Dry January

[Gerry Seymour]

You’re the one who brought up a disease not caused by alcohol in a discussion about alcohol. I don’t know about most folks but my liver function, including ALT, is checked annually at my routine physical. Millions of people safely consume alcohol daily.

I honestly don’t know why I indulge you. It’s one thing to play devils advocate, but you’re just throwing out random things and trying to stir up conflict. I don’t get you. Is this fun for you?

I don't think the annual liver function check catches NAFLD very early. My mom had NAFLD that turned to cirrhosis (ending with a transplant). She has always had regular checkups with all the usual tests, and hers wasn't caught until it was a problem. So DD probably has a point about the risks we can't know about, and that might be the point of the "no safe limit". I still don't like the wording of it, though.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It's always just 2 beers. Always.

Some cops I worked with and those I trained with said this is always the answer at a traffic stop, no matter how drunk or sober-seeming.

I got pulled over on New Years some years ago (it was a spurious stop - he had no reason to stop me, other than the time and it being New Years), and I'd literally had 2 drinks that night - one at 10 and one at midnight - because I was the driver. I actually laughed when I had to answer the question, "How many drinks did you have tonight?"

 

[Tony Dismukes]

I don't have any stakes in this discussion, since I don't drink alcohol and never have. (No interest in anything that impairs my cognition and the few times I've been exposed to the taste of anything alcoholic I've found it unpleasant.)

But the question of "safe" or "unsafe" is interesting, because it involves complex evidence gathering, sophisticated math, the psychology of personal risk aversion, and personal values concerning what risks are worth taking.

You can certainly make a reasonable argument that there is no safe level of BJJ training. Even practicing with a focus on safety, the chance of serious injury is always non-zero and the chance of some sort of mild injury is almost inevitable in the long run. I've personally had a broken thumb, a dislocated shoulder, a broken wrist, probably a couple of concussions, had my eye poked a few times, and countless minor bumps, bruises, and sprains. To me, the benefits to the rest of my life have been worth it. To someone else they might not be.

I imagine that for those who choose to drink, you have to make similar calculations about whether the perceived benefits outweigh the perceived risks. (Although I've certainly known my share of people who have not been able to make those judgements and those decisions in any sort of rational and healthy way and have done irreparable damage to their lives as a result. Addiction sucks.)

 

[Steve]

I don't think the annual liver function check catches NAFLD very early. My mom had NAFLD that turned to cirrhosis (ending with a transplant). She has always had regular checkups with all the usual tests, and hers wasn't caught until it was a problem. So DD probably has a point about the risks we can't know about, and that might be the point of the "no safe limit". I still don't like the wording of it, though.

I’m sorry to hear that. So for her, alcohol was unsafe. Not to be argumentative, but by definition, NAFLD, according to the Mayo Clinic, is a diagnosis specific to people who drink little or no alcohol.

More relevant, is the goal here to eliminate risk? Is that even reasonable? I mean, by this logic, there is no safe amount of exercise, because one may have an asymptomatic condition that could be exacerbated by exercise and result in a life threatening cardiac event.

What most folks are intuitively reacting to is that very broken logic. X activity is unsafe for some people; ergo, it is unsafe for all people.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I’m sorry to hear that. So for her, alcohol was unsafe. Not to be argumentative, but by definition, NAFLD, according to the Mayo Clinic, is a diagnosis specific to people who drink little or no alcohol.

More relevant, is the goal here to eliminate risk? Is that even reasonable? I mean, by this logic, there is no safe amount of exercise, because one may have an asymptomatic condition that could be exacerbated by exercise and result in a life threatening cardiac event.

What most folks are intuitively reacting to is that very broken logic. X activity is unsafe for some people; ergo, it is unsafe for all people.

Yeah, I think that's a good summary of what I was thinking, Steve.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Some cops I worked with and those I trained with said this is always the answer at a traffic stop, no matter how drunk or sober-seeming.

I got pulled over on New Years some years ago (it was a spurious stop - he had no reason to stop me, other than the time and it being New Years), and I'd literally had 2 drinks that night - one at 10 and one at midnight - because I was the driver. I actually laughed when I had to answer the question, "How many drinks did you have tonight?"

Yup. I never believe that answer-whenever i drink i make sure to have either 1 or 2.5 so i can say the number if something happens and i get asked.

 

[Gyakuto]

I think I need you to define "no safe limit" before I'll be able to know how to respond, but I'll give my view as a starting point.

If something does not show any apparent negative impact on my all cause risk of mortality, nor my general health, I do not care how much it increases my risk of mortality from some specific illness. The boundary point for a safe limit, for me, would be the point at which it could be demonstrated that consuming a specific amount of alcohol increased my all cause risk of mortality or harmed my general health. So, let's say 2 beers a night increased my relative risk for death from cirrhosis of the liver by 100% but doesn't change my absolute risk of death from all causes, then 2 beers a night is within safe limits by my definition. If it could be demonstrated that cooking with a little red wine or adding vanilla extract to a recipe raised my absolute risk of all cause mortality, then I would agree that for all practical purposes, there was not a safe limit for alcohol consumption.


I hate to use Wikipedia as a source but I think it's accurate enough for the current purpose: Observational Study vs Randomized Controlled Trial

There is some debate about what can be concluded from observational studies. The Cochrane Reviews, for example, has claimed that there is little difference in the results of randomized controlled trials and modern observational studies but last I looked at this there was still a lot of argument around the topic. Until recently, observational studies were essentially always considered to have low empirical value and many researchers would make statements along the lines of, "If you're reading a paper and you see it's based on an observational study you can just stop reading." Again, there's still debate about how much credibility they represent.

As to the part in bold, that may very well be a solid, practical approach for a medical practitioner, but it isn't scientific. Unless maybe you've done a well conducted study that tells you how much people lie about their drinking first, or a clinical study where you directly measure the impact of alcohol consumption on the liver, in order to establish a relationship between the two. My weight is my weight on the scale, but my liver function on a blood test is not my drinking history, unless we have some way to establish that it is.


Studies can only talk about groups and can't say much about individuals. Even if we had a fantastic, perfectly conducted study we couldn't say that you or I would respond like the median participant in the study. Not only size, but genetics and other lifestyle choices are likely to come into play. So, we can't actually say that a random, 6'9" dude is going to have less impact on his liver than you without directly comparing both of your current biological states. We can make some generalized predications, that will be more or less accurate depending on how close you both hew to the norm.

In response to the part in bold - As I said above, I don't care if something is bad for my liver if it doesn't actually increase my real risk of death or poor health, which seems to be the case with moderate alcohol consumption. To re-phrase, I think it's reasonable to say that alcohol consumption damages the liver*. I don't think it's reasonable to say that any liver damage is unsafe if it doesn't actually have any measurable impact on my perceived health, quality of life, or actual longevity.

It also sometimes seems like you are arguing that if we know someone's level of liver function we know how much they drink. I don't know how you think we can know this if we are basing those metrics off of self reported data about drinking. It seems like a circular argument, unless I'm missing something.

*Does any alcohol consumption, no matter how small, damage the liver for the average person? If not, how much does it take to cause damage? The liver can heal over time, how much time needs to pass between drinking sessions for the liver to have completely recovered? If we don't know the answer to these questions we can't speak very knowledgeably about this piece of the puzzle.

Now that I read this point, I see that we're on the same page about much of what I said in the point above.

I also think I now see the crux of our disagreement. Your definition of "safe" seems to mean proven safe, or absent any indication of risk. I think that's an unreasonable standard and rapidly becomes absurd. We may not know the absolute limits for everyone, but the data we have certainly seem to indicate there's no reason to think that even daily drinking of 1 or 2 alcoholic beverages makes a significant difference in health span nor lifespan for the average individual in terms of the direct toxic effects of alcohol*.

Statements like, "there is no safe limit for alcohol consumption", become just so much noise and without meaning if that is our metric. By that standard there is no safe limit for exercise nor for being sedentary, nor for walking down the street as they all increase risk of some negative outcome. Why are we bothering with news articles and press releases over this? How is it relevant to anyone's life? I think we apply it to alcohol more freely and frequently than many other things that are similarly dangerous (or not dangerous) for moralistic, rather than scientific or practical reasons.

*The study you posted also takes alcohol related accidents and other injuries into account, so when including indirect effects such as these they conclude that it's a net detriment. Based on my other readings on this topic, these concerns are particularly relevant for men in their 20's and almost irrelevant for women in their 60's, but mostly means it's not a big factor for most, if not all, of those participating in this thread, unless I'm very wrong in my estimations about the demographic being represented.

Depends on the study and which experts. To claim we have anything close to a consensus at this point seems unreasonable.


As above, some world class experts.

This study, published in 2018, based on the criteria they selected, leads this set of researchers to conclude that, "Alcohol use contributes to health loss from many causes and exacts its toll across the lifespan, particularly among men. Policies that focus on reducing population-level consumption will be most effective in reducing the health loss from alcohol use." Their definition of safe and their evaluation of risk may (or may not) be accurate for those stated goals when looking at a global population of drinkers, including Russia*. Other studies, using different metrics and data, have come to different conclusions. Those of us who don't live in Russia, are over 50, and don't seem to have a predisposition for liver problems may have a substantially different risk profile. Regardless, I still think we're a long way from a consensus.

*From the study:

"Failing to address harms from alcohol use, particularly at high levels of consumption, can have dire effects on population health. The mortality crisis in Russia is a striking example, where alcohol use was the primary culprit of increases in mortality starting in the 1980s and led to 75% of deaths among men aged 15–55 years."

I think the crux for is that alcohol is such a low priority for me - I don’t really like the taste, dislike the outlets from where it’s served and the clientele who frequent such places, especially after a few drinks. So in my case even a tiny increase in health risks due to imbibing alcohol (or supposed benefits) makes it worth my while cutting it out of my diet. If anyone has a similar feeling toward alcohol as me, they too, might want to consider abstinence.

If drinking alcohol is an important part of your life, then you have a more difficult decision to make and perhaps make that decision based on what the experts say (many of whom do appear to drink!). But if you’re drinking above recommended limits (14 units spread over 7 days, I think), then you should seriously think about reducing your intake.

If I had to make a similar decision about pizza or Mars Bar intake after experts said there was no safe limit in consuming them, then it’d be a very difficult decision for me to make but I would seriously consider it based on my health and the evidence. Such things are not published lightly.

 

[Gyakuto]

I've never had a non-alcoholic beverage that had the same taste as an alcoholic one. I'd certainly be interested in finding non-alcoholic versions of some things I really like the taste of.

I think if you treat it like a different brand to your usual beer, or one of those supposed ‘craft beers’, it’ll change your perception of them. I think Heineken Zero lager tastes like Moosehead which I loved in the 80s (the sold it in Pizza Hut which I regularly frequented!

 

[Gyakuto]

, "How many drinks did you have tonight?"

<Hic> Good constanoon affable! I’ve only had tee martoonis <hic>

 

[MetalBoar]

I think the crux for is that alcohol is such a low priority for me - I don’t really like the taste, dislike the outlets from where it’s served and the clientele who frequent such places, especially after a few drinks. So in my case even a tiny increase in health risks due to imbibing alcohol (or supposed benefits) makes it worth my while cutting it out of my diet. If anyone has a similar feeling toward alcohol as me, they too, might want to consider abstinence.

I understand what you mean. If you don't like it I don't think there's any compelling reason to drink, even if the most positive studies turn out to be accurate.

If drinking alcohol is an important part of your life, then you have a more difficult decision to make and perhaps make that decision based on what the experts say (many of whom do appear to drink!). But if you’re drinking above recommended limits (14 units spread over 7 days, I think), then you should seriously think about reducing your intake.

I guess there's a difference of degree here for us. I'm not sure I would call alcohol an important part of my life at this point (there was a time when I would have said it was important socially), but I do enjoy the occasional drink. And by occasional, I mean 14 units would be spread over 60 days or more. The risks presented by even the most negative, legitimate, studies just don't seem so high as to require alcohol to be an important part of my life to imbibe on occasion. Mere enjoyment seems sufficient.

If I had to make a similar decision about pizza or Mars Bar intake after experts said there was no safe limit in consuming them, then it’d be a very difficult decision for me to make but I would seriously consider it based on my health and the evidence. Such things are not published lightly.

See, now this is interesting. I won't eat a Mars Bar, nor a Snickers, nor any of those candies with huge amounts of added sugar and I limit my pizza intake. I love chocolate, but I find sugar to be very addictive, and it doesn't even have to be married with chocolate. I've never had a problem not drinking, even when I was genuinely a heavy drinker (by CDC standards), but if I eat a high sugar content chocolate bar or bowl of ice cream, etc. with regularity it's not long before my intake escalates and I have a hard time stopping the habit. Based on the diabetes epidemic and observing the challenges faced by clients of mine who wished to lose weight, I'd guess that it's even more addictive for a lot of other people.

And, unfortunately, we've just seen a study published (have no idea how well conducted) that shows that an awful lot of chocolate is high in heavy metals, which scare me a lot more than alcohol.

I think added sugar should be modeled as a drug. It adds no useful nutritional value, many people seem to have severe trouble managing their consumption, and overconsumption, which is easy to do, is rampant and can lead to poor health outcomes. That doesn't mean nobody should ever consume it, but I wouldn't recommend it if it isn't an important part of your life .

 

[Steve]

Yeah, I think that's a good summary of what I was thinking, Steve.

Hey, was answering on a phone so not writing at length, but I want to emphasize that I’m very sorry that your mom went through that. In rereading my response to yiu, I hope it didn’t come across as crass. I was not in any way trying to minimize the seriousness of her medical condition or needing a liver transplant. I hope it was clear, but if not, I hope it’s clear now.

 

[Steve]

I think the crux for is that alcohol is such a low priority for me - I don’t really like the taste, dislike the outlets from where it’s served and the clientele who frequent such places, especially after a few drinks. So in my case even a tiny increase in health risks due to imbibing alcohol (or supposed benefits) makes it worth my while cutting it out of my diet. If anyone has a similar feeling toward alcohol as me, they too, might want to consider abstinence.

If drinking alcohol is an important part of your life, then you have a more difficult decision to make and perhaps make that decision based on what the experts say (many of whom do appear to drink!). But if you’re drinking above recommended limits (14 units spread over 7 days, I think), then you should seriously think about reducing your intake.

If I had to make a similar decision about pizza or Mars Bar intake after experts said there was no safe limit in consuming them, then it’d be a very difficult decision for me to make but I would seriously consider it based on my health and the evidence. Such things are not published lightly.

There is no safe amount of chocolate

 

[Gyakuto]

I understand what you mean. If you don't like it I don't think there's any compelling reason to drink, even if the most positive studies turn out to be accurate.

I’m a fully grown, reasonably confident man, but at NY, I was coerced into drinking beer by a tiny little woman! Peer pressure is so powerful. I managed to hide the half drunk bottle in a child’s toy box but the little sod found it and dobbed me in to his mum😡

I guess there's a difference of degree here for us. I'm not sure I would call alcohol an important part of my life at this point (there was a time when I would have said it was important socially), but I do enjoy the occasional drink. And by occasional, I mean 14 units would be spread over 60 days or more. The risks presented by even the most negative, legitimate, studies just don't seem so high as to require alcohol to be an important part of my life to imbibe on occasion. Mere enjoyment seems sufficient.

I do wonder if there’s a degree of manipulation by alcohol manufacturers. If you want to meet friends in the evening the only place you can go is a pub or for a more committed meal. The non-drinking students at my old place of work, lamented that the social gatherings organised by their university clubs and societies revolved around pub crawls, especially the sporting ones (which they rightly see as somewhat ironic!). But it’s all about deman. If nobody wants a late night coffee bar etc, then why would they open? Do they exist in the US? Ours close at about 7pm in well populated areas.

See, now this is interesting. I won't eat a Mars Bar, nor a Snickers, nor any of those candies with huge amounts of added sugar and I limit my pizza intake.

I love Mars Bars but even I limit my intake to one a day and despite my love of pizza, I can’t remember the last time I had one. This is based on calorific content and sugar spikes reported as being bad by researchers. I can’t believe one or two Mars Bar a day is bad for me but they say it is. They don’t define ‘bad’ after all and what ‘bad’ does to my body. I bet they couldn’t differentiate between a 2-Mars Bar/day person and another who doesn’t eat them at all (see what I did there?😉).

I love chocolate, but I find sugar to be very addictive,

And why is that a problem? It’s a natural substance found in fruit and…🤔….coconuts. Has somebody told you sugar is bad for you? 👨🏽‍🔬👩🏻‍🔬 I bet their stats are dubious. My grandmother had 17 sugars in her cup of tea (18 were too sweet for her) and she lived until she was 56!

and it doesn't even have to be married with chocolate. I've never had a problem not drinking, even when I was genuinely a heavy drinker (by CDC standards), but if I eat a high sugar content chocolate bar or bowl of ice cream, etc.

I dont like ice cream. When I tell people that, they look at me like I’m a puppy-kicker! 😳

with regularity it's not long before my intake escalates and I have a hard time stopping the habit.

We are evolutionarily primed to seek out sugary (carb-rich) food because they are highly calorific and kept primordial humans well fuelled, so maybe the reward centres in the striatum of the brain are highly activated by sugars. Thus Berries were favoured over…kale (🤢 I hate kale) We find sugar tastes pleasant compared to kale

Based on the diabetes epidemic and observing the challenges faced by clients of mine who wished to lose weight, I'd guess that it's even more addictive for a lot of other people.

Evolution!🥳

And, unfortunately, we've just seen a study published (have no idea how well conducted) that shows that an awful lot of chocolate is high in heavy metals, which scare me a lot more than alcohol.

….and there’s no safe limit of heavy metal exposure 😉

I think added sugar should be modeled as a drug.

They tried something like that here in the U.K. and it didn’t go down well. We do have a sugar tax and does seem to have reduced consumption, but not enough.

It adds no useful nutritional value, many people seem to have severe trouble managing their consumption, and overconsumption, which is easy to do, is rampant and can lead to poor health outcomes. That doesn't mean nobody should ever consume it, but I wouldn't recommend it if it isn't an important part of your life .

Have you heard of a substance called ‘miraculin’. It’s found in a West African fruit, Synsepalum dulcificum or miracle fruit. If you swill miraculin around your mouth for a minute or so it inhibits the ‘bitter’ and ‘sour’ taste buds so any subsequent food tastes much sweeter. Pineapple bursts with flavour, apples are so tasty. It’s amazing and using it drastically reduces the amount of sugar your require on your food to get an enjoyable effect. Tate and Lyle, the sugar manufacturers, bought the rights to it and forbade it to be sold! I used to buy it from Amazon (USA) as it wasn’t available here in the U.K. for the dental student’s taste labs and it went down very well! Be warned, however. The packet advise suggested the effects only last 30-40 minutes when in fact it’s more like 2-3 hours and miraculin once ruined a meal out I had with an old girlfriend….sweet pizza, sweet beer, disgustingly sweet cheese cake 🤢😒

 

[Steve]

I’m a fully grown, reasonably confident man, but at NY, I was coerced into drinking beer by a tiny little woman! Peer pressure is so powerful. I managed to hide the half drunk bottle in a child’s toy box but the little sod found it and dobbed me in to his mum😡

I do wonder if there’s a degree of manipulation by alcohol manufacturers. If you want to meet friends in the evening the only place you can go is a pub or for a more committed meal. The non-drinking students at my old place of work, lamented that the social gatherings organised by their university clubs and societies revolved around pub crawls, especially the sporting ones (which they rightly see as somewhat ironic!). But it’s all about deman. If nobody wants a late night coffee bar etc, then why would they open? Do they exist in the US? Ours close at about 7pm in well populated areas.

I love Mars Bars but even I limit my intake to one a day and despite my love of pizza, I can’t remember the last time I had one. This is based on calorific content and sugar spikes reported as being bad by researchers. I can’t believe one or two Mars Bar a day is bad for me but they say it is. They don’t define ‘bad’ after all and what ‘bad’ does to my body. I bet they couldn’t differentiate between a 2-Mars Bar/day person and another who doesn’t eat them at all (see what I did there?😉).

And why is that a problem? It’s a natural substance found in fruit and…🤔….coconuts. Has somebody told you sugar is bad for you? 👨🏽‍🔬👩🏻‍🔬 I bet their stats are dubious. My grandmother had 17 sugars in her cup of tea (18 were too sweet for her) and she lived until she was 56!

I dont like ice cream. When I tell people that, they look at me like I’m a puppy-kicker! 😳

We are evolutionarily primed to seek out sugary (carb-rich) food because they are highly calorific and kept primordial humans well fuelled, so maybe the reward centres in the striatum of the brain are highly activated by sugars. Thus Berries were favoured over…kale (🤢 I hate kale) We find sugar tastes pleasant compared to kale

Evolution!🥳

….and there’s no safe limit of heavy metal exposure 😉

They tried something like that here in the U.K. and it didn’t go down well. We do have a sugar tax and does seem to have reduced consumption, but not enough.

Have you heard of a substance called ‘miraculin’. It’s found in a West African fruit, Synsepalum dulcificum or miracle fruit. If you swill miraculin around your mouth for a minute or so it inhibits the ‘bitter’ and ‘sour’ taste buds so any subsequent food tastes much sweeter. Pineapple bursts with flavour, apples are so tasty. It’s amazing and using it drastically reduces the amount of sugar your require on your food to get an enjoyable effect. Tate and Lyle, the sugar manufacturers, bought the rights to it and forbade it to be sold! I used to buy it from Amazon (USA) as it wasn’t available here in the U.K. for the dental student’s taste labs and it went down very well! Be warned, however. The packet advise suggested the effects only last 30-40 minutes when in fact it’s more like 2-3 hours and miraculin once ruined a meal out I had with an old girlfriend….sweet pizza, sweet beer, disgustingly sweet cheese cake 🤢😒

there is an incredibly large body of data that proves living inevitably leads to dying. There is no safe amount of living one can do.

 

[Gyakuto]

there is an incredibly large body of data that proves living inevitably leads to dying. There is no safe amount of living one can do.

I never touch life, it's disgusting and for the weak-minded.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think if you treat it like a different brand to your usual beer, or one of those supposed ‘craft beers’, it’ll change your perception of them. I think Heineken Zero lager tastes like Moosehead which I loved in the 80s (the sold it in Pizza Hut which I regularly frequented!

Oh, I've definitely had a couple of non-alcoholic beers I liked. They just didn't taste like actual beer to me. They're a different drink.

Part of the trouble for me is that there are so many beers I don't care for (every pilsner and IPA right off the bat), to start with, and those are usually the ones non-alcoholic beers strive to be similar to.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Hey, was answering on a phone so not writing at length, but I want to emphasize that I’m very sorry that your mom went through that. In rereading my response to yiu, I hope it didn’t come across as crass. I was not in any way trying to minimize the seriousness of her medical condition or needing a liver transplant. I hope it was clear, but if not, I hope it’s clear now.

Nah, I caught your meaning, Steve. And thanks. She's been doing very well since the transplant.

If anyone else out there has to deal with a loved one going through liver failure, I feel for you - it's tough to see.

 

[Gyakuto]

There is no safe amount of chocolate

How very DARE you! - Richard Tapper Cadbury

 

[Gyakuto]

Oh, I've definitely had a couple of non-alcoholic beers I liked. They just didn't taste like actual beer to me. They're a different drink.

Beer has such a wide range of flavours though. I could drink a German smoked beer or a German chocolate beer and doubt I was even drinking ‘beer’ except they have a bitter taste. But beer it is. So when I would drink alcohol-free beer, I’d just consider it to be a niche beer.

Part of the trouble for me is that there are so many beers I don't care for (every pilsner and IPA right off the bat), to start with, and those are usually the ones non-alcoholic beers strive to be similar to.

Oh yes I agree. I want my beer cold, fizzy and bitter with minimal taste.

Real ale is a big thing here in the U.K., with bearded men drinking small bottles of cloudy concoctions, often with bit’s floating in it, at room temperature in dark scruffy hostelries and thinking they’re sophisticated connoisseurs and look down on lager-drinkers. Real ales seem to have a vile ‘sour’ note to them that I can’t abide 🤢

I once looked after a delightful elderly gentleman in the late 1980s, who was a brewer for Chester Ales. He claimed that if you lifted the lids on the mash vats, you’d see a layer of dead cockroaches on top of the mix 😳 I’m a bloody vegetarian! 😭

 

[Tez3]

I’ll try!


1) Trying to eat 30 different types of plants each week
2) Eating ‘colourful’ foods (rather than beige foods)
3) Adding fermented foods to your diet
4) Give you GI tract a break from digestion (time-restricted eating)
5) Limit refined (ultra refined) foods
(I copied this list from my TV screen where Prof Tim Spector happens to be talking about healthy guts on breakfast TV - synchronicity!)

I watched that too, just before Christmas I came out of hospital after spending 7 days on the medical ward as my stomach was digesting itself. I told the doctor that's what it felt like, he nodded and said yeah, basically it is. 😥😥 I did not expect that.
Massive dose of antibiotics, took ages to feel better and now have to watch for ulcers.