They found that people who worked more than 48 hours a week were 13 percent more likely to engage in risky drinking than people working 35 to 40 hours a week.
And since almost 40 percent of Americans working full time work more than 50 hours a week, according to a 2014 Gallup poll, that could mean a lot of problem drinkers.
Since the researchers are based in Finland, they defined risky drinking by the European standard as more than 14 drinks per week for women and 21 drinks for men. In the U.S., risky drinking is defined more conservatively, at more than 7 drinks per week for women and more than 14 drinks per week for men.
Thursday, January 15, 2015
"Working Longer Hours Can Mean Drinking More"
"Around the world, people working long hours are more likely to drink too much, according to a study that analyzed data from 61 studies involving 333,693 people in 14 countries."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
"Risky drinking"?
That sounds intriguing.
If that's not a compelling argument for slacking off then I don't know what is.
@Eric
I had the opposite reaction. The article almost provoked me to pull out my bottle of tequila.
Wait until you're retired and find out how much time you have to drink.
I think this is right on the money .
One day at a time Lem.
So are Europeans twice the risk takers we are? I've read about the amount of alcohol consumed in some other countries or even in the U.S. in past times, and I can't imagine how anybody got anything done. I'd be hung over after the first day and never catch up again. How did they do it?
I have serious workers comp problems, because California is crazy. The legal standards include genius ideas like if an injury is even 1% work related then the employer is on the hook for the whole bill, and the employee's evidence always trumps the employer's when there is a conflict in the facts. We also have a lawyer/doctor/legislator corruption ring going statewide. This results in workers comp rates that are 2 - 3 times higher than in neighboring states. So I ask my insurers what more can I can do to lower my costs beyond all the safety stuff we already do, and they suggest drug and alcohol testing: pre-hire, post-injury, and random. Being a freedom and privacy fanatic, I'm not too keen on that stuff. I pay people for their time, effort, and results, not their lifestyle.
I know my people well, and they are pretty comfortable with me, so I know mostly who drinks and who uses recreational drugs. That stuff is grounds for termination during work hours, but it's none of my business outside. Here is the thing: The people who get injured are overwhelmingly those who do not imbibe in any such recreation. The partiers are the least injured group.
The other thing is that most everything people do is legal here now with a prescription, and the testing doesn't tell if they are under the influence of the drug or just used it off hours.
What I really want to test for is a tendency toward gratitude and honesty.
There's a stunner.
This is bs. When I work, I don't drink much. When I have nothing to do, I get bored and drink more.
Post a Comment