“As Little as 8 Alcoholic Drinks a Week Can Contribute to Dementia, Research Says”

Question

I used the People's website which tens to have bias and not generally a trustworthy source but I was able to find credible information and trustworthy sources within this topic. It is true that 8 drinks per week causes long term dementia and can really affect your health. They did research on people that drank alcohol consistently for years and found that alcohol caused lesions restricting blood flow and overall decreasing health. Everything was backed up by a scientific article showing that it is a fact.

https://people.com/as-little-as-8-alcoholic-drinks-a-week-can-contribute-to-dementia-research-says-11712922#:~:text=Per%20the%20study%2C%20published%20this,associated%20with%20diseases%20like%20Alzheimer's.

Answer 1

True, but to a degree. When you click on the link to the study that was provided in the People article “As Little as 8 Alcoholic Drinks a Week Can Contribute to Dementia, Research Says”, it takes you to a press release from the association responsible for the study. The study was done by the American Academy of Neurology (whose goal is to advance neurology learning and to encourage care for brain health), who claim that heavy drinkers that have eight or more drinks every week have an increased risk of having hyaline arteriosclerosis. “Hyaline arteriolosclerosis is a condition that causes the small blood vessels to narrow, becoming thick and stiff. This makes it harder for blood to flow, which can damage the brain over time. It appears as lesions, areas of damaged tissue in the brain” the release says. However, an important detail left out of the People article is that there results couldn’t be completely confirmed, with the press release saying in its first paragraph that “The study does not prove that heavy drinking causes brain injury; it only shows an association”, and it saying at the end of the release that “A limitation of the study was that it did not look at participants before death and did not have information on the duration of alcohol consumption and cognitive abilities.” Also, while the press release does claim that excessive alcohol consumption can increase the chances of facing thinking and memory issues, it never mentions the possible of developing dementia, although it does claim it can increase the risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, saying “Researchers also found heavy and former heavy drinkers had higher odds of developing tau tangles, a biomarker associated with Alzheimer’s disease, with 41% and 31% higher odds, respectively.” However, there was a separate study done by BMC Public Health titled “Alcohol use disorders and associated chronic disease – a national retrospective cohort study from France” that claimed it it’s results that people with alcohol use disorders had a higher risk of developing dementia, saying that “AUDs were associated with significantly higher risks of hospital admission for all alcohol-attributable disease categories: digestive diseases, cancers (exception: breast cancer), cardiovascular diseases, dementia, infectious diseases, and injuries” (Baillot, Mallet, Rehm, Schwarzinger & Thiebaut). Overall, I would still put this claim as true, but know that the “can” is doing a bit of heavy lifting.

https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/5251 

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-017-4587-y

Comments

I think you did a good job at looking into the limitations of the study, and the wording of the claim. You made a good point to talk about how the article was more focused on association, and not causation since these two get mixed up a lot. You could talk about how the study talks about alcohol use disorders and how that differs from the claim, which is just 8 drinks a week.

---

Great breakdown! I think it’s key to note that while the study shows an association, it doesn’t prove causation. The confusion around “brain injury” and dementia is understandable, especially since the study didn't mention dementia directly. Also, your reference to the BMC Public Health study adds helpful context, showing that alcohol use disorders do have a stronger connection to dementia risk. Nice work!

---

I like the extra research you did into what the name of the disease means and entails. I wonder however if the question was just worded poorly in regards to the “dementia” aspect of it because some people use that and Alzheimer’s interchangeably not knowing that there is a difference. That being Alzheimer’s is a more specific version of dementia.

---

I'll have to agree with News Detective 'dra' when I say that I am quite impressed by your in-depth research beyond what your source provided you with. What encouraged you to look beyond the seemingly realistic statistics of The People article? It is repeated agian and again in science that "Correlation does NOT equal causation". I hav very few criticisms to this fact check and appreciate as well that you addressed how it can be true, but only to some degree. It validates much of the research that has been done to prove this claim while also making a close comparison to other research that has been done on the topic.

---

You did an excellent job of delving deep into the major sources of the People article and describing the limitations of the research — I particularly enjoyed that you named the disparity between association and causation. Something you may want to include is that the American Academy of Neurology study looked at brain injury markers (such as hyaline arteriosclerosis and tau tangles) that are reliable predictors of dementia, though they did not study dementia outcomes directly themselves. Also, your observation that the word "can" does a lot of heavy lifting is actually significant — it would be great to emphasize that "can" implies possibility, not certainty. You may want to more explicitly distinguish between what the AAN study discovered and what the BMC Public Health study did, just so readers don't inadvertently confuse the two kinds of evidence.

Answer 2

A 2025 Neurology study of 1,781 brain autopsies found that people reporting ≥ 8 drinks per week had 133 % higher odds of hyaline arteriolosclerosis (small-vessel damage) and 41 % higher odds of tau tangles, which are both markers linked to dementia, versus lifelong abstainers. However, the study was observational, showing only an association, not proof of direct causation. The claim appeared on People.com, a mainstream lifestyle outlet prone to sensational headlines. The primary research, by contrast, is published in Neurology, a leading, peer-reviewed journal. The People.com article was written by a staff health reporter, a legitimate journalist. The Neurology paper’s authors are neuroscientists at the University of São Paulo with credible publication records. The Neurology study was published online in April 2025, and media coverage appeared in mid- to late-April 2025, so it’s very current. People.com correctly quotes the percentage increases but frames them as proof that 8 drinks per week “causes” dementia, overstating the study’s conclusions that only note statistical associations. The People.com story uses attention-grabbing language, for example, “eight drinks a week can contribute to dementia”, without fully explaining limitations, indicating a sensational bias. The headline claims a direct causal link that 8 drinks/week “causes” dementia, whereas the Neurology paper reports increased risk markers but stops short of proving that drinking alone definitively produces dementia. Regularly consuming eight or more alcoholic drinks weekly is associated with brain vessel damage and protein tangles linked to dementia risk, but there is no high-quality evidence that this level of drinking inevitably causes long-term dementia in every individual. Therefore, the claim is overstated and misleading.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/alcohol-use-could-contribute-to-dementia-by-damaging-the-brain

https://www.advisory.com/daily-briefing/2025/04/23/drinking-brain

Comments

Your line stating: "People.com correctly quotes the percentage [...]" is a good way to showcase the credibility of a source. Furthermore, not only did you utilize quotes but also statistics to signify that this study is nonetheless authentic.

---

I like how you point out the difference between what the study itself says and how the media headline exaggerates it as more sensational. It's reassuring to know that the study shows a link, but no proof that alcohol causes dementia directly.

---

The amount of numbers and data used makes this claim stand out. This is because you offer the article's perspective and the numbers that back up the perspective. This allows the article and claim you make to be more credible because of the facts that help back it up, helping make your claim stronger.

---

I appreciated that you began your response using scientific facts because it helped prove your point a lot there although there are links that complement each other regarding dementia and alcohol use, there was not a direct link proven.

---

Your inclusion of the possible shortcomings in the studies that you cited was a great addition that adds significant credibility to your fact-check. Addressing the difference between association and causation in the results of the studies you used to prove your point increases the quality of your writing and allows the reader to have a more nuanced understanding of your topic.

---

What I liked about this post is that it breaks down the difference between what the research says and how the media presents it. I appreciate that it called out the sensationalism in the headline and explained that the study only shows an association, not proof. It helped me understand the real takeaway from the research without the hype.

---

The use of credible sources and data to back them up is great! I also like the way you used Italics to highlight the name of the paper you are quoting. Lastly, the use of dates in your fact check to give the reader context to when the data was posted is a nice touch.

Answer 3

This source is misleading because of some vagueness. As said by Dementia UK, 8 drinks a week doesn't "cause" dementia, rather than increases the risks of long-term dementia. The statement mentioned above about restricting blood flow is true, it also causes brain shrinkage that include memories. The drinks also depend on what type of alcohol is being used for the week's drinking, if it's small seltzers or beers with 5% alcohol chances are the risks are lower than other tests. Sources recommend you to avoid hard liquor such as vodka and stick with low risk drinks such as certain wines. Furthermore, yes in general 8 drinks a week has you at a high risk of dementia but relies on the volume of alcohol in each of those drinks.

https://www.dementiauk.org/information-and-support/living-with-dementia/alcohol-and-dementia/

https://www.alzheimers.org.uk/about-dementia/managing-the-risk-of-dementia/reduce-your-risk-of-dementia/alcohol

Comments

I enjoy your perspective and think it is very smart that you took the time to interpret the original claim correctly. This is a tactic used by those in the medical field to scare people. Similarly people who raise concern about things in our food that are dangerous, but leave out the part that it would take 100x the amount that’s in our food to kill us. It would be the same as saying vanilla is bad for you because it can have an intoxicating effect, when in reality it is only bad in large amounts and completely fine at regular amounts. This claim is indeed misleading.

---

Excellent observation highlighting ambiguity in the original claim—pointing out that it is a risk factor instead of a causal factor is important. I also appreciate that you've brought in the nuance of drink type and alcohol amount, which a lot of sources miss. I do have a suggestion: it may be helpful to define what is meant by a "standard drink" in the studies you are referencing, since that varies by country, and that might change how individuals interpret "8 drinks." Also, have any of the studies identified a cut-off point where risk increases significantly? That context may help make your fact-check even more powerful.

---

This response brings up a valid point about the difference between increasing risk and directly causing dementia, and it adds helpful context about alcohol type and strength. However, it's a bit unclear and disorganized, with grammar issues that make it harder to follow. Clearer wording and a more precise grammar and structure would improve it.

---

This is a really good perspective on this claim. I liked how you pointed out that alcohol increases the risk of dementia instead of causing it directly. Highlighting the role between brain shrinkage and blood flow adds good information to this claim. Overall this fact check helps make the original claim more accurate and helps the argument.

---

I like that you didn't say that claim was unfair, but clarified what it was probably trying to say, and added the facts that are true, like restricting blood flow.

---

I liked how you used specific examples regarding what alcohols have been tested to prove this theory, because it provided a real life visual to understand!

---

This is a real good take on the claim, it does seem a bit of exaggerated and there was definitely some gray area in the "8 drinks" statement. Your response specified that by stating that you're at less risk if you're drinking 5% drinks rather than more concentrated drinks like liquor. So essentially the claim isn't completely false but rathe vague on the amount of alcohol it would take to suffer and contribute to dementia.

---

I liked how you broke down the process of what is true and what isn't from the original claim. I like how you explained the effects drinking can have and I liked how you explained the different percentage types and what is best to drink.

---

I agree with the above comment and appreciate that you took the time to think deeper and more critically about situation.

---

You make a great point about the difference between alcohol causing dementia and increasing the risk—that’s an important clarification. I like how you included specific examples, like the type of alcohol and how stronger drinks pose more danger. That adds depth. However, a few sentences are a bit unclear or wordy, so tightening up the grammar and structure would help make your point even stronger. Try rephrasing some parts for clarity and smoother flow. Overall, strong effort with solid research!

---

I love the fact that you commented on the common logical reasoning error of being made regarded the difference between correlation and causation. People tend to mistake a correlation to be a causation. Here, the article errors in the use of the word "cause". I would love to see any studies that suggest a causation but in the medical world, it is extremely hard to prove causation. A mere correlation may be true but further studies must be made as there are many other factors related to increasing risk of dementia other than alchohol consumption.

---

I really appretiate your interpretation of the claim and think that it was very helpful that you explained what the sources were saying. Adddtionally, I like how you provided many examples to support your argument that the claim in missleading and exagerated. I think these are very compelling examples and I would have to agree with you that it does very much depend on the volume within the drinks.

---

I thank you for the explanation of the relationship between alcohol and risk of dementia, but I believe you might be less specific on causation as opposed to risk. Dementia UK states that alcohol is not a cause of dementia — it raises the risk over time. Also, it would be beneficial to include the fact that not all alcohols are made equal — higher-proof liquors such as vodka are a greater risk than weaker drinks such as beer or some wines. To add that observation would make your fact-checking more robust and precise.

Answer 4

Parts of this claim are true but it is exaggerated. The same People article stated that 40% of people who never drank had brain injuries, while 44% of heavy drinkers had brain injuries. Leaving out this piece of information exaggerates the extent to which drinking can lead to dementia. 

https://people.com/as-little-as-8-alcoholic-drinks-a-week-can-contribute-to-dementia-research-says-11712922

Comments

I like how you pointed out the statistics with the percentages. It shows that, yes, alcohol can possibly contribute to dementia, but it doesn’t necessarily mean it directly causes it.

---

I like how you referenced the percentages to show that there was exaggeration in the claim. The incorporation of information about people who never drink and still have brain injuries helps us determine wether the fact is true by looking into correlation since correlation does not mean causation.

---

I think your answer would've been improved with the correct facts, not over exaggerated. Although i like that you pointed out the exaggeration directly.

Answer 5

Claim: “As Little as 8 Alcoholic Drinks a Week Can Contribute to Dementia, Research Says” 

There is significant evidence proposing even moderate consumption of alcohol might be a contributor to brain injury and risk of dementia. Peer-reviewed journal sources such as Lancet Public Health (2018) and JAMA Network Open (2022) indicate consuming alcoholic beverages even up to volumes of 7–8 times per week contributes to alterations in brain structure, including white matter lesions, correlated with eventual worsening of cognitive capacity. Although People magazine does provide a summary of studies, it is a secondary source and must be cross-checked with original studies. The studies cited are peer-reviewed and hence more accurate than secondary sources. But note here that alcohol is only one of the causes of dementia risk and that genetics, general health, and lifestyle are also involved.

Sources:

Lancet Public Health study on alcohol and cognitive decline: Lancet Public Health, 2018J

AMA Network Open on alcohol and brain structure: JAMA Network Open, 2022

Claim: Yes, there is an increase in the risk for cognitive impairment for moderate drinking, as studies actually do indicate. Do utilize peer-reviewed journals for best information and remember there are many variables in dementia risk.

Comments

Nice job finding legitimate research on this topic rather than a news article or tabloid material!

---

This is a good fact check you found reliable information and sources and used that to prove the information. Great job!

---

I like how you emphasized the importance of peer-reviewed sources and other academic studies. Since the claim in scientific, it is important to reference scientific sources such as Lancet Public Health.

---

While this is a sensitive topic, I think you properly addressed the article and claim at hand. The Emphasis on using peer-review sources is great and you kept in mind that causes for dementia are often hard to isolate in individuals.

---

Something that I appreciate about your fact-check that I have not seen in many of the others under this question is mentioning that there are many different variables in dementia risk. Heavy alcohol consumption will not always lead to increased dementia risk, as you said, other factors at play need to be considered to have a comprehensive understanding of the relationship between alcohol consumption and neurodegenerative diseases.

---

It’s interesting how the study shows that even though impaired cognitive abilities were mainly seen in former drinkers, long-term drinking still clearly damages the brain over time. Eight drinks being enough to cause injury is serious, especially since it could lead to dementia or memory loss later in life. It really shows how even habits people might not think twice about can have lasting effects on brain health.

Answer 6

People's website received its information from the American Academy of Neurology and it does like roughly 8 drinks to cause dementia/injury to the brain. However impaired cognitive abilities were only observed in former drinkers, however long term drinking can damage the brain which in turn can lead to a decrease in memory/thinking abilities.

https://www.aan.com/PressRoom/Home/PressRelease/5251

Comments

This response shows an effort to evaluate the source and includes a reference to a credible source, which is a strength. However, it’s a bit repetitive and unclear, especially with the phrasing around who is affected and how. The grammar could also be improved to make the argument more precise and easier to understand.

Answer 7

The headline refers to a Neurology study (Apr 9 2025) that labelled anyone who drank ≥ 8 standard drinks a week as “heavy” and found they had 133 % higher odds of vascular brain lesions and 41 % higher odds of tau tangles – pathologies linked to dementia.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2025/04/250409173113.htm

The study was cross-sectional and observational (post-mortem autopsies + family interviews). It identified an association, not a proven cause-and-effect between drinking and dementia. Even “moderate” drinkers (≤ 7 drinks/week as classified by the study) showed a 60 % increase in the same vascular lesions compared with abstainers, so the paper does not define a clear ‘safe’ threshold.

Global health authorities already advise “avoiding harmful use of alcohol” but do not specify 8 drinks/week as a universal cut-off.

https://www.who.int/news/item/14-05-2019-adopting-a-healthy-lifestyle-helps-reduce-the-risk-of-dementia

Current evidence suggests that consuming eight or more alcoholic drinks a week is associated with brain changes (vascular lesions and tau tangles) that are considered biological precursors of dementia. However, the study does not prove that this level of drinking causes dementia, nor does it show that drinking fewer than eight drinks is risk-free. Readers should understand that the headline is accurate about the observed link but overstates certainty about causation.

Justo AF O, et al. “Association Between Alcohol Consumption, Cognitive Abilities, and Neuropathologic Changes: A Population-Based Autopsy Study.” Neurology (published online Apr 9 2025). DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000213555.

Comments

I understood the claim to be that eight drinks a week *can* cause dementia. Doesn't the research indicate that?

---

What I liked about your answer is how clearly it explains what the study found, especially the difference between association and causation. It also helped me understand that "moderate" drinking might carry some risk. I also appreciate that it gave proper context and didn’t just go along with the headline.

Answer 8

New research says drinking as little as 8 alcoholic drinks a week can raise the risk of dementia. A 2024 study with over 313,000 people found that dementia risk grows with any amount of alcohol, even at low levels. This challenges older ideas that moderate drinking might be safe or even helpful. The study used strong methods to show a clear link between alcohol and dementia. It suggests there’s no safe amount to drink if you want to lower your dementia risk.

Older studies had different findings. Some, like one from 2018, said drinking up to 8 drinks a week didn’t increase dementia risk compared to not drinking. They even hinted it might be better than quitting altogether. But these studies might have been flawed because they included former heavy drinkers as non-drinkers, which skewed results. The new research fixes these issues and shows that even light drinking, like 8 drinks a week, adds to the risk.

The topic is still debated. Some health groups, like the Alzheimer’s Society, say moderate drinking—up to 8 drinks a week—hasn’t been clearly tied to higher dementia risk. But the 2024 study disagrees, pushing for less alcohol to protect brain health. This shift in thinking is important. It shows we need more research to settle the debate and guide people on drinking safely.

Sources:

• Medical News Today: Dementia Risk and Alcohol

• Alzheimer’s Society: Alcohol and Dementia Risk

• BMJ: Alcohol Consumption and Dementia

Comments

I don't see your sources linked in URL link form. Also, mentioning specific studies in-text would be a good idea so readers understand where you're pulling your information from. Thanks!

Answer 9

This claim is true. The primary source used, the People's website, claims that as little as 8 drinks can contribute to dementia. There is importance in the word contribute, as their secondary source, published in ScienceDaily, states that the heavy drinking is not a direct cause of brain injury, but is associated with it. There is a point to be made about the People's website's bias, as there is a clear bias against the consumption of alcohol. In the People's website, they include information that is unnecessary toward their claim, and seems to only have the purpose of encouraging the reader to drink less. 

Comments

I agree with the claim, but it’s important to emphasize that while the study shows a link between alcohol consumption and dementia risk, it doesn't prove direct causality. The distinction between "contribute" and "cause" is crucial here. Also, the People's website does seem to have a clear bias against alcohol, which might affect the way they present information. Including additional details that aren't directly related to the study could be seen as pushing a particular agenda rather than just focusing on the research findings.

Answer 10

This article, written by Charlotte Phillips of People Magazine, claims that drinking just eight alcoholic drinks a week can contribute to dementia. Phillips cites a publication by Science Daily to support her claim. The headline of this article is slightly altered from Phillips', stating that eight or more drinks per week are linked to signs of injury in the brain. The word "dementia" isn't even mentioned in the article; rather, Alzheimer's disease is mentioned. However, the Science Daily article exclaims that heavy drinker's don't necessarily have an increased risk of developing Alzheimer's, but brain lesions which are associated with diseases similar to Alzheimer's, which is only mentioned once. Thus, it seems like Phillips' article is exaggerating claims, even saying in the final paragraph that "there likely won't be a single consensus" on the issue, which points to how inconclusive this study may have been.

Comments

I enjoyed reading your perspective on this claim, you went deeper on the subject and notified of the lack of evidence that was held in the original claim.