warning! this report is bogus

Last week, the Surgeon General announced that alcohol consumption is harmful to health. Specifically, Dr. Vivek Murthy’s report recommends labeling alcohol with a warning, indicating that drinking could increase the risk of cancer. The report states that even "one or fewer drinks per day" can lead to an increased cancer risk. It’s crucial not to confuse this announcement with the widely known fact that excessive drinking can cause various illnesses, including cancer. The Surgeon's General’s claim is that even moderate drinking poses a risk.

Interestingly, just before Dr. Murthy's report, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released a congressionally mandated report suggesting insufficient evidence linking moderate drinking to the seven types of cancer mentioned by the Surgeon General.

So why the conflicting claims? Is one report flawed or biased? How can an everyday American, not trained in science or medicine, determine which one to trust? The answer lies in the motivations behind each report.

Examining Dr. Murthy’s track record raises questions. In 2021, he issued a report stating that "health misinformation" is a "serious threat," pushing for social media platforms to redesign their algorithms to combat misinformation. Essentially, Dr. Murthy used this report to advance a political agenda that aimed to silence dissenting voices in the medical and scientific community—voices that often presented valid truths about COVID treatment options and potential risks associated with the COVID-19 vaccine.

In 2022, Dr. Murthy produced a report on "workplace mental health," advocating for paid family leave and higher minimum wages. This report seemed to ignore the influence of factors such as inflation driven by the Biden administration, a higher education system that inadequately prepares young professionals, ineffective human resources departments too focused on diversity and equity rather than fostering productive environments, and parenting styles that prioritize friendship over guidance.

I could provide numerous examples of how Dr. Murthy has utilized his position to promote a political agenda centered on government intervention and liberal ideology, which often fail to address the real issues.

It’s important to note that the medical and scientific community has also been affected by political influences, including those from the right. This issue isn't new and dates back centuries. A famous example is Galileo, who faced backlash from fellow scientists for supporting Copernicus' heliocentric theory. Eventually, he was placed under house arrest for challenging the prevailing authority of the Church.

The call to "trust the science" is inherently flawed, as scientific inquiry is grounded in continual questioning of observations and beliefs in pursuit of truth and discovery.

Does moderate alcohol consumption increase the risk of cancer? Perhaps, but I am not a doctor. What I do know is that Dr. Murthy's reports seem more politically motivated than scientifically grounded. Is it any wonder that many people have become skeptical of "the experts"?

I have always loved science, and perhaps, had I received encouragement as a young woman, I might have pursued a career in physics or astronomy. I believe we should not disregard medicine or science, abandon doctor's visits, or claim that the Earth is flat. Instead, we should advocate for a well-informed public.

Currently, the Department of Agriculture and Health and Human Services is drafting the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Although these guidelines are not legally binding, they have historically influenced policy that eventually becomes law. This is yet another aspect of the administrative state. Studies produced by federal agencies and political appointees are often swayed by special interest groups and the ruling political party, significantly impacting everyday Americans.

For what it's worth, if you can abstain from alcohol, that is the best choice. However, moderation is typically preferable to overindulgence. The same principle applies to any report from a government agency or political appointee.