Give it a couple years. It will go to one. Funny thing is they took a cue from the Canadian research. Them canadians drink almost as much beer as the irish.
Perhaps you should sticky this as a permanent topic. I will say however that this isn’t helping Biden’s efforts to win back the working class. They should issue a correction - one or two cases a week.
Czar is just a buzzword designed to trigger you (it worked like a charm, BTW). He's the director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism which was formed 52 years ago.
I think the main point was: Why on Earth do we even have an alcohol czar in the first place? That pathetic waste of taxpayer's money.
Believe what? That we actually have an alcohol czar? I know what you mean... that is hard to believe.
The czar term is colloquial and a media buzzword. The official, George Koob, is the head of the National Institute of Health's National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAA). It's been an institute for 53 years where research on alcoholism and abuse is done.
I get that, is he there to give recommendations to the general public about the dangers of alcohol? Is is he there to put real restrictions of alcohol use? Also: We all know there's a sad amount of alcohol abuse in our country, and just like drug abuse it's hard to contain. So the alcohol czar seems to be a redundant position since alcohol is a drug.
Literally, a key role of the NIH is to provide recommendations/guidance to the general public. It would be a bad interpretation to say that they're seeking to actually restrict alcohol. Rather, it's a recommendation based on the known negative health effects in using alcohol. I'd suggest that the NIAA is it's own institute because of the history and nature of alcohol use and abuse that makes it a focus onto its own apart from other drugs.
Seems like a logical answer... especially if this czar has another position inside an actual institute.
You both raise important questions regarding how restrictive or lenient the FDA should be. It goes back a few years, but it was a good thing that the FDA took their time on thalidomide when the UK approved it. The results from that drug were horrendous. Overall, I think it’s good that FDA investigations are rigorous, however I think there needs to be more exceptions for experimental drugs if the people are willing to take it.
