Would anyone really self report excessive alcohol consumption accurately in China? Isn’t there an incentive to lie to bolster your social credit? Or are there guarantees in China against medical surveillance?
Not really dissagreeing here. But still, the specifics of these variables might derail from the actual question at hand. Do people actually self report accurately regardless of state? That why i just mentioned that i think these specifics aren't quite useful
I think, if it is a reputable research company or university or some such, doing a study, which promises privacy with an NDA, yes. They would self report more accurately.
Is this even a serious question/discussion? I am not pro-china but I can't help but notice the us-induced narrative to just hate-spam russia and china as totalitarian states purely based on the socioeconomic differences. This meme isn't even funny.
I am not claiming that the CCP meetings are full of drunks, I am just asking how far "excessive" alcohol consumption is supposedly accepted behavior. I would be seriously surprised if that was accepted.
Chinese people are just like any other people. That’s also true of most of the planet. Have you spent any time living in East Asia? Perhaps you ought to.
No they're not.
Who the hell would to want to live in a genocidal totalitarian state where people bury their newborn daughters and where 10% of food is made from sewer oil?Also a country where people would rather kill you if they run you over?And where your organs can get harvested by the government?
The only legitimate reason to want to live in China would be to actively work against the government criminal actions but that would also be suicidal.
Russia?? Purely based on socioeconomic differences?
They invaded Crimea and the Donbas in Ukraine. They are literally about to further invade Ukraine and have already amassed 100k troops and heavy weaponry, thousands of Ukrainian lives and their sovereignty be damned…
Just like the US has done on another dosens cases throughout their history. Please don't spam, my statement still stands. Both sides have done wrong, i just get annoyed when i see the obvious "US good - China/Russia bad" narrative being subliminally pushed on irrelevant matters.
No the US is not good, not at all. It's pretty bad, but it's currently not a greater threat than China.
The US is not currently invading Canada or Mexico, or harvesting organs from minorities.
This is not irrelevant, China is the new Nazi Germany and the greatest threat to the world besides global warming.
No I'm not a troll.
You're just really ignorant.
Did you spend the last 5 years living in a cave?
How can you be totally oblivious to the fact that there is millions of people in concentration camps right now? Working as slaves for multinationals or getting their organs harvested by the Chinese government?
There is a literal genocide going on in China right now, this is not hate-spam.
Russia is about to invade a foreign country again.
This isn't the US induced narrative, this is literally what's currently happening according to any informed person that is not being paid/brainwashed by the Chinese or Russian government.
Implying that people here are so happy and proud of being alcoholics...
Yeah, but it was expected to hear some "China bad" stuff in a thread about Chinese people - not even the government or the system. Hence, I dont believe you at all when you say "Government bad, people okay".
I'm sorry, what point are you trying to make? Where is "here" in your first sentence?
The social credit system is somewhat unique, and it is not a stretch to say drinking to excess may not be regarded as a favorable characteristic. This may disincentivize individuals from reporting the behavior. I am similarly curious, and fail to see how this is derogatory to either the Chinese government or its people.
> Drinking alcohol - particularly the potent rice-based spirit bai jiu - plays an important ritualised role in business and government circles in China.
and that is selection.
Chinese were first to rely on fermented grains to be food at least 6k years ago.
good strategy -- there are time when every calorie you can get counts.
bad strategy -- its addictive and toxic.
solution? favor those who could consume it to avoid starvation, but would not touch it otherwise because it is so unpleasant (instant hangover).
Meanwhile brewing alcohol only started maybe 3k years ago in north western Europe so they are still figuring it out.
And poor north America did not stand a chance, bulk fruit/grain preservation via fermentation had never became widespread then it showed up fully refined.
Metabolizing alcohol yields aldehydes, which can and do cause double strand breaks in DNA. We normally have processes to repair the damage but mistakes will be made and build up over time.
There is no minimum safe healthy amount to consume.
Drinking alcohol just beats starving, nothing more.
The body produces alcohol when oxydising carbohydrates. Granted, the amount is small (few grams), but it indicates that there is in fact a dose to consume that stays below the saturation limit for the body to safely deal with alcohol.
I would assume that alcohol consumption makes people act less rationally, like having sexual intercourse when it would be better not to, leading to unplanned pregnancies. Evolution tends to favor behaviours which lead to more offspring.
I am not advocating this in any way of course, just pointing out why getting drunk might have evolutionary benefits besides not starving to death.
> Chinese were first to rely on fermented grains to be food at least 6k years ago.
Not really. We found vessels that are that old, and that contained fermented grain, the rest is extrapolation. There is also evidence of some kind of beer making in Egypt not that long afterwards. Fermented things are present in almost any culture you could care to have a look at, even the remotest Amazonian tribes.
> solution? favor those who could consume it to avoid starvation, but would not touch it otherwise because it is so unpleasant (instant hangover).
6k years is awfully short for evolution to drive out a bit of genotype in a whole population. Also, again the same thing was happening in Egypt at around the same time, and we don’t have any proof that it did not happen elsewhere as well.
Also, a pet peeve of mine: evolution is not sentient. There is no being that “favor” or drive to extinction according to a pre-existing plan.
> Meanwhile brewing alcohol only started maybe 3k years ago in north western Europe so they are still figuring it out.
It does not work like that, there is no line in the sand for evolution to have worked instead of being “figuring it out”.
For some versions of a gene to be selected, you also need a driving force, in the form of either improved fitness in some environments, or the number of children. Alcohol causing a tiny increase in absolute terms of some specific types of cancers, that are not all that likely to kill someone before they reproduce, seems quite unlikely to be that driving force.
OTOH, alcohol is well known to increase social contacts, which is likely to result in more offsprings (see e.g. studies on alcohol consumption and teenage pregnancy rates).
Overall, this theory sounds truthy and consistent with a pop-culture understanding of evolution, but is not quite consistent with our understanding of history or biology.
Not disputing you. Just wanna look at the point on 6000 years for evolution. 6000 years likely has 200 generations or more. Is 200 gen not significant enough to evolutionary changes?
> it has been difficult to establish whether alcohol directly causes cancer, or if it is linked to possible confounding factors (such as smoking and diet) that could generate biased results.
> It was also unclear whether alcohol is linked to other types of cancer, including lung and stomach cancers.
If smoking was a confounding variable, shouldn't we see an increased risk of smoking-related cancers?
He was saying that there should be an increased % of smoking-related cancers among people who drink, due to smoking smoking being a confounding factor when trying to determine causality with alcohol-related cancers.
Two genetic variants that alter alcohol metabolism, ALDH2-rs671 and ADH1B-rs1229984, can modify oesophageal cancer risk associated with alcohol consumption in East Asians, but their associations with other cancers remain uncertain.
This would be born out with a lower average cancer rate in populations that do not drink alcohol. So one would expect cultures that do not of forbid drinking would have a lower rate of cancer. Alas it is hard to nail down that date due to various factors and types of cancer and equally, associated health care. So a high cancer death rate in one country compared to another, maybe due to health care as well, so really gets down to diagnosis of cancer and types of cancer. Saying cancer is a bit like saying the flu, there are many variations under that catch-all imbrella label.
Though mindful, health care and with that a better health system would detect more cancer and mind-set of people to seek or be able to approach a health system is a huge factor that only add's to muddy the waters. Hence for me, whilst this maybe a factor, has the data been sanatised for example those that drink and smoke? Those that drink and enviromental factors (air and water quality) and more so, standards of living. Many drink to offset stress caused by many factors and without the details it is hard to nail things down.
So would be more interested in a more granular study and per country's Worldwide. Though if you use the link and look at Alcohol and then the Cancer map, there is defiantly something there. Though very much mindful that one countries reporting of data can be less accurate than another's, as we have seen with Covid reporting early on.
the study of mormon communities did actually show a lower cancer rate. I can't find the article anymore, but it's visible in breast cancer rate (I don't remember what the study was controlled for).
I don't know, it's all about regression on other factors.
I'm pretty sure you can find a drinking test population in California that is wealthy and non-smokers too. And you can eliminate coffee with a muslim population.
I’ve often heard it mentioned that the church of Latter Day Saints is a religious culture that abstain from alcohol and caffeine, and their life expectancy is many years longer than average, by a decade or so, even when they live amongst others in the same country and otherwise have similar environmental influences.
There’s handful of places in the world that were believed to an have an unusually high number of extremely old people and it’s like Loma Linda, California, Okinawa , Japan, Sardinia, Italy, Nicoya, Costa Rica, and Icaria, Greece.
Turned out that Loma Linda (because of the Adventists) was the only legit one and the others were just a result of bad record keeping/fraud (people pretending dead relatives were alive to collect pensions).
Comparing Islamic societies (alcohol forbidden) with others should be a good basis for research. Also, non Islamic sub cultures in Islamic countries (Copts in Egypt, Maronites in Lebanon).
Causal inference is unfortunately not that simple. If you find differences in cancer rates, it could be due to alcohol consumption or any number of other factors that differ between Islamic societies and other societies. You can try to control those differences statistically but since the set of possible differences is pretty much open-ended, it’s incredibly difficult to say the least.
Not really, because they are more likely to lie about how much alcohol and or drugs they take. I have lived in two Muslim countries now and I don't know any Muslims who don't drink in private. I doubt they'd admit to it on a survey though.
You should know me then. No drugs, no alcohol. Only caffeine which I am trying to downregulate with. Though perhaps you should have tried in the mosque rather than the bar :)
I'm 40 years old who is a muslim. I spent half of my life living in a muslim/arab country and the other hald in the west. Here is what I've seen:
1- Of all the people I know where I grew up in the arab country, probably only 2-3 drunk. This does correlate with the data [1]. But those 2-3 people did drink heavily. Could you back your personal experience with some stats?
2- Alcohol in the arab world has a different meaning. In the arab world it would be more like: "hey there is this poison, let's drink to forget about my issues and lets do that in hiding". While in the western world, it's more "let's meet for a drink and have a little fun".
3- There is no drinking culture in the arab world. This is because there are limited number of bars/pubs and people do not consume it openly. Not in weddings, gatherings or barbeques. A minority will come already drunk to a wedding (see point 1)
4- Islam is big on forbiding Alcohol. Not only that, but there is this idea that alcohol can stay up to 40 days in your body (never verfied this claim). Hence why a lot of people who actually drink, stop drinking 40 days before Ramadan starts. While a lot of muslims don't pray, the majority do fast and hold onto Ramadan. Bars and Pubs actually close a month before Ramadan too. The drinkers I knew, did actually follow this rule.
5- Yes, I know, you probably knew that guy in high school who was an arab and a heavy drinker. And that is correct. But the data and what I've seen in arab countries correlate more with point 1 above. Alcohol is so frowned upon, that even people who like to drink don't want to show it to their kids or neighbors. It's rare to have an arab family buy alcohol and put it in the fridge. Alcohol is also not available in supermarkets or anywhere except in bars. I lived in >1mil city and we had 3 bars.
6- There is a weird association in arab countries between Alcohol and Violance/Agression. WHich is some time true.
I never understood this obssession with Alcohol. Because I just wasn't used to it. It's so bizzare that I had to explain myself all the time on why I'm not drinking.
I don't have stats on Smoking/Tabacco. but from the islamic perspective 'Any drink that intoxicates is unlawful.' and alcohol/drugs were specifically mentioned in the quran. This is why Smoking/Tabacco only was forbidden by scholars through a fatwa recently[1]. Saudi Arabia mentioned in the article as one of the highest smokers (23 rd) worldwide.
What the scholars did is basically infer that since smoking is harmful to the body, and since Islam prohibits harming your mind and body, smoking was then considered haram.
Muslim smokers would then just consider it a lesser sin, compared to Alcohol/Gambling/Interest..etc.
The UAE is certainly a muslim/arab country and alcohol is certainly available outside of bars. And I would say from my experiences in Dubai, a lot more than "1 or 2" muslims are getting drunk here.
I don't have stats no, just personal experience. It could certainly be a reflection on the fact that I drink, and in both the UAE and Malaysia my friends also moved in multicultural circles. Maybe it's similar to people who take drugs in Western societies - they tend to hang out together.
Of course being a Muslim and actually practicing Islam are two different things.
Lebanon has a drinking culture, as does Turkey, Syria, etc., so that's not really the best example. Drinks such as anise-based spirits are popular across that part of the Mediterranean.
In this study, rate of alcohol abuse is lower in Muslims than Druze or Christians, but the rate of alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder wasn't too different.
Life (aging) is a direct cause of cancer. And we can't change that unless we have some sort of nanobots constantly repairing DNA damage in every single cell of our body.
How's that related to this story? One outcome might have multiple factors affecting its probability of ocurrence. Just because you can't change life doesn't mean you can't stop alcohol. Life isn't 1 and 0 dude.
You realize the human body has a process thst cleans out damaged and misbehaving cells. Autophagy. This process is kicked off during periods of not eating.
We both expose ourselves to too Many toxins, eat too often, and don't get the right balance of nutrients over the long term.
If you can positively impact these things, then you can lengthen health span and lifespan.
I can imagine aging being a technically solvable problem and maybe some of us will live to see it.
But if people didn't age, then there would still be a base rate of mortality from illness and accidents, and so for any arbitrary probability (99.9%, etc) there would be a maximum age that one could reasonably expect to live to.
For instance, if the only thing people ever died of was car accidents, at a rate of 20 per 100,000 people per year, then it would still be very unlikely for anyone to live more than 20,000 years. That's a long time, but it's not millions or billions of years, much less eternity.
Furthermore, if nothing but accidents killed people we might become extremely conservative and do practically nothing for thousands of years. Do I want to use the stairs and risk 99% of my potential lifespan?
So maybe one could say that biology and even physics don't ensure death, probability does.
Yes and no. While some cells may be impossible to rejuvenate otherwise, there are few reasons why we cannot just exchange many organs for dish grown ones, i.e artificially grown kidneys. For others like blood stem cells, we many extinguish the existing ones and add replace them by fresh ones that lack any pathogenic somatic mutations every so often. Even parts of the brain may be replaced one by one, though I assume such a technology is quite far away (compared to the other two that may be possible in the next 2-3 decades).
Ok, not good finding that link while suffering from such a terrible hangover from last night as I am right now.
I’ve been always concerned about alcohol and health, personally more on the cognitive side than the physical one. I’ve tried to “quit” many times but the thing is that absolutely every social event where I live (UK) involves alcohol in one way or the other. Is crazy how culturally accepted is around the world. You can see it everywhere and the campaign for normalizing its consumption is very obvious. I would definitely like to quit. Is a habit that has only given me bad things or directly nothing at all.
Anyways, I hope one day I’ll find a good balance between not drinking at all while not being seen as a weirdo when meeting with friends.
Cancer seems to increase with age, so could we not conclude the opposite, that alcohol somehow aids survival?
Studies should not come with conclusions. Just the data, and unbiased analysis of the data if you must. No one statistical study can "confirm" anything. This is why science is so broke.
It is all about the dose! 50 ml of alcohol a day have benefits and I know a lot of 90+ people who drink moderately on a daily basis. According to Ray Peat, it dissolve lipofuscin. There are studies [0]. The issue is not alcohol, but the lack of self-control!
What a sensational title about a 14% correlation on a proxy variable! I wish I could sometimes turn into a journalist and sell my model with 30% MAPE (mean absolute percentage error) to management like this.
This is why popular medical press should not be read at all, because it announces another cure of cancer or of aids every day, yet those are just preliminary in-silico researches (simulation of chemical reaction), 90% of which fail at in-vitro stage, another 9% at in-vivo.
90 comments
[ 6.1 ms ] story [ 161 ms ] threadWould people really self report excessive alcohol comsumption accurately?
This would not happen elsewhere, and thus, is a valid question. Would this effect, uniquely, reported numbers in China?
Thus the parent post made a sensible logical point.
Sorry for not being clear about that.
They invaded Crimea and the Donbas in Ukraine. They are literally about to further invade Ukraine and have already amassed 100k troops and heavy weaponry, thousands of Ukrainian lives and their sovereignty be damned…
This is not irrelevant, China is the new Nazi Germany and the greatest threat to the world besides global warming.
Then it must be the drugs. Try to get it together mate.
Are you denying the fact that a genocide is currently happening in China?
Or are you just a brainwashed Chinese national who wants to cry because not everyone worship the CCP?
This isn't the US induced narrative, this is literally what's currently happening according to any informed person that is not being paid/brainwashed by the Chinese or Russian government.
Drinking != excessive consumption. Telling us drinking is not stigmatized, is meaningless.
Yeah, but it was expected to hear some "China bad" stuff in a thread about Chinese people - not even the government or the system. Hence, I dont believe you at all when you say "Government bad, people okay".
The social credit system is somewhat unique, and it is not a stretch to say drinking to excess may not be regarded as a favorable characteristic. This may disincentivize individuals from reporting the behavior. I am similarly curious, and fail to see how this is derogatory to either the Chinese government or its people.
from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/8350170.stm There have been quite a number of stories of death from this. Your assumptions about China are out of sync with reality.
See the reference section for supporting research.
good strategy -- there are time when every calorie you can get counts.
bad strategy -- its addictive and toxic.
solution? favor those who could consume it to avoid starvation, but would not touch it otherwise because it is so unpleasant (instant hangover).
Meanwhile brewing alcohol only started maybe 3k years ago in north western Europe so they are still figuring it out.
And poor north America did not stand a chance, bulk fruit/grain preservation via fermentation had never became widespread then it showed up fully refined.
Metabolizing alcohol yields aldehydes, which can and do cause double strand breaks in DNA. We normally have processes to repair the damage but mistakes will be made and build up over time.
There is no minimum safe healthy amount to consume.
Drinking alcohol just beats starving, nothing more.
I am not advocating this in any way of course, just pointing out why getting drunk might have evolutionary benefits besides not starving to death.
> Chinese were first to rely on fermented grains to be food at least 6k years ago.
Not really. We found vessels that are that old, and that contained fermented grain, the rest is extrapolation. There is also evidence of some kind of beer making in Egypt not that long afterwards. Fermented things are present in almost any culture you could care to have a look at, even the remotest Amazonian tribes.
> solution? favor those who could consume it to avoid starvation, but would not touch it otherwise because it is so unpleasant (instant hangover).
6k years is awfully short for evolution to drive out a bit of genotype in a whole population. Also, again the same thing was happening in Egypt at around the same time, and we don’t have any proof that it did not happen elsewhere as well.
Also, a pet peeve of mine: evolution is not sentient. There is no being that “favor” or drive to extinction according to a pre-existing plan.
> Meanwhile brewing alcohol only started maybe 3k years ago in north western Europe so they are still figuring it out.
It does not work like that, there is no line in the sand for evolution to have worked instead of being “figuring it out”.
For some versions of a gene to be selected, you also need a driving force, in the form of either improved fitness in some environments, or the number of children. Alcohol causing a tiny increase in absolute terms of some specific types of cancers, that are not all that likely to kill someone before they reproduce, seems quite unlikely to be that driving force.
OTOH, alcohol is well known to increase social contacts, which is likely to result in more offsprings (see e.g. studies on alcohol consumption and teenage pregnancy rates).
Overall, this theory sounds truthy and consistent with a pop-culture understanding of evolution, but is not quite consistent with our understanding of history or biology.
> It was also unclear whether alcohol is linked to other types of cancer, including lung and stomach cancers.
If smoking was a confounding variable, shouldn't we see an increased risk of smoking-related cancers?
I.e. People who drink, smoke.
Two genetic variants that alter alcohol metabolism, ALDH2-rs671 and ADH1B-rs1229984, can modify oesophageal cancer risk associated with alcohol consumption in East Asians, but their associations with other cancers remain uncertain.
In my search for data, about the most intersting for visualisation would be https://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/all-cance...
Though mindful, health care and with that a better health system would detect more cancer and mind-set of people to seek or be able to approach a health system is a huge factor that only add's to muddy the waters. Hence for me, whilst this maybe a factor, has the data been sanatised for example those that drink and smoke? Those that drink and enviromental factors (air and water quality) and more so, standards of living. Many drink to offset stress caused by many factors and without the details it is hard to nail things down.
So would be more interested in a more granular study and per country's Worldwide. Though if you use the link and look at Alcohol and then the Cancer map, there is defiantly something there. Though very much mindful that one countries reporting of data can be less accurate than another's, as we have seen with Covid reporting early on.
I.e. https://www.deseret.com/2010/4/13/20375744/ucla-study-proves...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventh-day_Adventist_Church#H...
Turned out that Loma Linda (because of the Adventists) was the only legit one and the others were just a result of bad record keeping/fraud (people pretending dead relatives were alive to collect pensions).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_zone
1- Of all the people I know where I grew up in the arab country, probably only 2-3 drunk. This does correlate with the data [1]. But those 2-3 people did drink heavily. Could you back your personal experience with some stats?
2- Alcohol in the arab world has a different meaning. In the arab world it would be more like: "hey there is this poison, let's drink to forget about my issues and lets do that in hiding". While in the western world, it's more "let's meet for a drink and have a little fun".
3- There is no drinking culture in the arab world. This is because there are limited number of bars/pubs and people do not consume it openly. Not in weddings, gatherings or barbeques. A minority will come already drunk to a wedding (see point 1)
4- Islam is big on forbiding Alcohol. Not only that, but there is this idea that alcohol can stay up to 40 days in your body (never verfied this claim). Hence why a lot of people who actually drink, stop drinking 40 days before Ramadan starts. While a lot of muslims don't pray, the majority do fast and hold onto Ramadan. Bars and Pubs actually close a month before Ramadan too. The drinkers I knew, did actually follow this rule.
5- Yes, I know, you probably knew that guy in high school who was an arab and a heavy drinker. And that is correct. But the data and what I've seen in arab countries correlate more with point 1 above. Alcohol is so frowned upon, that even people who like to drink don't want to show it to their kids or neighbors. It's rare to have an arab family buy alcohol and put it in the fridge. Alcohol is also not available in supermarkets or anywhere except in bars. I lived in >1mil city and we had 3 bars.
6- There is a weird association in arab countries between Alcohol and Violance/Agression. WHich is some time true.
I never understood this obssession with Alcohol. Because I just wasn't used to it. It's so bizzare that I had to explain myself all the time on why I'm not drinking.
[1] https://ourworldindata.org/alcohol-consumption
What the scholars did is basically infer that since smoking is harmful to the body, and since Islam prohibits harming your mind and body, smoking was then considered haram.
Muslim smokers would then just consider it a lesser sin, compared to Alcohol/Gambling/Interest..etc.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_tobacco
"Why do you always invite at least two muslims to your apartment? Because if you only invite one, they'll drink all your beer."
https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/7zotqa/how_do_you_ke...
Of course being a Muslim and actually practicing Islam are two different things.
http://www.lpalebanon.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Prevale...
In this study, rate of alcohol abuse is lower in Muslims than Druze or Christians, but the rate of alcohol dependence or alcohol use disorder wasn't too different.
We both expose ourselves to too Many toxins, eat too often, and don't get the right balance of nutrients over the long term.
If you can positively impact these things, then you can lengthen health span and lifespan.
Life (aging) is a direct cause of death. And we can’t change that. Might as well die.
But if people didn't age, then there would still be a base rate of mortality from illness and accidents, and so for any arbitrary probability (99.9%, etc) there would be a maximum age that one could reasonably expect to live to.
For instance, if the only thing people ever died of was car accidents, at a rate of 20 per 100,000 people per year, then it would still be very unlikely for anyone to live more than 20,000 years. That's a long time, but it's not millions or billions of years, much less eternity.
Furthermore, if nothing but accidents killed people we might become extremely conservative and do practically nothing for thousands of years. Do I want to use the stairs and risk 99% of my potential lifespan?
So maybe one could say that biology and even physics don't ensure death, probability does.
But this should ha e implications for mouthwash too
I know I've heard the phrases "mouth cancer" and "skin cancer". The former probably in connection with chewing tobacco.
I genuinely don't know the answer to whether mouthwash could be harmful, assuming one doesn't swallow. But I've thought of the question before.
https://www.nature.com/articles/sj.bdj.2009.1014
I’ve been always concerned about alcohol and health, personally more on the cognitive side than the physical one. I’ve tried to “quit” many times but the thing is that absolutely every social event where I live (UK) involves alcohol in one way or the other. Is crazy how culturally accepted is around the world. You can see it everywhere and the campaign for normalizing its consumption is very obvious. I would definitely like to quit. Is a habit that has only given me bad things or directly nothing at all.
Anyways, I hope one day I’ll find a good balance between not drinking at all while not being seen as a weirdo when meeting with friends.
Studies should not come with conclusions. Just the data, and unbiased analysis of the data if you must. No one statistical study can "confirm" anything. This is why science is so broke.
[0]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/089158...
This is why popular medical press should not be read at all, because it announces another cure of cancer or of aids every day, yet those are just preliminary in-silico researches (simulation of chemical reaction), 90% of which fail at in-vitro stage, another 9% at in-vivo.