Alcohol under 25: the prefrontal damage no one wants to see

Alcohol under 25: the prefrontal damage no one wants to see

A video from a trauma surgeon is shaking up the debate about alcohol. Her thesis is direct: any amount of alcohol, even what is considered moderate, causes pogre and irreversible damage to the prefrontal cortex. And that damage begins far earlier than most people assume, especially in brains that are still developing. The reaction was not long in coming: from staunch defenders of the 'glass of wine' to former drinkers who confirm the long-term effects.

The neuroscience argument: lobotomy as a metaphor

The viral video pulls no punches. To illustrate the impact of alcohol on the prefrontal cortex, it turns to the history of the lobotomy: in 1949, António Egas Moniz won the Nobel Prize for perfecting that operation, which deliberately destroyed the prefrontal region. Walter Freeman operated on more than 3,400 people. The comparison is brutal: drinking alcohol, even in small doses, would be doing something similar, only slower. Current neuroscience holds that the prefrontal cortex — responsible for impulse control, decision-making and planning — keeps maturing until age 25. Introducing alcohol during that period would amount to interfering with its construction.

The trenches of moderate drinking

Faced with this warning, the social reaction is predictable. Those who drink daily argue that they notice no problems, that their health is good, or that the longevity of certain regions — such as the one mentioned in an article by La Región — disproves the alarmism. There, wine with meals is customary and life expectancy is high. Others focus on social pleasure: 'alcohol is the best anxiolytic', people say, and doing without it would expose a 'crappy society'. There are also those who distrust the flood of 'experts' on social media who launch new prohibitions every week. 'Only the sick are looked after', some sum up.

The dead end of responsible drinking

The debate reveals an underlying tension: alcohol is so embedded in the culture that any scientific questioning clashes with social identity. Teetotallers are seen as oddballs or failures, while drinkers cling to the French paradox or the example of centenarians who drink wine every day. Science moves forward, but the uncomfortable question remains: are we willing to stop drinking even if the data say there is no safe dose? For now, the only consensus is that alcohol is a neurotoxin; the disagreement lies in what we do with that information.