Samstag 5. März 2011 von htm
I am sitting on the Justice and Electoral Select Committee as we hear submissions on the Alcohol Reform Bill for two days in Auckland.
There have been so many powerful and moving submissions. Some brave individuals have shared their own stories of alcohol harm. Overwhelmingly submitters are urging that a decisive leadership role is taken in dealing with alcohol harm. Submitters illustrate time and again what research has shown and that is as a drug alcohol causes greater harm to others than to self. (Source: Google Alcohol News, 03/04/11) blog.labour.org.nz, 03/04/11 our Online-Comment:
It’s really funny how many “experts” discuss this problem without knowing the facts. One of the included problems is that information is not coming to the public. In May 2010 the World Health Organization has accepted with all member states a resolution on a Global Alcohol Strategy. The harm alcohol does and the effective measures to reduce the problems are shown in detail. Did the New Zealand people got this information? In many countries the alcohol lobby is so strong that medias and government health agencies did not dare to inform the public.
The WHO calls all of us “passive drinkers” because we all suffer directly or indirectly from alcohol-related harm and we pay during a lifetime without ever being asked an awful lot of money for alcohol-related social costs. (income tax, insurance premiums)
The best measure to reduce harm is to reduce consumption by higher alcohol prices. This reduces consumption in all groups. The majority, the moderate consumers have the best profit. They pay a little more taxes but have the full profit of less social costs. And everybody has the freedom to drink as much as he likes or want to afford. Our freedom is only restricted by the alcohol industry which forces us to suffer and pay the social costs they produce. They have the profits the public has to pay the damage.
To reduce the availability is the second best measure.
To bring down the BAC-limit would be very effective. If it is combined with strong controls. In Europe the result was a reduction of 15 to 20% in mortality, alcohol related accidents and injuries. And the effect remained for years. Why not use the experience of other countries and science?
Dieser Beitrag wurde erstellt am Samstag 5. März 2011 um 13:21 und abgelegt unter Alcohol industry, Alcohol taxes, Allgemein, Availability, consumption, Driving under the Influence, Global, Health, Legal Drinking Age, Letters and comments to editors, mortality, Parliaments / Governments, Passivtrinker, Politics, Prevention, Price, Social Costs, societal effects, WHO, WHO globale Alkohol-Strategie. Kommentare zu diesen Eintrag im RSS 2.0 Feed. Die Kommentare sind derzeit geschlossen, aber sie können einen Trackback auf Ihrer Seite einrichten.