Time to get serious about curbing drinking

Responsibility for reducing the harmful consumption of alcohol can no longer be left to the industry that produces the stuff

AT THIS time of year it is traditional to take stock of one's life and resolve to be a better person. For many people with an indulgent holiday season under their belts, that involves cutting down on alcohol.

Easier said than done. Booze is relatively cheap, widely available and addictive. This toxic combination has created a public health disaster: alcohol is now the world's third-biggest cause of illness and premature death, behind only smoking and high blood pressure.

The alcohol industry is well aware of this and understands that it bears some responsibility for taking action. But it has not been very successful. Alcohol consumption is roughly the same as it was 20 years ago and is a more pressing public health problem now than it was then.

The industry must shoulder part of the blame for this failure. Its strategy for tackling alcohol harm largely consists of promoting policies that don't work especially well, while disputing the effectiveness of those that do (see "The battle of the bottle").

This is a classic strategy from an industry whose bottom line is threatened by scientific evidence. We have seen it time and again, from tobacco and fossil fuels to salt.

Up until now, politicians have generally been content to let the alcohol industry regulate itself. Not for much longer. Drinking has become so problematic that some governments are ready for a showdown. Scotland is taking the lead with a proposed minimum price for a unit of alcohol. England, Wales and Ireland are considering following suit.

Alcohol companies will not lie down and just let this happen. Scotland's proposals are already the subject of a legal challenge by groups led by the Scotch Whisky Association. One plank of their argument is that minimum pricing "will be ineffective in tackling alcohol misuse". That flies in the face of extensive scientific evidence (The Lancet, vol 373, p 2234).

If the industry is serious about reducing harm, it should come out in support of minimum pricing. New year's resolutions usually fail, and so do alcohol policies that are based on personal restraint.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

Have your say

Only subscribers may leave comments on this article. Please log in.

Only personal subscribers may leave comments on this article

Subscribe now to comment.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Source: http://feeds.newscientist.com/c/749/f/10897/s/27a5ac43/l/0L0Snewscientist0N0Carticle0Cmg217289930B90A0A0Etime0Eto0Eget0Eserious0Eabout0Ecurbing0Edrinking0Bhtml0Dcmpid0FRSS0QNSNS0Q20A120EGLOBAL0Qonline0Enews/story01.htm

toure patti smith lottery winners lottery winners april fools day pranks ohio state vs kansas daniel von bargen