News India Times

www.newsindiatimes.com – that’s all you need to know Disclaimer:The views and opinions expressed on this page are those of the authors and Parikh Worldwide Media does not officially endorse, and is not responsible or liable for them. T he Trump administration reignited a debate about alcohol this month by removing daily recommend- ed limits in the national Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Now, women are no longer advised to limit intake to one drink per day and men to two. Instead, the updated guidelines simply state that people could “consume less alcohol for better overall health.” The change leaves many people wondering how much is too much and what alcohol means for their health. It also invites a closer look at where evidence is strong and where uncertainty remains. The science is clear that binge drinking is dangerous. Defined as consuming four or more drinks on a single oc- casion for women and five or more for men, the behavior is strongly associated with car crashes, falls and other serious injuries. Drinking large amounts of alcohol over a short period also overwhelms the body’s ability to metab- olize it, increasing the risk of heart rhythm disturbances, acute pancreatitis and alcohol poisoning. In 2024, nearly 58 million people reported binge drink- ing in the past month. The message to them is straight- forward: This level of alcohol consumption carries real risks and should be reduced. The same is true for people who drink heavily on a regular basis. The American Heart Association defines heavy drinking as four or more drinks per day, or binge drinking on five or more days in the past month. At these levels, alcohol use increases the risk of nearly every cardiovascular condition, from hypertension and heart rhythm disturbances to stroke, heart attack, heart failure and sudden cardiac death. Meanwhile, studies have found that about 90 percent of women who consume two or more drinks per day and men who consume three or more show signs of alcohol- associated liver disease. Excessive alcohol use is also firmly linked to higher risks of at least six types of cancer, long-term brain damage and premature death. The science is also unequivocal that alcohol is an addictive substance that can profoundly disrupt lives. Nearly 28 million people meet criteria for alcohol use disorder, meaning they cannot control their drinking and may experience physical symptoms such as nausea, tremors or agitation when they try to stop. This disease is also associated with serious impairments in work, family and social functioning, often affecting not only the indi- vidual but those around them. What is far less settled is whether low levels of alco- hol consumption pose health risks for people who can moderate their intake. On one side of the debate, the World Health Organization states that “no level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.” Former U.S. Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy issued an advisory last year warning that even small amounts of alcohol may increase cancer risk. Other medical groups have taken a more nuanced view. A 2024 congressionally-commissioned report by a panel at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine found that women who drink moderately have a slightly higher risk of breast cancer than those who never drink. At the same time, the report concluded that, compared with abstaining entirely, moderate alco- hol consumption is associated with lower overall mortal- ity, a finding thought to be driven by fewer cardiovascular deaths. The analysis drew significant criticism, including concerns about industry ties among some panel mem- bers. Subsequently, a June AHA study reached a similar conclusion as the NASEM review: While heavy drinking is clearly linked to heart disease, the study found that con- suming no more than one to two drinks per day does not increase cardiovascular risk and may modestly reduce it. To be clear, no major medical society is telling people who don’t drink to start, or that those who drink rarely should do so more often. Individual circumstances mat- ter. Alcohol can make it harder to lose weight or control blood pressure, and people struggling with either should factor that into their decisions. Those with liver disease or a history of alcohol use disorder may need to avoid alcohol altogether. For many adults, though, the evidence suggests that small amounts of alcohol fall within accept- able levels of risk. Which, in fact, is largely what previous dietary guide- lines already said. Removing clear recommendations in favor of vague statements does not resolve uncertainty. What’s needed is evidence-based guidance that helps people make informed choices appropriate to their own circumstances, which includes whether and how alcohol fits into their lives. Leana S. Wen, a Washington Post contributing columnist who writes the newsletter The Checkup with Dr. Wen, is an emergency physi- cian, clinical associate professor at George Washington University and author of “Lifelines: A Doc- tor’s Journey in the Fight for Public Health.” Previously, she served as Baltimore’s health commissioner. -TheWashington Post By Leana S.Wen News India Times (January 24, 2026 - January 30, 2026) January 30, 2026 4 Commentary WhatWe KnowAnd Don’t KnowAbout Alcohol’s Health Impacts Kingsmill Bond, a strategist at Ember and one of the authors of the report. Ember’s analysis adjusted China’s and India’s gross domestic product for the cost of living, putting India’s income per person of about $11,000 today at the same level as China’s in 2012. That allowed the report’s authors to compare the two economies’ energy systems at a similar level of development. Even as it boosts green electricity, India continues to rely heavily on fossil fuels. The government is considering new plans that would double India’s coal power capacity by 2047, and the country’s oil consumption growth was set to outpace China’s last year. But the South Asian economy’s coal and oil consumption per capita is a frac- tion of what China’s was at similar income levels. In absolute terms, India’s fossil fuel consumption is growing at slower rates than China’s today. That’s mainly because India has ac- cess to solar panels and electric cars at a much lower price than China did about a decade ago. Chinese investments lowered the costs of what experts call “modular technologies” – the production of each solar panel, battery cell and electric car enables engineers to learn how to make it more efficiently. In India, 5% of all new car sales in 2024 were electric. The country’s per-capita consumption of oil for road transport is 60% lower than when China hit that mile- stone. As a result, Bond says that India’s peak road-oil consumption per person will likely never reach Chinese levels. Bond and his team at Ember argue that countries such as India, who don’t have significant domestic fossil-fuel reserves, will become “electrostates” that meet most of their energy needs through elec- tricity generated from clean sources. No country is an electrostate yet, Bond says, but countries are increas- ingly turning to green electricity to power their economies. Nations that are less developed than India will see even more advantages as the cost of electricity tech- nologies, from solar panels and electric vehicles to battery components and min- erals, continue to fall. Neither India nor China is going electric purely to cut emissions or meet climate targets, says Bond. They’re doing so because it makes economic sense, particularly for India, which imports more than 40% of its primary energy in the form of coal, oil and gas, according to the Inter- national Energy Agency. “To grow and have energy indepen- dence, India needs to reduce the terrible burden of fossil-fuel imports worth $150 billion each year,” said Bond. “India needs to find other solutions.” The difficulty is that today China is the world’s biggest manufacturer of all kinds of electricity technologies, which could create a bottleneck in other parts of the world. China has leveraged that dominance, for example to extract tariff concessions from the US in return for rare earths. Chinese companies also control the equipment other countries need to kick- start domestic manufacturing, creating another potential roadblock for would-be electrostates. This month, Indian giant Reliance Industries Ltd. paused plans to make lithium-ion battery cells at home after it failed to secure necessary equip- ment from China. Bond acknowledged that these risks could grow as trade becomes more con- tentious and slow down electrification. Conversely, if countries like India find ways to grow electrotech manufacturing without absolute dependence on Chinese equipment, electrification could speed up further. With the US and Europe continuing to add exclusions for Chinese-linked electrotech, countries like India will have an incentive to invest in their own manu- facturing capacity. “We are probably at a moment of peak Chinese dominance in the electrotech system, as the rest of the world starts to wake up and realize that this is the energy future,” he said. --With assistance from Jeremy Diamond. -Bloomberg India Is Electrifying Faster Than China Using Cheap Green Tech PHOTO:TheWashington Post - Continued From Page 3