What the study actually finds is that heavy drinkers who live to age 55 live longer than nondrinkers who live to age 55. This might be because heavy drinking confers some health benefit, or some behavioral benefit (couch surfing vs outdoor activity). But to me, the more likely explanation is that heavy drinking selects for people who are genetically or otherwise predisposed to live longer (by killing the rest before age 55).
Imagine a headline that read "Smoking correlates with increased life expectancy among centenarians." You probably wouldn't conclude based on that that smoking is a good idea.
Imagine a headline that read "Smoking correlates with increased life expectancy among centenarians."
On aside topic, I've heard from three different people (each around 60) that they plan on taking up smoking (cigars, at least, in one case) when the reach 70 or 80.
Interesting idea. Me, I'm so glad to be free of the headaches of maintaining a smoking habit I can't see ever going back, even if any health risk was irrelevant.
I don't actually know. I'm just saying that it's one possible interpretation, and that it seems to me like a more likely explanation than heavy drinking extending your life.
The point is that harsh selection early in life means that anyone who survives to late life will be hardier. This has been shown in studies of, for example, plants that survive heavy storms as seedlings. Is heavy drinking harsh enough to show this effect? I'm not sure.
Imagine a headline that read "Smoking correlates with increased life expectancy among centenarians." You probably wouldn't conclude based on that that smoking is a good idea.