Opposing Views

OK, it's time I dealt with a serious issue, for once. Alchohol consumption. Preferably beer. On one side we have (the fictional) Dean Woermer saying in "Animal House" (1978), "Fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son." OTOH, Cliff (a slightly less fictional character [heh] ) outlined the Buffalo Theory of Alchohol Consumption" on a "Cheer's" episode pretty much thusly: "Well you see, Norm, it's like this... A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo and when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members. In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now, as we know, excessive drinking of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers." (Thx to DNW for the Buffalo Theory.) Well, there you have it. The arguments for and against alchohol consumption. Diametrically opposed, neither one seems compelling. I fear the controversy is with us forever, given the chasm that gapes between these two intellectual giants' positions and the near inmpossibility that we lesser mortals can reconcile the stances of these two great authorities on the effects of booze, glorious booze, hot sausage and mustard, While we're in the mood... Sorry. That's another story.