A problem with the older studies that seemed to indicate that alcohol had health benefits was also that their control group, the people who didn’t drink, turned out largely not to do so because they already had severe medical problems. They weren’t allowed to drink because of them.

Compared to them it looked like the people who did drink were more healthy on average. So they concluded there must be health benefits to drinking alcohol.

This “Science VS” episode is about that (and has a bunch of citations in its transcript): https://gimletmedia.com/shows/science-vs/llhdgj

For me at least, that opinion came from a time when the internet wasn’t dominated by corporations, and giant coordinated misinformation campaigns weren’t a problem.

When the main actors on the internet were individuals, I agree, government interference would limit their freedom.

But as it is now, corporations determine who gets access to information, how it gets filtered, which voices get amplified and which get silenced.

One of the only effective ways we’ve seen in recent years to force corporations to do the right thing, and restore some freedom for individuals, is by government regulation.

That’s why I’ve changed my mind on that.

I’m sorry, but I’ma keep calling it twitter. You can fuck right off with x