You have to protect yourself.
Light drinking may protect brain function:
UGA study shows that for older people it could help cognitive condition
[...] The study examined the link between alcohol consumption and changes in cognitive function over time among middle-aged and older adults in the U.S.
[...] Compared to nondrinkers, they found that those who had a drink or two a day tended to perform better on cognitive tests over time.
Even when other important factors known to impact cognition such as age, smoking or education level were controlled for, they saw a pattern of light drinking associated with high cognitive trajectories.
The optimal amount of drinks per week was between 10 and 14 drinks. But that doesn't mean those who drink less should start indulging more, says Zhang.
"It is hard to say this effect is causal," he said. "So, if some people don't drink alcoholic beverages, this study does not encourage them to drink to prevent cognitive function decline."
Journal Reference:
Ruiyuan Zhang, Luqi Shen, Toni Miles, et al. Association of Low to Moderate Alcohol Drinking With Cognitive Functions in US Adults [open], JAMA Network Open (DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.7922)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:31PM (26 children)
The Iranian engineer I worked with in a previous job loved a drink.
According to her Tehran is awash with booze and always has been. The Islamist authorities turn a blind eye, but crack down on anyone who gets too open about it.
She also told me that the Islamic government would be overthrown tomorrow if they really made an effort to get rid of booze, and they know it.
Iran sounds interesting.
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:40PM (6 children)
That's part of the problem with Islam. Few muslims follow the teachings closely and Mohamed was clear that the only sure way to reach paradise was to die as a martyr in jihad. Now imagine growing up believing that message and hitting a low point in your life.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by PartTimeZombie on Friday July 03 2020, @12:14AM (4 children)
Sounds like every fundamentalist Christian I ever met.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @12:55AM (2 children)
To paraphrase a Bill Hicks skit: "Follow your teachings or burn in hell for eternity? Well thank you God... for all those... options!"
My original comment is true (not a "troll") and the reason we get the Pulse nightclub shooter and suicide bombers who drank.
So Mohammed doesn't know if he will make it to Jannah but there's one sure way other muslims can get there. Jihad (struggle) becomes qital (killing) in other passages with the suicide passage in Sura 3:143 - "Before you encountered death, you were hoping for it".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @08:37AM (1 child)
Kind of like the mafia saying - I've got a deal you can't refuse.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by coolgopher on Friday July 03 2020, @02:07PM
See Stargate with the Ori.
I'm with O'Neill on this topic.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 04 2020, @08:24PM
There are big differences. If lots of Christians followed Jesus's example they would be dying non-violently as martyrs. If lots of Muslims followed Muhammad's example they would be marrying many wives, some of them 6 or 9 year olds, and fighting many wars.
If you look at what the early Muslims were doing, it's far closer to what the ISIS and Taliban are doing than what the more peaceable "Muslims" are doing. So unlike the Christian Reformation a reformation of Islam to its roots won't make them more peaceful.
Fundamentalist Christians believe they are saved - they have assurance of salvation. So they don't need to go around killing non-Christians to get to heaven. In fact, logically speaking if the goal is getting more people to heaven, Christians are more expendable than non-Christians. It's clear many US people who call themselves Christians aren't following what their religion says or Jesus asks them to do[1].
In Islam. Muslims don't have assurance of getting to heaven and there are certain things they can do to increase their chances. Go figure.
Islam is definitely not a "turn the other cheek" religion[2]. And there are many verses that emergently encourage violence[3].
[1] https://www.patheos.com/blogs/jaysondbradley/2020/05/how-a-plague-exposed-the-christian-nation-myth/ [patheos.com]
[2] A man once asked the Prophet (peace be upon him), “O Prophet of Allah, what about if a man came to me asking for my money (meaning to take it by force)?” The Prophet said, “Don’t give him your money.” So the man said, “What if he fights me?” The Prophet said, “Fight him (back).” The man asked, “What if he kills me?” The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Then you are a martyr.” (Sahih Muslim)
The Prophet (peace be upon him) also said, “Whoever is killed defending himself is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his family is a martyr, whoever is killed defending his property is a martyr.” (At-Tirmidhi and Abu Dawud)
[3] https://answeringislam.org/authors/silas/islam_hates_you.html [answeringislam.org]
(Score: 2) by EETech1 on Friday July 03 2020, @09:25AM
So why haven't they all sacrificed themselves yet?
Right...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:40PM (8 children)
Look at some footage of Iran in the70s. They were chevy-driving, bikini-clad-sun-tanning, Aryan hedonists.
Iranians are different from desert dwelling Saudi Arabs. For that matter, Iraqis, their Arab neighbors to the west, are/were quite different from the desert dwelling Saudis.
And then there are the Lebanese - they think they are Europeans, and they are not wrong.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:46PM
Arabs own the magic rock so the other muzzies have to put up with them, even though they give the religion a bad name. If all Muslims were Iranian the world would be a much better place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:53PM (5 children)
Yeah, Persians I know are more Rita Panahi than Ali Khamenei, however, when we look at pictures from the '70s and see a forward looking society we overlook that the religious loons were demographically significant to have instituted and held theocratic power for so long.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 02 2020, @11:59PM (1 child)
Pahlevi regime was pretty damn corrupt, and the resistance found its focus thru their version of Islam - sorta "back-to-basics" ideology, given that it's the "West" - i.e., UK/BP/CIA - that overthrew Mossadeq regime.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Friday July 03 2020, @12:32AM
The Pahlavi regime was incredibly corrupt, and vicious which is why it enjoyed almost no public support by the end.
The people who really pushed the Iranian Revolution early on were actually pretty liberal students, but the Ayatollah Khomeini was a leader everyone could get behind, and he purged the movement of the more liberal groups once it was clear the Shah was not coming back, which is a real shame.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @04:16AM (2 children)
You need better friends. :)
Alt-right Liberal-apologist ambulance chasing Trumpian loony troll in the service of Uncle Rupert.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @04:29PM (1 child)
^ Communist identified. How does it feel to support an authoritarian ideology responsible for 100,000,000 deaths and believe you have a right to call other people names?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @11:29PM
The 'Liberal party' of Australia, i.e. the kleptocrats in government. Panahi is nothing more than a socket puppet of Canberra.
I support nobody.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @02:18PM
My in-laws are Persian and particularly because they're Zoroastrians rather than Muslims, they really do not like what the Ayatollah has done to the country. My wife regularly suggests that she wants the US to change the regime. I keep reminding her that the Ayatollah is there in large part because the US tried to change the regime there by reinstating the Shah over the ruler that they had chosen, but she still wants us to do it. Personally, I have no reason to believe that us doing it would be any better than in other countries where we've engaged in regime change.
And yeah, back before the revolution, the country was pretty liberal and yes, Persians don't necessarily like Arabs as they're completely different groups of people with different cultural values and beliefs.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Friday July 03 2020, @12:23AM (2 children)
Doesn't surprise me at all that the descendants of the old Persian empire let the Islam flow over them with reduced permeation to the root of their culture.
Even the arabs had a "culture of indulgence", one can find quite a number of references of drinking wine (in private) in the Arabian nights [wikipedia.org] - see also Abu Nuwas [wikipedia.org] and his khamriyyat [stanford.edu].
The hard stance against fermented drinks in Islam practicing world seems to have come into being after the great Abbasid civil war [wikipedia.org]. Even that is not quite a clear cut [wikipedia.org] as Quran seems to literally ban only grape and dates wine and "praying under influence".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Friday July 03 2020, @12:39AM (1 child)
I am good friends with a nurse who worked in Saudi for a couple of years and according to her, the moment the plane to London is out of Saudi airspace, the women on board line up at the toilets to change out of their hijabs, and the men all start drinking.
I don't think anyone really listens to priests.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @05:19PM
That's not really a surprise, when you live in a country where the state enforces religious practices with severe punishment for those violating them. Many of those folks wouldn't be Muslim at all or would be a member of a more liberal sect if the state wasn't literally enforcing the restrictions.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Tokolosh on Friday July 03 2020, @02:33AM (3 children)
Sounds like the US and marijuana.
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Friday July 03 2020, @02:47AM (2 children)
My country is going to have a referendum on pot at our next election.
Guess who is funding the "no" campaign?
Did you guess the Scientologists? Because it's the Scientologists. Weird.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @03:13AM (1 child)
Are the scientologists a large enough group to have political influence?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @03:45PM
Given the way they charge money to advance in the church, they're quite rich for their size, which amplifies their influence. Not to mention they've got a fair number of high-status people enmeshed in their ranks. Celebrities seem atypically vulnerable to their balderdash for some reason.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @12:13PM
"Iran sounds interesting."
Religion and drinking seem to have such a truce in many places.
Perhaps this is common ground among reasonable folks in a world of otherwise.
Old classics:
In the South, how do you tell the difference between a Methodist and a Baptist?
The bootlegger comes to the front door for the Methodist.
How do you keep a Mormon from drinking all your beer?
Bring another Mormon.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday July 03 2020, @12:45PM
Most of the U.S. seems to have tipped its hand during the pandemic, this is also true here - liquor stores have been 100% essential never closed businesses. Even social bars were among the first to reopen (and now be re-closed) when the powers that be decided to let COVID run amok.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 03 2020, @01:19PM
That's not terribly surprising, you saw the same sort of thing in the US during prohibition. I've heard the same thing about Saudi Arabia, there's definitely access, it's just that if you get caught by the authorities, the consequences are severe.
I don't personally mind that they continue to study the effects of alcohol, but it's rather irresponsible the way the studies are covered. Any upsides to drinking alcoholic beverages are outweighed by the negative health consequences. Yes, having the occasional drink is unlikely to have a noticeable impact on your health, nor is getting drunk a few times a years, but alcohol is a carcinogen and a toxin, it gets removed from the body preferentially to other things that you consume as a result.