounding communities' as they pressed for a timeline on when research operations would resume.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
US judge invalidates Biden rule protecting privacy for abortions
June 18 (Reuters) - A federal judge on Wednesday struck down a rule adopted by the administration of former President Joe Biden that strengthened privacy protections for women seeking abortions and patients who receive gender transition treatments. U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in Amarillo, Texas, said the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services exceeded its powers and unlawfully limited states' ability to enforce their public health laws when it adopted the rule last year. The rule prohibits healthcare providers and insurers from giving information about a legal abortion to state law enforcement authorities who are seeking to punish someone in connection with that abortion. "HHS lacked clear delegated authority to fashion special protections for medical information produced by politically favored medical procedures," wrote Kacsmaryk, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, a Republican, during his first term. Kacsmaryk in December had blocked HHS from enforcing the rule against a Texas doctor who had brought the lawsuit, Carmen Purl, pending the outcome of the case. Wednesday's decision blocks the rule nationwide. HHS and Alliance Defending Freedom, a conservative Christian legal group that represents Purl, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Biden administration issued the rule as part of its pledge to support access to reproductive healthcare after the conservative-majority U.S. Supreme Court in 2022 overturned the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling that made access to abortion a constitutional right nationwide. It came in response to efforts by authorities in some Republican-led states that ban abortion, including Texas, to restrict out-of-state travel for abortion. Texas has filed a separate lawsuit challenging the rule, which is pending in federal court in Lubbock, Texas. HHS in a court filing last month said agency leadership appointed by Trump is evaluating its position in this case. Biden, a Democrat, said in announcing the rule that no one should have their medical records "used against them, their doctor, or their loved one just because they sought or received lawful reproductive health care."
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Revealed: Experts discover trendy diet loved by millions no better than other weight loss plans
Intermittent fasting—a trendy eating pattern beloved by celebrities and A-listers—is no better than regular dieting, a major review has suggested. Hollywood stars like Jennifer Aniston, Nicole Kidman, Cameron Diaz and Mark Wahlberg have jumped on the trend since it shot to prominence in the early 2010s. It sees dieters cram all their meals into a strict daily time window, or in extreme examples, skip some entirely. But now, in a major review of data on the diet, a team of international researchers found the benefits from fasting were essentially 'trivial' compared to normal dieting. Neither eating meals in a specific time window—like in an eight hour period—or doing fasting for five days of the week and then eating normally for two were found to be any better for losing weight. In fact, alternate day fasting—where people fast for 24 hours on alternate days—was only found to help people lose more weight, with dieters slimming down 2.84lbs (1.29kg) more, on average. However, this difference didn't meet what the researchers said was the minimum clinical threshold of 4.4lbs (2kg). But they did say this type of intermittent fasting was found to lower cholesterol levels. Time restricted fasting, which involves a 16 hour fast followed by an eight-hour eating window, was found to slightly increase cholesterol levels. No benefit was found for blood sugar levels or 'good' cholesterol levels in any of the fasting diet strategies. In the study, researchers analysed the results of 99 randomised clinical trials involving 6,582 adults, aged 45 on average, to compare intermittent fasting with calorie reducing diets. Writing in the BMJ, the scientists said while their data suggested intermittent fasting was better for losing weight than not dieting at all, it didn't stand out compared to a basic calorie-counting diet. 'Minor differences were noted between some intermittent fasting diets and continuous energy restriction, with some benefit for an alternate day fasting strategy with weight loss in shorter duration trials,' they added. 'All intermittent fasting strategies and continuous energy restriction diets showed a reduction in body weight when compared with an ad-libitum diet (allowing yourself to eat at any time). 'Of three intermittent fasting diets alternate day fasting showed benefit in body weight reduction compared with continuous energy restriction.' Independent experts, not involved in the research, said the findings were unsurprising. Professor Naveed Sattar, an expert in cardiometabolic medicine at the University of Glasgow, said: 'Overall, the results do not surprise as there is nothing magical about intermittent fasting for weight loss—beyond being another way for people to lower their calorie intake. 'Whether it is sustainable over the longer term is worth examining. 'For those who need to lose much more weight, other options are now clearly available.' Meanwhile, Dr Amanda Avery, an expert in nutrition and dietetics at the University of Nottingham, added: 'The pros and cons of intermittent fasting have been debated for some time now. 'This review can hopefully end the debate with the conclusion that if someone chooses intermittent fasting and overall a nutritionally balanced diet is still achieved, then it could be used as one of the options to support weight loss.' Experts have long been divided over the effectiveness of intermittent fasting as well as its potential long term health impacts. Some have even warned that it may raise the risk of strokes, heart attacks or early death. One study earlier this year also suggested intermittent fasting could trigger type two diabetes. Around two in three adults in the UK are obese or overweight, giving the country one of the highest obesity rates in Europe. Obesity itself increases the chances of person suffering serious health conditions that can damage the heart, such as high blood pressure. Last year, a sobering report also suggested Britain's spiralling obesity levels have fuelled a staggering 39 per cent rise in type 2 diabetes among people under 40, with 168,000 Brits now living with the illness. Piling on the pounds has also been linked to at least 13 types of cancer and is the second biggest cause of the disease in the UK, according to Cancer Research UK.
