Moderate alcohol consumption and h - CARBC
Supplementary material to a Letter published by the British Medical Journal in February 2012: Moderate alcohol consumption and health benefits: how good is the science? A critique of the Ronksley et al meta-analysis Stockwell, T. 1 , Greer, A. 1, 2 , Fillmore 3 , K., Chikritzhs, T. 4 and Zeisser, C. 5 1 Director, Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia (Corresponding author) Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria Box STN CSC 1700, BC, Canada Email: firstname.lastname@example.org 2 Graduate Student, Dalla Lana School of Public Health University of Toronto Toronto, Ontario, Canada 3 Senior Scientist, Institute for Scientific Analysis, San Francisco, CA, USA and Professor, University of California, San Francisco, CA USA 4 Professor, National Drug Research Institute Curtin University GPO Box U1987 Perth WA 6845, Australia 5 Postdoctoral Fellow, Centre for Addictions Research of British Columbia University of Victoria, BC, Canada Introduction This supplementary document provides more background and explanation regarding methods used to identify errors in the Ronksley et al  meta-analysis which we critique in the Letter. We also provide a full list of the 84 references they employed categorised according to the types of error we identified. Based on meta-analysis Ronksley and colleagues  asserted that the association between moderate alcohol consumption and reduced mortality risk was "beyond question". A companion paper  concluded that strong evidence for underlying biological mechanisms warranted refocusing research towards investigating how best to communicate health benefits to the general population. We reviewed all of the 67 studies which generated the 84 articles in the Ronksley meta-analysis. All but two suffered from at least one of six serious methodological problems.