[robbick]

Indeed, it is always good to know the science but we should balance that against the benefits. I like this quote from David Spiegelhalter[0]

"Given the pleasure presumably associated with moderate drinking, claiming there is no 'safe' level does not seem an argument for abstention," he said.

"There is no safe level of driving, but the government does not recommend that people avoid driving.

"Come to think of it, there is no safe level of living, but nobody would recommend abstention."

[0]: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45283401

[politelemon]

I don't see it as a good quote and was puzzled as to its inclusion. It is simply a play on the words 'safe level' and equating it to other things. My best guess is that it's meant to appeal to the "I hear you but wish to continue drinking anyway" thought process, which is fair. This kind of equation is not.

[bodge5000]

Not necessarily. Driving for example is dangerous, a fatal crash can occur even if all parties involved are driving safely and are in complete control, and for that matter anything has a risk carried with it, but you balance out the risks and the rewards, just as you would with alcohol

[greatquux]

I do see it as a good quote and wasn't puzzled. Perhaps we simply disagree?