Re: Survival of the Sudsiest By F. Will

[Guest guest]

<<nonessential items like beer>>

What sort of heretical thinking is this? LOL.

Do one thing every day that scares you.

Eleanor Roosevelt

From: Lee <jackalope_lepus@...>Subject: [Flu] Survival of the Sudsiest By F. WillFlu Date: Monday, July 14, 2008, 7:02 AM

Survival of the Sudsiest By F. WillThursday, July 10, 2008; A15Perhaps, like many sensible citizens, you read Investor's BusinessDaily for its sturdy common sense in defending free markets and otherrational arrangements. If so, you too may have been startled recentlyby an astonishing statement on that newspaper's front page. It was ina report on the intention of the world's second-largest brewer,Belgium's InBev, to buy control of the third-largest, Anheuser-Busch,for $46.3 billion. The story asserted: "The [alcoholic beverage]industry's continued growth, however slight, has been a surprise tothose who figured that when the economy turned south, consumers wouldcut back on nonessential items like beer.""Non wh at"? Do not try to peddle that proposition in the bleachers orat the beaches in July. It is closer to the truth to say: No beer, nocivilization.The development of

civilization depended on urbanization, whichdepended on beer. To understand why, consult 'smarvelous 2006 book, "The Ghost Map: The Story of London's MostTerrifying Epidemic -- and How It Changed Science, Cities, and theModern World." It is a great scientific detective story about how ahorrific cholera outbreak was traced to a particular neighborhood pumpfor drinking water. And begins a mind-opening excursion into arelated topic this way:"The search for unpolluted drinking water is as old as civilizationitself. As soon as there were mass human settlements, waterbornediseases like dysentery became a crucial population bottleneck. Formuch of human history, the solution to this chronic public-healthissue was not purifying the water supply. The solution was to drinkalcohol."Often the most pure fluid available was alcohol -- in beer and, later,wine -- which has

antibacterial properties. Sure, alcohol has itshazards, but as breezily observes, "Dying of cirrhosis of theliver in your forties was better than dying of dysentery in yourtwenties." Besides, alcohol, although it is a poison, and an addictiveone, became, especially in beer, a driver of a species-strengtheni ngselection process. notes that historians interested in genetics believe that theroughly simultaneous emergence of urban living and the manufacturingof alcohol set the stage for a survival-of- the-fittest sorting-outamong the people who abandoned the hunter-gatherer lifestyle and,literally and figuratively speaking, went to town.To avoid dangerous water, people had to drink large quantities of,say, beer. But to digest that beer, individuals needed a geneticadvantage that not everyone had -- what describes as thebody's ability to respond to the intake of alcohol by

increasing theproduction of particular enzymes called alcohol dehydrogenases. Thisability is controlled by certain genes on chromosome four in humanDNA, genes not evenly distributed to everyone. Those who lacked thistrait could not, as the saying goes, "hold their liquor." So, manydied early and childless, either of alcohol's toxicity or fromwaterborne diseases.The gene pools of human settlements became progressively dominated bythe survivors -- by those genetically disposed to, well, drink beer."Most of the world's population today," writes, "is made up ofdescendants of those early beer drinkers, and we have largelyinherited their genetic tolerance for alcohol." suggests, not unreasonably, that this explains why certain ofthe world's population groups, such as Native Americans and AustralianAborigines, have had disproportionately high levels of alcoholism:These groups

never endured the cruel culling of the geneticallyunfortunate that town dwellers endured. If so, the high alcoholismrates among Native Americans are not, or at least not entirely,ascribable to the humiliations and deprivations of the reservationsystem. Rather, the explanation is that not enough of their ancestorslived in towns.But that is a potential stew of racial or ethnic sensitivities that weneed not stir in this correction of Investor's Business Daily. Sufficeit to say that the good news is really good: Beer is a health food.And you do not need to buy it from those wan, unhealthy-looking peoplewho, peering disapprovingly at you through rimless Trotsky-stylespectacles, seem to run all the health food stores.So let there be no more loose talk -- especially not now, with summerarriving -- about beer not being essential. lin was, asusual, on to something when he said, "Beer

is living proof that Godloves us and wants us to be happy." Or, less judgmentally, and forsecular people who favor a wall of separation between church andtavern, beer is evidence that nature wants us to be.http://www.washingt onpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/ article/2008/ 07/09/AR20080709 01934.html

[Guest guest]

Hi , I think it is a joke in honor of AB being purchased by

InBev. But I posted it because it discusses this book about cholera:

The Ghost Map: The Story of London's Most Terrifying Epidemic -- and

How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World.

>

> <<nonessential items like beer>>

> What sort of heretical thinking is this? LOL.

[Guest guest]

As much as I disagree with Will's political opinions, I do

enjoy his way with words.

> >

> > <<nonessential items like beer>>

> > What sort of heretical thinking is this? LOL.

>