Ethics News
News: Addiction (excluding Smoking)
>> = Important Articles; ** = Major Articles
Study: Alcohol Linked to Breast Cancer (980218)
Further Confirmation: Wine is Good (920220)
U.S. parents sending teens mixed message on alcohol (980528)
‘Designated Driver’ for Teens Is Lax Phrase (980930)
The Connection Between Lifestyle and Liver (990504)
The Guts of the Story (990504)
Smoking Pot Raises Psychosis Risk in Youths (Foxnews, 041201)
Alcohol May Fuel Cancer Tumor Growth (Foxnews, 041213)
Youth Smoking, Drug Use Down Again (Foxnews, 041221)
Study: Majority of Protestants Say Alcohol Consumption is Not a Sin (Christian Post, 070926)
Alcohol-related deaths on the rise worldwide: report (National Post, 090625)
Poll: 2 in 5 Evangelical Leaders Drink Alcohol (Christian Post, 100625)
==============================
CHICAGO — Women who consume two to five alcoholic drinks a day have a 41% higher risk of developing breast cancer than do non-drinkers, according to a study published Tuesday.
“Reduction of regular alcohol consumption in women is likely to reduce breast cancer risk,” said the report from the Harvard School of Public Health.
But it added that the impact of alcohol consumption remained complex because other studies have found it is linked to a reduced risk of heart disease in women.
“Ultimately, analyses simultaneously considering cancer, cardiovascular disease and other end points, such as traffic accidents and domestic trauma, are required to define the costs and benefits of alcohol consumption,” said the report published in this week’s Journal of the American Medical Association.
The findings were based on an analysis of six studies in Canada, Sweden, the Netherlands and the United States that involved 322,647 women evaluated over 11 years.
Women who consumed the equivalent of two to four bottles of beer, two to five glasses of wine or two to four shots of liquor a day had a 41% higher risk of invasive breast than did non-drinkers, the report said.
======================================
PARIS — Wine drunk in moderation significantly reduces the risk of fatal illnesses, including cancer and heart disease, according to a new French medical report.
The survey, which tracked 34,000 men from eastern France between 1978 and 1993, showed that those who drank two or three glasses of wine a day had a 30% lower mortality rate than those who were either abstemious or heavy drinkers.
Doctor Serge Renaud, who carried out the study which was published this week, said cases of cancer among moderate wine drinkers fell by 20% compared with other groups, while incidents of heart attacks and brain hemorrhages dropped by 20 to 30%.
The report said its findings related to all social groups, regardless of people’s weight, smoking habits or physical fitness.
However, Renaud was at pains to point out that heavy drinkers faced above average mortality rates.
“It would be catastrophic if our results were misinterpreted and people began drinking (a lot of) wine because they think its good for ones’ health,” Renaud told Le Figaro daily. “What we are talking about is very limited consummation.”
The survey, which was also published in the U.S. magazine Epidemiology Wednesday, followed men who were aged between 40 and 60 in 1978. By 1993, 2,642 of the original 34,000 sample had died.
Earlier this week, a Harvard School of Public Health report said women who consume two to five alcoholic drinks a day have a 41% higher risk of developing breast cancer than do non-drinkers.
But it added that the impact of alcohol consumption remained complex as other studies have found it was linked to a reduced risk of heart disease in women.
======================================
WASHINGTON, May 28 — Most parents are sending their teenagers mixed messages about drinking, saying they prefer they would not drink but telling them to call for a ride if they do, according to a survey published on Thursday.
“We’re very concerned that parents are not able to give a clear message to young people,” Ariel White-Kovach, executive director of the Hazelden Center for Youth & Families, said in a telephone interview.
“If you tell them ‘I don’t want you to drink, but...’ or even if you’re silent on the subject, that will be interpreted as approval,” she said.
The survey was conducted by the Hazelden Foundation, a nonprofit national organization specializing in chemical dependency and related disorders.
It found that 92% of parents said they would not allow their children to drink on prom night, but 32.9% would allow their teenagers to stay out on prom night even if their son or daughter told them that alcohol would be part of the evening’s celebration.
Fewer than one in four parents said they would forbid their children to drink alcohol before they reach legal age.
More parents, 60%, tell their children they would prefer that they not drink but encourage them to call for a ride if they do become intoxicated.
“They’re trying to take care of their children’s safety, but the message needs to be clear. It’s clear from the survey that a high majority of parents do not want their kids to use alcohol,” Kovach said.
Kovach suggested the following message as an example: “I do not want you to use alcohol. It is illegal, it is unhealthy and it is unsafe for you to use alcohol before you are 21.”
Kovach said it was also important for parents to decide on consequences — such as suspending the teen-ager’s driving privileges — and to be prepared to enforce them.
The Hazelden survey was conducted by telephone on April 8-9 among a random group of 500 parents. The margin of error was plus or minus 4.5%age points.
======================================
CHICAGO — A survey of teen drinking found good news and bad news — more than half of the youths ages 16 to 19 said they drank during the preceding month, but nearly two-thirds said they always appoint a designated driver.
Still, even the good news in Tuesday’s study had a twist: 80% think it’s fine to drink as long as there is a designated driver, and nearly half think that designated drivers can still drink.
“We’re not impressing on kids the fact that getting drunk can be dangerous,” said Dr. Richard Heyman, a Cincinnati pediatrician and chairman of the substance abuse committee at the American Academy of Pediatrics, which released the study.
The results mirror a much larger government-supported study of 51,000 high school students released in December.
The telephone survey, conducted between Aug. 24 and Sept. 3, has an margin of error of plus or minus 4%age points.
Both surveys found that teens generally drink to get drunk, with the new results showing nearly 30% down six or more drinks each outing. Fifty-one percent said they consume between two and five drinks at a sitting.
“They don’t stand around like an adult with their beer in their hand at a cocktail party. They take a six-pack,” Heyman said. “They are mind-altering drinkers.”
Findings include:
—Sixty-one percent said they’d consumed alcohol within the preceding month.
—Nearly a third mistakenly think a can of beer is less intoxicating than a shot of vodka.
—Boys and girls average about the same number of drinking days a month — 5.6 days and 5.2 days respectively. Boys are more likely than girls to have had six or more drinks in the preceding month — 32% vs. 22%.
—The average age when drinking begins is 14.
—Sixty-four percent say they avoid drunken driving by always appointing a designated driver when drinking with friends.
—Eighty percent think it’s OK to drink with friends as long as there is a designated driver.
“Teens have the unfortunate misconception that if they designate a driver, they can still drink as much as they like,” said Dr. Joseph R. Zanga, the academy’s president.
Only 2% think designated drivers can drink five or more drinks. Nineteen percent think one drink is acceptable for a designated driver, and 17% think two drinks is OK.
Only about half “agree that a designated driver should not have a drink. Usually they just mean, ‘Someone who drinks less than I do,”‘ Heyman said.
======================================
NEW YORK — Cirrhosis of the liver is a disease normally associated with alcoholism. But research has found that drinking alcohol regularly the way the French and Italians do — in many cases about a liter of wine a day — can also lead to liver disease.
In one study, conducted by Dr. Charles Lieber of Mt. Sinai School of Medicine in New York, people who had rich diets supplemented with minerals and vitamins were given a daily dose of alcohol that was less than the amount needed to produce intoxication (a blood alcohol level of .08%, or four drinks in an hour).
“After 18 days, subjects showed an eight-fold increase in liver fat,” the pre-condition for cirrhosis, Dr. Lieber said.
The reason for “fatty liver” is that alcohol prevents this organ from using its usual fuel — fat. Instead, the liver uses alcohol as fuel.
“There is a price to pay for this adaptation,” Lieber explained. “When you burn alcohol, you are not burning fat.”
This alcohol-burning reaction is what causes the liver to metabolize alcohol into a toxic, carcinogenic compound called acetaldehyde, and produce five to 10 times more of the carcinogenic enzyme cytochrome P450 2E1.
This enzyme “not only causes liver injury,” Lieber said, “it increases the vulnerability of the alcoholic to the [physically damaging effects of] illicit drugs, analgesics, Tylenol, carcinogens and vitamin A.”
==============================
NEW YORK — Alcohol may be famous for damaging the liver, but it does a lot of its dirty work in the gut.
Although about 25% of alcohol is absorbed into the bloodstream through the stomach, most of it is metabolized and absorbed through the small intestine, according to Dr. Mikko Salaspuro, a professor of alcohol diseases at the University of Helsinki in Finland.
There, intestinal bacteria turn the alcohol into a “toxic, carcinogenic” chemical called acetaldehyde, Salaspuro said.
Acetaldehyde has been shown in test-tube studies to damage DNA. It also can inhibit the production of folate, a vitamin found in green leafy vegetables and some grains that is important in building healthy cell membranes.
Although acetaldehyde is broken down by an enzyme, alcohol dehydrogenase, many people are genetically deficient in this enzyme. “Japanese alcoholics who have this deficiency may have from three to 50 times cancer risks in certain areas,” Salaspuro said.
One way to stop the gut from producing excess acetaldehyde is to treat a person with antibiotics, which kill off gut microbes. Salaspuro and his colleagues gave subjects the antibiotic Ciprofloxacine twice a day for seven days and greatly decreased the acetaldehyde-producing activity in the gut.
But these antibiotics also can kill off beneficial bacteria — and overuse of antibiotics can lead to resistance, so they are not necessarily the solution to the problem. “Another possibility would be to use some other bacteria, so-called ‘healthy bacteria,’ to counter the reaction,” Salaspuro suggested.
==============================
Smoking pot increases psychosis risk in young people, especially among those who are already vulnerable to psychosis.
That’s the conclusion of a study of more than 2,400 German teens and young adults aged 14-24.
Participants’ substance use and psychosis symptoms were tracked for about four years. Psychologists interviewed participants at the study’s beginning and end.
The research was conducted by experts from Maastricht University in the Netherlands, including Jim van Os, a professor in the university’s psychiatry and neuropsychology department. Their study appears in today’s edition of BMJ Online First.
At the study’s start, 13% said they had smoked marijuana at least five times. Four years later, about 17% of all participants had had at least one psychotic symptom.
Psychotic symptoms include hallucinations, such as seeing or hearing things that aren’t really there, and delusions, which are false beliefs that do not go away with logical or accurate information. Other possible psychotic symptoms are incoherent speech, confused thinking, and strange behavior. The most common psychotic disorder is schizophrenia.
Pot smokers were more likely to have psychotic symptoms than those who didn’t smoke pot. The more pot that participants smoked, the greater their chance of having at least one psychotic symptom. The risk held after screening out other influences including alcohol and other drugs.
Pot had “a much stronger effect” on psychotically predisposed participants, say the researchers. People who have a family member with psychotic symptoms are more likely to suffer similar symptoms themselves.
It’s not the first time that marijuana has been linked to psychosis. But until now, no one knew which came first — the psychosis or the pot use. Were participants using pot to soothe their psychological problems?
Probably not, say the researchers. Psychotic predisposition wasn’t a good predictor of future pot use, they note.
Youth may be a particularly risky time for pot use.
Puberty is “a vulnerable period” for pot’s negative effects, say the researchers, citing studies of lab rats. Pot’s active ingredients may interact with brain chemicals to create negative psychological side effects, they say.
In 2002, a study published in the British Medical Journal linked frequent marijuana use at a young age – more than 50 times — to an increase in schizophrenia later in life. Similar to the current study, this previous research showed that the more pot people smoked, the more likely they were to suffer psychosis.
Another study published in the same issue showed that daily pot smoking as a teen increased the risk of depression as an adult. When that study was released in 2004, researcher Louise Arseneault, PhD, told WebMD that their research suggested that there is a direct causal link between pot smoking and psychological problems that cannot be explained by tendency toward mental illness.
==============================
Researchers say they have discovered a new clue as to how alcohol may speed up cancer progression.
Since the early 1900s, alcohol consumption has been linked to cancer, particularly of the esophagus, stomach, liver, and even the breast. Doctor’s know that the more alcohol you drink, the higher your risk, but the exact role alcohol plays in cancer progression has remained a mystery.
Now scientists say they’ve unraveled the clues behind this alcohol-cancer connection. A preliminary study, published in the Jan. 15, 2005 issue of the journal CANCER, shows, for the first time, that alcohol fuels the production of a growth factor that helps create new blood vessels inside a tumor, a process called angiogenesis. Production of these new blood vessels helps feed tumor cells.
Jian-Wei Gu, MD, and colleagues from the University of Mississippi Medical Center, injected chick embryos, which contained cancer cells, with either salt water or alcohol for nine days. The alcohol content injected into the embryos was equivalent to what the researchers say is chronic alcohol administration.
Based on their previous studies they say that light to moderate amounts of alcohol can induce new blood vessel growth.
Embryos exposed to the alcohol had more than eight times the amount of cancer cells in their blood vessels than the saline-exposed embryos.
The researchers also noted significant increases in tumor size and tumor blood vessel density, and higher levels of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) — a protein involved in the growth of new blood vessels in the alcohol-exposed embryos.
The findings support existing theories that alcohol accelerates the production of growth factors and new blood vessels that foster cancer growth. This “represents an important mechanism of cancer progression associated with alcoholic beverage consumption,” the authors say, in a news release.
==============================
Youth smoking and drug abuse declined again this year, concludes a federal study that also found marked progress over the last decade in persuading teens to avoid cigarettes and illicit substances.
The smoking rate among younger teens is half what it was in the mid-1990s, and drug use by that group is down by one-third, says the University of Michigan study, done for the National Institute on Drug Abuse and released Tuesday. Less dramatic strides have been made among older teens.
Altogether, gains in 2004 over 2003 were modest. Researchers were bothered by increases in the use of inhalants such as glue, aerosols and the pain-control narcotic OxyContin. Use of most other drugs declined or held steady.
This was the eighth consecutive year that smoking rates among surveyed teens dropped, a turnaround that began in 1996 among students in grades eight and 10 and a year later among 12th-graders.
“We know that young people have come to see cigarette smoking as more dangerous, while they also have become less accepting of cigarette use, and these changes continued into 2004,” said Lloyd Johnston, lead researcher for the Monitoring the Future study.
Researchers credited higher cigarette prices, tighter marketing practices, anti-smoking ads and withdrawal of the Joe Camel logo among the reasons smoking has fallen out of favor with more teens. Close to three-quarters of surveyed 12th-graders now say they’d rather not date a smoker, up from close to one-third in 1977.
“When smoking makes a teen less attractive to the great majority of the opposite sex, as now appears to be the case, one of the long-imagined benefits for adolescent smoking is seriously undercut,” Johnston said.
Overall, the percentage of eighth-graders who had ever tried cigarettes declined to 28% this year, down half a percentage point from 2003 and from a peak of 49% in 1996.
About 41% of 10th-graders had tried cigarettes, down 1%age point from a year earlier and from 61% in 1996.
And 53% of seniors had smoked at least once in their lives, down 1%age point from 2003 and from more than 65% in 1997.
Even so, cigarette use has hardly been stamped out among youth. The study reported that 25% of 12th-graders said they had smoked within 30 days of being surveyed, as did 16% of 10th-graders and 9% of eighth-graders.
The study also found that progress in discouraging teen drinking in recent years held steady for the lower grades in 2004. Researchers said it would take another year to know whether a small increase indicated in drinking by seniors was real or a statistical blip.
They reported a gradual decline in drug use this year over last. Eighth-graders have been less apt to use drugs for eight years running while drug use among seniors has declined for three years.
The survey found 15% of eighth-graders, 31% of 10th-graders and 39% of 12th-graders had used drugs in the previous year — down 1%age point or less from the year before.
Inhalants emerged as a particular concern; their use went up in all three grades last year and again, marginally, in 2004.
Within that drug group, researchers noted the apparent growing popularity of OxyContin, which up to 5% of seniors and smaller percentages of younger teens reported having tried in the last year. By contrast, 1% or less of teens had tried heroin in a year.
OxyContin is a powerful and potentially addictive synthetic narcotic.
The study questioned 50,000 students in about 400 schools nationwide as part of a series that began three decades ago with high school seniors. Surveys of eighth-graders and 10th-graders were added in 1991.
==============================
THERE’S A WONDERFUL SCENE in the movie Traffic in which a captured drug kingpin, played by Miguel Ferrer, is being interrogated by two federal agents. Ferrer says to them disdainfully: “You people are like those Japanese soldiers left behind on deserted islands who think that World War II is still going on. Let me be the first to tell you, your government surrendered this war a long time ago.”
It’s a brilliant bit of filmmaking; it’s also bunk. Over the last five years, while no one was paying attention, America has been winning its war on drugs.
The cosmopolitan view has long been that the fight against drugs is a losing battle; that the supply of drugs pouring into America is never-ending; that drug lords are unrelenting zombie-supermen—kill one, and five more spring up.
The American drug problem grew to epidemic proportions throughout the 1960s and 1970s. In 1979, agencies of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health performed a national household survey of illicit drug use; substances included marijuana, cocaine, heroin, banned hallucinogens and inhalants, and unauthorized use of sedatives, stimulants and analgesics. As of 1979, the numbers were horrifying: 31.8% of teens ages 12 to 17 had used drugs; 16.3% of them had used in the last month. Among those ages 18 to 25 it was worse: 69% had used at some point; 38% in the last month.
But throughout the ‘80s, those numbers shrank. Sophisticates derided “Just Say No,” but by 1993, only 16.4% of 12- to 17-year-olds had used, and only 5.7% had used in the last month. In the 18-to-25 age bracket, 50.2% had tried drugs, but only 15% had used in the last 30 days. It was a remarkable success.
From 1993 to 2001, the numbers become less rosy: Among ages 12 to 17, the percentage of youths who had tried drugs increased almost twofold. In the 18-to-25 crowd, the increase was less marked, but still noticeable.
There’s a reason we pay so much attention to these two age groups. As Tom Riley, the director of public affairs at the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), explains: “If people don’t start using drugs as teenagers—the mechanism of addiction clicks much more quickly in the developing brain—then they are unlikely to ever go on to serious drug abuse. If we can reduce the number of teens who use drugs, we change the shape of the problem for generations to come.”
After 2001, the tide turned again. Since then, teen drug use is off nearly 19%. Which means that 700,000 fewer teens are using drugs today than just a few years ago.
What happened? For one thing: funding. Since 1998, the ONDCP’s real budget has increased, from $8.2 billion to $12.4 billion. That extra money has mostly gone to law enforcement and drug treatment, attacking both the supply and the demand sides of the problem. Measures for demand are fuzzy, but the supply side of the equation - the “war” part of the war on drugs—has solid metrics.
Each substance is its own front and has its own dynamics. Drug supply is shockingly local. Take coca, the substance from which cocaine and crack are derived. From 1998 to 2001, world coca production increased from 586,100 metric tons to 655,800 metric tons, with the lion’s share grown in Columbia. Since then, the ONDCP orchestrated a campaign to spray 140,000 hectares of Colombian coca fields with glyphosate (you know it as Roundup). The result: world coca production is down 20%.
With other substances, the news is even better. On Nov. 6, 2000, the Drug Enforcement Agency raided an abandoned missile silo in Wamego, Kan., which housed the world’s leading LSD operation. By 2004, LSD availability in America was down 95%. The market still hasn’t recovered.
The supply of all the major drugs is down, but at the same time, drug interdiction is up. In 1989, 533,533 kilograms of the four major drugs were seized by U.S. authorities. By 2005, the total had risen to 1.3 million kilograms.
Earlier this week, the ONDCP released a report outlining their order of battle for 2006. Director John Walters is not the type to go running for the nearest TV camera. Yet the quiet success he has overseen is a powerful reminder that the bad guys are not 10 feet tall; that failure is not inevitable; that the war on drugs is a war worth fighting; and that we’re fighting it well.
Jonathan V. Last is online editor of The Weekly Standard and a weekly op-ed contributor to the Philadelphia Inquirer. This essay originally appeared in the February 5, 2006 edition of the Philadelphia Inquirer.
==============================
Although an overwhelming majority of Protestant pastors and lay people agree that Scripture indicates people should never get drunk, only less than a third say it forbids drinking, a new study showed.
Slightly more laity (29%) than senior pastors (24%) agree people should never drink alcohol, according to the latest study by LifeWay Research. Moreover, senior pastors (68%) are more likely to agree that reasonable consumption of alcohol is a “biblical liberty” compared to lay people (54%).
Yet, 90% of clergy, compared to 63% of laity, say a Christian drinking alcohol could cause other believers to stumble or be confused.
Overall, the majority of Protestant pastors and laity do not consider drinking alcohol a sin.
Christian opinion on whether the Bible condemns drinking alcohol is varied with ongoing debates between churches completely opposed to alcohol and churches that hold a more liberal view that a lot of times argue that Jesus and his disciples drank wine and that Jesus even turned water into wine.
Leaders in the Southern Baptist Convention – the largest Protestant denomination in the country – are more conservative on the issue. They reaffirmed last year their stance against the manufacturing, advertising, distributing and consuming of alcoholic beverages.
Southern Baptist clergy are less likely to agree that Scripture indicates it is not a sin to drink alcohol than other Protestants, the latest LifeWay survey found.
Among senior pastors, 41% of Southern Baptist pastors at least “somewhat” agree that Scripture says people should never drink alcohol compared to 21% of non-Southern Baptists.
Southern Baptist pastors and laity themselves are less likely to drink alcohol or to condone drinking it than other Protestant pastors and lay people.
Research further showed a gap between Southern Baptist clergy opinion and that of their laity. SBC pastors are much more likely than laity to agree that Christians should not drink.
77% of Southern Baptist pastors say Christians should not use alcohol as a beverage while 59% of laity agree.
Only 3% of Southern Baptist senior pastors drink alcohol compared to 29% of lay people. Among non-Southern Baptists, 25% of clergy consume alcohol while 42% of laity do so.
Furthermore, three quarters of Southern Baptist pastors agree that when a Christian abstains from drinking alcohol, this makes non-believers who see this more interested in Jesus Christ. Over half of SBC lay people (58%) agree. Non-Southern Baptist pastors and laity are even less likely to say the same, with less than half (47% and 44%, respectively) agreeing that abstinence from drinking may attract non-believers to Jesus Christ.
Findings are based on a survey conducted this year between April and May among 1,004 Protestant laity who attend church at least five times a year and 1,005 Protestant senior pastors.
==============================
One in 25 deaths across the globe can be directly attributed to alcohol consumption, according to new research from the Toronto-based Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.
“These numbers are high,” says Dr. Juergen Rehm, one of the authors of the study published in this week’s edition of the Lancet. “And they’re only getting higher as more people drink in higher volumes and more frequent patterns.”
Researchers attribute the recent global increase in part to greater consumption by women.
“Plus, production is more widespread and marketing has globalized,” he added.
Mr. Reham also said the effect of alcohol on the human body is better understood and can be more easily linked to causes of death.
“The public doesn’t always recognize an alcohol-related death,” he added. “It’s not like if your neighbour dies of lung cancer, and you assume he was a smoker. Nobody ever assumes that their neighbour’s breast cancer was because she was a drinker.”
Most diseases the public associates with alcoholism — such as cirrhosis of the liver — constitute a minority of alcohol-related deaths, said Mr. Rehm.
Alcohol can influence several hormonal systems in the body, causing various diseases such as mouth and throat, colorectal and breast cancers, as well as strokes.
A woman who has three drinks per day on average increases her risk of getting breast cancer by about 15%, said Mr. Rehm. “That means that [perhaps] only one in 20 cases of breast cancer is due to alcohol consumption. And that’s why the public ignores alcohol as a carcinogen.”
The report noted alcohol consumption also leads to accidental, premature deaths.
“When you have more people drinking more alcohol, you get more people who are risk-prone,” said Mr. Rehm. “You have more people on our highways, drunk driving, and more people drunk while snowmobiling or boating. Accidents and deaths will happen.”
Separate data from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health published in 2006 found 3,892 deaths attributable to alcohol in Canada, or 1.8% of all Canadian deaths. The three biggest contributing factors were unintentional injuries, cancers and digestive diseases.
While the Canadian figure is lower than the world percentage, the global numbers are bolstered by areas such as Europe, where one in 10 deaths is directly attributable to alcohol, and Russia, where about one in seven deaths can be directly linked to alcohol.
The study published in Lancet this week found that globally, alcohol consumption worked out to about 12 units per person per week on average. A unit is comparable to a small can of beer, glass of wine or a one-ounce shot of liquor.
“But globally, the vast majority of adults abstain from liquor,” said Mr. Rehm. “So the drinkers are actually drinking about twice as much.”
The Canadian consumption is calculated at almost nine units per person per week. By contrast, in Europe it is 21.5 unit per week.
“The public disregards a lot of what alcohol does to the system,” said Mr. Rehm.
But whatever happened to the adage of a glass of wine being good for the heart?
While that still holds true, Mr. Rehm said, people simply don’t drink in a way that benefits the body. The study showed more people are binge drinking, instead of spreading consumption out.
“If you drink one drink — and I really mean one drink, not one bottle — you will benefit your heart,” he said. But, Mr. Rehm warned, even those who drink light and responsibly need to weigh the benefits.
“There are benefits to drinking,” said Mr. Rehm. “We have good evidence for that. Unfortunately, for our populations, they are less relevant because no one seems to care to drink at those low levels, which would actually do you a little bit of good.”
==============================
Forty percent of evangelical leaders said they “socially drink alcohol,” according to a new monthly poll.
Many of them added that they only drink “in moderation,” “on special occasion,” or “infrequently.” And they noted that they do so only with those who share similar views on alcohol consumption.
The poll, released Thursday, was based on responses from the Board of Directors of the National Association of Evangelicals, including the CEOs of denominations and representatives of a broad array of evangelical organizations.
Among the majority who said they did not consume alcohol, the common reason for abstinence was not because they believe it is sinful to drink.
“Even though there is no prohibition on the moderate alcohol consumption in Scripture, due to the many implications as an example to family and those I serve, I like Paul’s words ‘it is better not to’ (Romans 14:21),” said Gary Benedict, president of The Christian and Missionary Alliance, according to the NAE poll.
For some, their denominations do not allow leaders to drink.
“[W]hile we understand one cannot defend [abstinence from alcohol] biblically, we have chosen to raise the standard for leadership in our movement,” said Jeff Farmer of Open Bible Churches.
Others said they abstain from drinking because of alcoholism in the family, a desire to be an example to younger generations, or the affect alcohol addiction has on society.
“Alcohol and its effects have been a major challenge in American society,” said Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals. “Just as society has dealt with it, as evidenced in the 18th and 21st amendments, so have evangelicals looked at how to appropriately interact with alcohol.”
An earlier study of Protestants in the country found that over a quarter of lay people (29%) said people should never drink alcohol, according to LifeWay Research. Meanwhile, 24% of senior pastors agreed. Also, while 68% of pastors said reasonable consumption of alcohol is a “biblical liberty,” just over half (54%) of lay people agreed.
At the same time, 90% of clergy said a Christian drinking alcohol could cause other believers to stumble or be confused, the LifeWay survey found.
Based in Washington, D.C., the National Association of Evangelicals represents more than 45,000 local churches from over 40 different denominations and serves a constituency of millions. The NAE defines an evangelical as one who takes the Bible seriously and believes in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.
==============================
Influential Pastor John MacArthur has come out strong against young Christian leaders who insist that bringing alcohol into the context of ministry is necessary to reach more people.
“It is puerile and irresponsible for any pastor to encourage the recreational use of intoxicants – especially in church-sponsored activities,” MacArthur, who leads Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, Calif., wrote in a recent blog post. “The ravages of alcoholism and drug abuse in our culture are too well known, and no symbol of sin’s bondage is more seductive or more oppressive than booze.”
When the Southern California pastor set out to write the article, he was well aware that it would offend some people.
At the risk of “alienating” “an enthusiastic group of young reformers,” MacArthur still went ahead with the post because “he cares,” Travis Allen, director of Internet Ministry wrote Monday on MacArthur’s Grace to You media ministry website.
Allen made it clear that MacArthur does not offer “candy-coated messages in pretty packages.”
“He’ll never tickle your ears,” he described.
In his straightforward article, MacArthur was addressing the “Young, Restless and Reformed” community, particularly taking issue with their argument that “most good theological discussion has historically been done in pubs and drinking places.”
“Beer-loving passion,” he noted, has become a “prominent badge of identity” for many in that community.
“Mixing booze with ministry is often touted as a necessary means of penetrating western youth culture, and conversely, abstinence is deemed a ‘sin’ to be repented of,” he wrote.
Drinking beer is just one of several activities that the young Reformed community has adopted and “redeemed,” MacArthur pointed out.
“Tobacco, tattoos, gambling, mixed martial arts, profane language, and lots of explicit talk about sex,” are some of the other activities.
To disapprove of any of those activities would result in being labeled legalistic, the Grace Community pastor said.
But the issue, he stressed, isn’t whether these activities should be acceptable or whether they’re even all out evil or sinful.
Rather, the question MacArthur poses is: Does the church want to be known for these?
“[W]e surely ought to be able to say that controlled substances and other symbols of secular society’s seamy side are not what the church of Jesus Christ ought to wish to be known for,” he detailed. “In fact, until fairly recently, no credible believer in the entire church age would ever have suggested that so many features evoking the ambiance of a pool hall or a casino could also be suitable insignia for the people of God.”
Putting it bluntly, MacArthur, who has ministered to hundreds of former alcohol addicts, called pub outreaches and the like “bad missional strategy” and “a bad testimony” as it cultivates an appetite for beer or a reputation for loving liquor.
“This tendency to emblazon oneself with symbols of carnal indulgence as if they were valid badges of spiritual identity is one of the more troubling aspects of the YRR movement’s trademark restlessness,” he said plainly. “It is wrong-headed, carnal, and immature to imagine that bad-boy behavior makes good missional strategy. The image of beer-drinking Bohemianism does nothing to advance the cause of Christ’s kingdom.”
While some point to biblical times when Jesus drank wine, MacArthur quickly rejected the comparison, saying wine was necessary at the time for health reasons.
“The risk of amoebae and parasites in drinking water could be significantly reduced or eliminated by mixing the water with a little wine (1 Timothy 5:23). The result was a greatly diluted wine that had virtually no potential for making anyone drunk.”
He added, “[T]here is no suggestion in Scripture that Jesus purposely assumed the look and lifestyle of a publican in order to gain acceptance in a godless subculture. He didn’t.”
In Monday’s follow-up post, Allen acknowledged that some may view MacArthur’s article as an attempt to “convert everyone into grumpy, fundamentalist teetotalers.”
But he offered this to the young, restless and Reformed: “It’s not about stealing joy; it’s about promoting pastoral wisdom and compassion for people. Church leaders must consider the consequences of what they approve and promote.”
==============================
Very few things take church planter Charles Hill by surprise.
But when a group that agreed to support his new ministry work in the middle of a predominantly Mormon community suddenly pulled its financial backing and gave him the boot, he was totally caught off guard.
Hill had just begun to host Bible studies and reach out to the unchurched and those who were seeking something outside of the dominant religious preference in Utah – where the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is headquartered – when he got fired.
He was allegedly let go because he drank half a beer in public during the new “Beer and Bible” meeting he started last month.
While he was told that was the main issue, he doesn’t have all the details because he didn’t receive a phone call or e-mail from the decision makers, he said. His boss, whom he respects and who had given him permission to conduct “Beer and Bible,” broke the news to him a couple of weeks ago.
He now has less than 60 days before he and his family – wife and three kids – are cut off from all funding and left “abandoned,” as he put it.
“It’s troubling,” Hill told The Christian Post. “We’re out here trying to reach people as Jesus would.
“It’s still baffling to me that when your boss has given you permission that you can still get terminated for something such as that.”
Hill moved out to South Jordan, Utah, last year, leaving a growing church he founded in Ohio to answer God’s calling in what he says is the most unchurched state in the country. He gained financial support from a denomination – which he declined to name in order to keep things as respectful as he can – after being drawn to and recruited by a dynamic church planter (his boss) in the church body.
In a city where around seven or eight out of 10 people are Mormon, Hill said he prayed a lot and battled with how he was going to reach people.
He determined that bars and coffee shops were the few places that he would be able to meet with unchurched and non-LDS folks. He knew that starting a Bible study in a bar could potentially be an issue with the denomination, so he asked for permission from his boss.
He was given the green light.
But once word about the “Beer and Bible” meeting spread and reached the upper leadership at the denomination, the 36-year-old church planter was cut from the $280,000 support he was being given for his outreach and ministry efforts. He was only five months away from a church launch in a region where not one non-LDS church exists in 25 cities.
One of the leaders, who wished to remain anonymous, in the denomination released a brief statement to The Christian Post on Monday, saying: “It’s not an issue of immorality or improper biblical behavior. We simply discovered there were instances in which we were not able to reconcile our differences as it concerns general Baptist principles.”
Hill, whose father was an alcoholic, said he doesn’t even like drinking and isn’t much of a drinker at all. Though he doesn’t believe it’s a sin, one of the biggest reasons he hasn’t drank alcohol is because as a senior pastor, he didn’t want younger believers to stumble and drink too much.
“In Ohio, we had alcohol problems in our community so I didn’t take that posture there,” he explained. “But out here, there doesn’t seem to be an alcohol issue because seven or eight out of 10 don’t drink at all.
“It’s a very different culture here than it is in my Midwest Bible roots community.”
From the moment he moved out to Utah, people would ask him about his stance on alcohol and he would express that he believes Jesus did not forbid it. That would in turn start up a conversation.
“It was odd that for people who drank alcohol out here that was their defining factor that ‘I’m not part of the LDS church,’” he said.
“If I have to go out and have a beer to have a conversation about the Lord to keep somebody out of hell, I’ll do it.”
After receiving the shocking news that he was being terminated, Hill sent a formal letter of apology to the president of the denomination, stating that he did not know this would be such an issue and asking for forgiveness. He vowed that he would not engage in public drinking again if that would satisfy their standards.
“We’ll still do Beer and Bible, but I’ll drink water or coke,” he said.
He did not receive a reply.
He was, however, contacted by several pastors within the denomination who informed him that they drink alcohol.
“At the end, it was that I drank it publicly,” Hill speculated. “What I believe I was hearing back was ‘if you had a drink in your house that’s okay.’”
“I’m not bitter or mad,” he made clear. “We’re disappointed, obviously, when you lose that kind of funding and your family is out here and you’re five months away from launch and you’re not sure in six weeks where you’re going to live or how you’re going to make it.”
“What troubles me is not being given forgiveness,” he added. “Where’s the Christian love? I think ...we need to read our Bible once in a while, get back to that heart.”
Hill is currently searching for other groups and individuals that could support his mission in Utah. Though unsure of the future, the church planter has no intention of abandoning God’s calling.
“If we had to pitch a tent and live out of a tent, off of food handouts in six weeks, then that’s what we’re going to do,” he said. “We have a heart for this community. We believe God has called us here and that God’s going to raise up an army of supporters to make this happen.
“The biggest thing now is, is there anybody out there that cares about 25 cities without one church that might want to show the love of Jesus and help support us in this work? Not ‘Beer and Bible’ ... but to keep people out of hell and to help plant the church.”
Notably, Hill doesn’t want to be known as the “Beer and Bible” guy, as some refer to him despite the brief stint. Hill was also running a separate Alpha meeting, sans alcohol, for those who were curious about the Bible.
==============================
Drinking alcohol, watching R-rated movies and cussing are just some of the countless “gray” areas in the Christian life.
Hoping to help guide Christians, new and seasoned alike, on issues that are not spelled out in black and white in the Bible, one Charlotte, N.C., pastor offered them a framework from which they can make their own decisions.
“I’m not going to give you an answer key,” said Pastor Steven Furtick of Elevation Church during his sermon this past weekend. “I’m not going to try to make black and white issues out of what’s gray in the Word of God. That would be malpractice on my part. I’m not going to back down either from making a black and white issue out of a clearly right and wrong scriptural issue.”
Opposing legalism, or “beating people up” with the Bible, the young megachurch pastor cautioned Christians against making an absolute truth out of their own personal preference.
“That’s where we get in trouble,” he said.
Rather than make a Christian boycott list, he encouraged believers to ask themselves three questions when dealing with a gray issue: “Is it best? Does it build (others up)? Does it bind?”
“Just because I can doesn’t mean I should,” the Elevation pastor emphasized.
Addressing Christians who may be compromising some of their values or beliefs or involved in activities that are sabotaging their spiritual growth, Furtick said, “You might get to heaven when you die and you might not burn in hell for it, but there’s probably a smarter way to do it.”
“It might not be a wrong thing; it might just be a stupid thing,” he added.
Rather than approach gray matters from the “how far can I compromise and still go to heaven” stance, Furtick challenged them to take a different approach.
“Stop trying to get as close to the edge as you can and start trying to stay as close to the source (God) as possible,” he urged.
Reminding Christians that they’ve been bought with a price, Furtick stressed, “Our Christian liberty is not a license to be idiots or to flirt with sin.”
Addressing some of the practical and hot button issues, the Charlotte pastor briefly touched on alcohol and R-rated movies.
For Furtick, his personal legalism is not drinking – not because he thinks it’s bad but because his family has had generations of alcoholics.
He also noted that he’s bothered by preachers who preach against drinking when they’re, for example, overweight.
“The Bible has more to say about gluttony than it does about drinking,” he said.
When it comes to R-rated movies, Furtick pointed out that there are network sitcoms that teach disrespectful attitude toward parents and are “way more sinful” than R-rated movies.
On a personal level, he explained that at times he chooses not to watch such movies not because he is trying to please other Christians (because you’ll never please all of them, he noted) but because it might not leave the best impression especially on an unbeliever.
“I can’t make a career out of catering to other Christians, but I can make it a priority to protect my testimony,” he stressed.
Furtick’s sermon was part of Elevation’s “Cow Tipping” series which addressed questions that are often avoided in churches. Elevation Church has touted itself as a church that is not afraid to talk about any issue.
==============================
[KH: health and wealth gospel]
Zachery Tims had led what he admits was a “messed-up life.” But he left that behind and devoted his life to preaching, telling millions that “it’s never too late” to start over.
His testimony of a changed life, after a bout with drugs and gangs, was reflected in the name of the church he started – New Destiny Christian Center in Apopka, Fla. – and told in his 2006 book It’s Never Too Late: How a teenage criminal found his divine destiny and became an entrepreneur and pastor of a thriving church with a global ministry.
The Baltimore, Md., native became a popular charismatic preacher, leading the 8,000-strong church for 15 years. His messages have been broadcast to over 100 million homes daily through radio and television.
The church expanded this year to the east side of Orlando.
But his ministering came to an end Friday when his body was discovered in a Times Square hotel room. He was 42.
A maintenance worker found Tims lying on his back between the bedroom and living room area, as reported by The Wall Street Journal. Police found an envelope with a white powdery substance inside his pocket.
The cause of his death has yet to be determined.
Tims’ testimony as a former drug addict who got himself involved in criminal activities in the past is recounted in his memoir It’s Never Too Late.
“At the age of 14 I shot a man and tried to kill him. I was locked up till I was 16. I was a drug addict till I was 19,” he summed up during a July 12 broadcast on TBN.
But God, he said, took him out of the gutter.
“I’m a living witness [that] it is never too late,” he stressed.
Tims, an only child, was raised by a single mom in the Baltimore projects. His parents had divorced when he was nine. His father was a detective with the Baltimore Police Department but he spent more time in the bar than at home, Tims wrote in his memoir.
He began to build relationships with gang members and drug dealers who thrived in his neighborhood. Later, he found himself in front of a Baltimore judge who called him a “menace to society.”
As stated on his website, however, Tims was “miraculously saved, instantly delivered from drug addiction, and called into ministry.”
As a preacher, Tims often spoke about battles with the devil and empowered congregants and other listeners to overcome.
“Tell the devil this is the last time you’re going to have me. I’m going across to the other side!” he said in his TBN broadcast last month.
“We’re going to walk through the Red Sea ... your enemy’s going to try and chase you but he’s never going to catch up with you.”
Following news of his death, condolences have poured in on Twitter and Facebook.
Bishop T.D. Jakes tweeted, “DEEPLY saddened to hear of the passing of Pastor Tims @ztims ...praying for his family and church.”
Jakes is among several pastors who have influenced Tims in his ministry. Other leaders who have impacted Tims include Apostle Fred Price of Ever Increasing Faith Ministries, A.R. Bernard who founded Christian Cultural Center, Pastor Benny Hinn, Pastor Paula White, and Noel Jones from Southern California.
Tims’ YouTube channel, where his sermons can be viewed, was also flooded with condolences and prayers from well-wishers.
“R.I.P you will be missed!” commented Alicialovecraz7.
Nanaslittleblessing posted, “To Live in Christ to die is Gain...my heartfelt condolences to the family of Pastor Tims. I watched this man of God on TBN and was always blessed and encouraged by the way he allowed the Lord to use him. To the family I pray God will comfort your heart with peace in knowing he’s with Jesus.” [KH: Trinity Broadcasting Network, preaching health and wealth gospel]
A statement by New Destiny Christian Center is expected to be released Monday night.
==============================