This study uses an inscrutable statistical model to arrive at this conclusion. On the other hand I have yet to see an epidemiological study that shows abstainin

This study uses an inscrutable statistical model to arrive at this conclusion. On the other hand I have yet to see an epidemiological study that shows abstaining results in a lower hazard ratio than moderate drinking. Consider the following study: https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(18)30134-X.pdf https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736... This study only calculates HRs between current drinkers, finding that the lowest mortality rates occur below 100g/week of alcohol. The issues with the conclusions of this study (issues which are apparent in many other alcohol studies) are addressed in the follow-up here: https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(18)32202-5.pdf https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736... I'm sure that similar issues exist with "Alcohol use and burden for 195 countries and territories" but the statistical model is too complicated to really see what's going on. I agree that at a population level alcohol is bad for longevity but at an individual level there seems to exist no evidence to suggest that moderate drinking is.