As I understand it, yes, it is. Are you really denying that we know whether excessive drinking poses significant health risks? Based on debates about the health risks and benefits of eating eggs? Perhaps you protest too much?
No one here has told you or anyone else to quit drinking. What puzzles me is why you are so intent on dissuading others from considering the risks as they are currently understood.
In saying that epidemiological data shows one thing and one thing only…correlation. It does not show causation. That’s the data we have. Intuitively it makes sense that excessive consumption of anything probably increases risk.
The overwhelming scientific consensus is that alcohol poses a number of health risks, and the risks increase as the amount consumed increases.
Honestly, I am baffled by the level of resistance by many to acknowledge this. I am left wondering if the hold alcohol has over people/society is even stronger than is currently understood?
Please take further back and forth to PM. This is not the Political Forum. Thank you for your understanding.
Gift link …
No political intent here, as some of the subgroups in the survey are lumped by their politics, but overall:
“Nearly 8 in 10 voters approve of Surgeon General Vivek Murthy’s January 3 recommendation to put cancer warning labels on alcoholic beverages, while 2 in 10 disapprove…
Despite the new advisory, two-thirds (66%) say it won’t prompt them to have fewer cocktails, while roughly one-third say it will (31%)…
Although the largest number (35%) says they don’t drink alcohol at all – even when it isn’t dry January. Wine is the most popular choice among women, while for men it’s beer.”
Why labels may not work. It looks like we need a new Ethernet router. Went shopping on Amazon. Found one…comes with this warning
'The solder used in this product contains lead, a chemical known to the State of California to cause birth defects and other reproductive harm. ’
Now, I don’t know how many people will open this thing, remove the solder, heat it, inhale it, bring it to bed with them and love it closely…But I guess we need a warning.
When everything has a cancer label it is just not even considered valid.
I guess soaking the router in wine is definitely a bad idea 
For a more pertinent indication of why the warning might work, the poll cited above indicates that almost a third of people will cut back on alcohol consumption because of the warning.
Also, as was referenced up-thread, over 1/2 of people aren’t even aware of the risk, so at the very least the warning may raise awareness.
It may raise awareness but people are strongly resistant to any information that interferes with their personal habits, particularly when it’s a deeply ingrained enjoyment. I’ve heard the most elaborate rationalizations about why the new warning doesn’t apply to them, and even dismissing it altogether as something that will eventually be debunked. Many people who regularly drink will never let anything as abstract as a warning about future health consequences change their regular routines.
@Joblue , for us one-drink-a-day drinkers there’s a very good reason not to heed a warning that tells us this level of consumption raises the possibility of cancer from 10.0 percent to 11.4 percent: It makes a negligible difference for an activity we greatly enjoy. You can deplore that enjoyment for moral reasons, but it’s hardly accurate to dismiss the choice being made here as an “elaborate rationalization” or a rejection of science or an assessment of the warning as something that “doesn’t apply to them.” No, it’s a rational weighing of risk (very low) as against pleasure (very high). Unless you make the pursuit of health a greater good than the good life itself, a good dry martini, gin of course, shaken not stirred, makes exquisite sense.
Who said I deplore your enjoyment of alcohol for moral (or any reason)? I’m not an abolitionist where alcohol is concerned (as long as there’s no driving or piloting involved). I enjoy an occasional cocktail and/or wine with a dinner out as much as anyone but I’m going to be more mindful of any consumption going forward.
I am just saying that people who have more than casual enjoyment of alcoholic beverages seem to find it easy to ignore any new information that suggests they do any harm. I don’t think that there’s anything the surgeon general could say to change that.
No one is ignoring it. We’re just putting it into perspective. I do the same when I drive my car, step into the shower or swallow a bite of food, each of which increases my risk of morbidity and mortality.
Interesting to see this thread because our 60-year old alcoholic neighbor was just diagnosed with cancer - they don’t know where it “started”.
He seems to otherwise lead a pretty healthy life - not a smoker, not overweight, no drugs, etc.
He drinks a LOT of crappy beer… all day, every day. Not sure if there is any hard liquor, but I don’t think so.
Those would be accidents. Drinking alcohol is not an accident.
And what type of food are you eating that makes you think about cancer risk? Or dying?
Odds of death:
Cancer 1 in 7 (14%). Dying of cancer is #2.
Auto accident 1 in 95 over a lifetime or 1%
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/
Over 5000 people choke to death in the US yearly.
Odds of dying of choking are 1 in 2,461 (.04%). That’s pretty long odds, but if that’s what you want to worry about. 
But drinking alcohol is an intentional act.
I don’t worry about that or about drinking alcohol.
