I suppose you could argue the French would be in worse shape still if they didn't drink so heavily...

They got it backwards. What the study really shows is that smarter people choose to drink. Teetotalers choose to avoid alcohol because thay are not bright enough to appreciate its nuances in the first place.

What we really need now is a study of those who abstain against their will. Do the bright become dull in that event?

Michael Gersh -

Excellent point. Even more unhelpfully, perhaps fools were incapable of drinking half-a-bottle a day; they either drank none at all, or to excess.

Coorelation does not imply causation.

I'd like to know if alcohol has any effect on the ability of researchers to analyze statistics properly.

"They got it backwards. What the study really shows is that smarter people choose to drink."

Hmm, maybe, but then why would the effect be stronger for women?

Tom:

That was a different (no doubt, equally bad) study about mental sharpness and age, possibly just because women live longer?

...

Hey, look, people who have shoes more than 12" long score higher, on average, on mathematical tests than those who do not. Clearly, therefore, we should outfit all elementary school children in clown shoes to improve math education.

My wife says this clearly explains why we're both so brilliant.

My informal research shows that women who drink are more likely to put out than women who don't.

Mike Earl, I understand the difference between correlation and causation. However, as far as I can tell from the study BroJuddBlog linked, the stronger relationship between alcohol consumption and intelligence for women wasn't a conclusion of an older study, but the same one (which was started in 1967). I can't see why women living longer would be relevant here-that would only generate the result if people get smarter as they age, which is, er, dubious.

"Several possible mechanisms might explain an association between alcohol consumption and cognitive function. For example, moderate consumption may be a proxy marker for good mental and physical health and for high socioeconomic position, both of which are related to good cognitive performance (12, 13). Alternatively, alcohol may have a causal effect via improved vascular function, which is itself associated with good cognitive ability in the general population (14–16)."

-- i'd go with the former over the latter, but it's early yet. i'll see what other gems are hiding in this paper.

"The cognitive test battery consisted of five standard tasks chosen to comprehensively evaluate cognitive functioning in middle-aged adults. The choice of this battery rather than a specific test for dementia was guided by an attempt to capture the entire range of cognitive ability and not be restricted by ceiling effects in this middle-aged cohort. The battery was composed of the following tests. The first was a 20-word free-recall test of short-term memory. Participants were presented with a list of 20 one- or two-syllable words at 2-second intervals and were then asked to recall in writing as many of the words as they could, in any order; they had 2 minutes to do so. The AH4 (18) is composed of a series of 65 verbal and mathematical reasoning items of increasing difficulty. This test of inductive reasoning measures the ability to identify patterns and infer principles and rules. Participants had 10 minutes to complete this section. The Mill Hill vocabulary test (19) assesses knowledge of verbal meaning and encompasses the ability to recognize and comprehend words. We used this test in its multiple format, which consists of a list of 33 stimulus words ordered by increasing difficulty and six response choices. Finally, we used two measures of verbal fluency: phonemic and semantic. Phonemic fluency was assessed via “s” words and semantic fluency via “animal” words. Subjects were asked to recall in writing as many words beginning with “s” and as many animal names as they could. One minute was allowed for each test."

-- wow, nice bias towards individuals with higher education background. although these are all civil servants, previously the authors noted this little tidbit

"The attrition rate was higher among older respondents and low socioeconomic status groups."

-- isn't that handy. kick out the old alcoholics, lower class alcoholics, and leave the middle-aged, better educated individuals who on occasion might binge drink. wheeeeeee.

"On the basis of salary and work role, the civil service defines a hierarchy of employment grades ranging from senior executive officers to clerical and support staff. This measure was used to control for socioeconomic position in the analyses"

-- appears they tried to control for socioeconomic position, but i dare say, there are plenty of idiots that get promoted (nepotism) while smarter individuals are left behind to get stuff done. color me unimpressed with controlling by the above methods.

last note, can't paste the charts. it's interesting to look @ this stuff because statistical significance only occurs on the vocabulary meaning/comprehension and AH4 tests (verbal/mathematical reasoning tests), arguably the two most likely influenced by education, as opposed to memory and phonemic/semantic fluency.

interesting study, but rather worthless as far as results are concerned.

I knew my wife didn't drink enough.

As for the froggies, the problem is not the quantity, but the very poor quality of the plonk they imbibe, most of which is hardly fit to be used as windshield washer fluid, that and the unfiltered Gitaines, which cause Carbon Monoxide poisoning.

Look at Churchill, probably drank a bottle of port every day. No plonk in plastic bottles from the medoc. My suggestion is Australian Shiraz or California Zinfandel.

Stay away from the cigaretts, If you must smoke smoke cigars.

In hearty response to this article I went out and bought a bottle of mead. Why mead? Why not. I raise my glass to you all. Wassail!

Thank you, poormedicalstudent, for so thoroughly deconstructing and discrediting this wretched excuse for a "study".

Do the words "Honey, there's a new study that says we ought to drink more" mean nothing to you people?