Differences in Next-Day Adverse Effects and Impact on Mood of an Evening of Heavy Alcohol Consumption between Hangover-Sensitive Drinkers and Hangover-Resistant Drinkers

Alcohol hangover versus dehydration revisited: The effect of drinking water to prevent or alleviate the alcohol hangover

The alcohol hangover is a combination of negative mental and physical symptoms which can be experienced after a single episode of alcohol consumption, starting when blood alcohol concentration (BAC) approaches zero. A popular theory suggests that dehydration is the primary cause of alcohol hangover and that the consumption of water could alleviate hangover symptoms. Here, the current evidence on the relationship between hangover severity, thirst, and water consumption is summarized. The positive correlations of the amount of water consumed with both hangover severity and thirst suggest that both dehydration and the hangover are co-occurring after-effects of alcohol consumption. While hangovers were typically relatively enduring, dehydration effects were usually mild and short-lasting. Survey data revealed that water consumption during or directly after alcohol consumption had only a modest effect in preventing next-day hangover. Also, the amount of water consumed during hangover was not related to changes of hangover severity and thirst. Thus, water consumption was not effective to alleviate the alcohol hangover. Taken together, these data suggests that alcohol hangover and dehydration are two co-occurring but independent consequences of alcohol consumption.

Absenteeism, Presenteeism, and the Economic Costs of Alcohol Hangover in The Netherlands

The alcohol hangover is defined as the combination of negative mental and physical symptoms that can be experienced after a single episode of alcohol consumption, starting when the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) approaches zero. Alcohol hangover symptoms such as fatigue, nausea, and headache can negatively affect daily activities, including work performance. The alcohol hangover can therefore be a cause of both absenteeism (not going to work) and presenteeism (going to work while hungover). An online survey among a convenience sample of n = 347 Dutch adults examined the number of days of absenteeism and presenteeism associated with having a hangover as well as the loss of productivity when going to work when hungover during the year 2019. In the Dutch sample, 8.1% of employees reported one or more days of absenteeism due to hangover in 2019, and 33.4% reported one or more days of presenteeism. The analyses revealed that alcohol hangover was associated with 0.2 days of absenteeism and 8.3 days of presenteeism and a productivity loss of 24.9% on days worked with a hangover. The estimated associated costs for the Dutch economy in 2019 of absenteeism (EUR 234,538,460) and presenteeism (EUR 2,423,603,184) total EUR 2,658,141,644. In conclusion, the alcohol hangover is associated with absenteeism, presenteeism, and reduced performance at work while hungover. As such, the annual costs of the alcohol hangover have a significant impact on the Dutch economy. However, these first findings on the economic costs of the alcohol hangover should be considered a rough estimate. They should be verified in a longitudinal study to minimize recall bias, including a nationally representative sample of sufficient sample size.

An evening of alcohol consumption negatively impacts next-day immune fitness in both hangover-sensitive drinkers and hangover-resistant drinkers

BACKGROUND

Survey research found poorer baseline immune fitness for self-reported hangover-sensitive drinkers compared to hangover-resistant drinkers. However, up to now a limited number of clinical studies revealed mixed results regarding the relationship between the concentrations of biomarkers of systemic inflammation in blood or saliva with hangover severity, and could not differentiate between hangover-sensitive drinkers and hangover-resistant drinkers. The aim of this study was to assess immune fitness and saliva biomarkers of systemic inflammation at multiple timepoints following an alcohol day and alcohol-free control day.

METHODS

The study had a semi-naturalistic design. In the evening before the test days, participants were not supervised. They could drink ad libitum drinking on the alcohol test day and refrained from drinking alcohol on the control day. Activities and behaviors on the alcohol and control day were reported the follow morning. On both test days, from 09:30 to 15:30, hourly assessments of immune fitness (single-item scale) and overall hangover severity (single-item scale) were made and saliva samples were collected for biomarker assessments.

RESULTS

N = 14 hangover-resistant drinkers and n = 15 hangover-sensitive drinkers participated in the study. The amount of alcohol consumed on the alcohol day did not significantly differ between the hangover-resistant group (mean (SD) of 13.5 (7.9) alcoholic drinks) and the hangover-sensitive group (mean (SD) of 12.4 (4.4) alcoholic drinks). All hangover-sensitive drinkers reported having a hangover following the alcohol day (overall hangover severity score 6.1 (on a 0-10 scale) at 09:30, gradually decreasing to 3.3 at 15:30), whereas the hangover-resistant drinkers reported no hangover. On the control day, immune fitness of the hangover-sensitive group was significantly poorer than the hangover-resistant group. On the alcohol day, both groups showed a significant reduction in immune fitness. The effect was evident throughout the day, but significantly more pronounced in the hangover-sensitive group than the hangover-resistant group. No significant differences between the groups were found at any time point on the two test days for saliva concentrations of Interleukin (IL)-1β, IL-6, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas hangover-sensitive drinkers reported a hangover following an alcohol day and hangover-resistant drinkers did not, both groups reported significantly reduced immune fitness throughout the day. However, the reduction in immune fitness among hangover-sensitive drinkers was significantly more pronounced in comparison to the hangover-resistant group.

Predictors of Hangover Frequency and Severity: The Impact of Alcohol Consumption, Mental Resilience, Personality, Lifestyle, Coping and Mood

Mental resilience is the ability to bounce back from daily life stressors such as divorce or losing a job. Extensive research has demonstrated a negative relationship between mental resilience and alcohol consumption. That is, both the quantity and frequency of alcohol consumption are greater in individuals with lower levels of mental resilience. There has, however, been little scientific attention paid to the relationship between mental resilience and alcohol hangover severity. The objective of this study was to evaluate psychological factors that may impact the frequency and severity of alcohol hangovers, including alcohol intake itself, mental resilience, personality, baseline mood, lifestyle, and coping mechanisms. An online survey was conducted among Dutch adults (N = 153) who had a hangover after their heaviest drinking occasion in the period before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic (15 January to 14 March 2020). Questions were asked about their alcohol consumption and hangover severity on their heaviest drinking occasion. Mental resilience was assessed with the Brief Mental Resilience scale, personality with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised Short Scale (EPQ-RSS), mood via single item assessments, and lifestyle and coping with the modified Fantastic Lifestyle Checklist. The partial correlation, corrected for estimated peak blood alcohol concentration (BAC), between mental resilience and hangover severity was not significant (r = 0.010, p = 0.848). Furthermore, no significant correlations were found between hangover severity or frequency and personality and baseline mood. For lifestyle and coping factors, a negative correlation was found between the use of tobacco and toxins (i.e., drugs, medicines, caffeine) and the frequency of experiencing hangovers. Regression analysis revealed that hangover severity after the heaviest drinking occasion (31.2%) was the best predictor of hangover frequency, and that subjective intoxication on the heaviest drinking occasion (38.4%) was the best predictor of next-day hangover severity. Mood, mental resilience, and personality were not relevant predictors of hangover frequency and severity. In conclusion, mental resilience, personality, and baseline mood do not predict hangover frequency and severity.