www.alkoholpolitik.ch

Alcohol industry resists legal restrictions.
The alcohol industry profits from governments with a policy that legally restricts them as minimal as possible. That is why the worldwide alcohol industry takes a stand against measures such as the raise of excise-duty, the introduction of minimum prizes for cheap booze, raising the minimum age for buying alcoholic beverages, restricting the number of outlet points, putting warning labels on products and restricting advertisement. It’s these measures that can achieve the reduction of alcohol use and the decline of damages caused by the use of alcohol. The industry doesn’t mind having to do more informing, because this is mostly ineffective, does not threaten the revenues and benefits the image of the industry.
Consequences of alcohol are terribly hard; governments remain passive. …
Influence of the alcohol industry costs human lives. ….
A number of European health organizations have concluded that the influence of the alcohol industry on the policy of national and European governments is very effective. The result of this is that essential (evidence based) policy changes are held of and the dramatic damages caused by alcohol are not contained. The success of the industry, according to these organizations, means that many people die unnecessarily due to alcohol use and that costs for society are kept needlessly high. …
Screening the alcohol industry lobby. …..
Eleven organizations from different countries, that are concerned about the successful lobby of the alcohol industry, have jointly analyzed this lobby. The results of this are captured in the report „The Seven Key Messages of the Alcohol Industry“. The report can be ordered through EUCAM (www.EUCAM.info), a partnership of a number of European health organizations. The purpose of this report is to give politicians, officials and health organizations insight into the strategic working manners and thinking of the alcohol industry. …
The seven messages of the industry that are illuminated through examples from various countries are: … (See our article on January 2nd 2011)

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?

Supporters Say It Could Raise Millions For Health Programs
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — A plan to increase the state alcohol tax by 10 cents a drink may be gaining momentum in Annapolis. Maryland has recently increased the gas tax, the tobacco tax and the sales tax, but the tax on alcohol hasn’t been changed in 38 years, thanks mostly to the state’s powerful alcohol lobby.
According to those who support increasing the alcohol tax this year, 10 cents gets more than one would think.
The Maryland Budget and Tax Policy Institute provided a House committee with a new study revealing that in the past three years, the state has cut hundreds of millions of dollars in programs that benefit the developmentally disabled in addiction services, medical assistance and other community health care projects. (Source: Google Alcohol News, 03/03/11) wbaltv.com, 03/03/11 our Online Comment: When a tax rise on alcohol is in discussion we forget always that there is also the possibility of reducing the social costs and alcohol-related harm, depending on the amount of taxation. If the new tax brings a reduction in consumption this not only brings more income for the state but could compensate the additional expenses of moderate consumers. And this is the majority. A new tax should be fixed with an article regarding compensation of inflation.

The SMART project (Standardizing measurement of alcohol-related troubles) [1] has been looking into developing standardised methodologies to survey drinking behaviours as well as standarised cost-benefit analyses of alcohol policies.
The project has been funded under the EU Public Health Programme and it is to be seen in the context of An EU Strategy to support Member States in reducing alcohol related harm. Adopting a common strategy requires common methodologies to monitor both its implementation and its impact. However, there is not a standardized survey methodology which could be applied across Europe for comparative purposes. This was the gap that the SMART project came to fill. …
[2] Ten countries participated representing various drinking cultures and different levels of political development ranging from Nordic Finland, new EU countries including the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary and Poland, Western European countries: Germany, UK and Ireland as well as Mediterranean Italy and Spain. (Source: Eurocare Newsletter January-February 2011)

Europe is the heaviest-drinking region in the world — we drink, on average, 11 litres of pure alcohol each year. Alcohol costs our society an estimated EUR 125 billion every year in spending on such things as the treatment of diseases and policing and in terms of lost productivity, etc.
This being so, could the Commission please provide data that show how much of the European budget is currently spent on the promotion of alcoholic beverages?
Does the Commission intend to continue to spend these levels of funds on the promotion of alcohol?
Answer given by Mr Cioloș on behalf of the Commission: … (Source: Eurocare Newsletter January-February 2011)

Alcohol’s role in everything from injury and relationship breakdown to trouble with the police, emerges in a poll of 2,221 people commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG).
According to the survey, some 11% of people polled have seen a friend or relative’s relationship end as a direct result of heavy drinking. One in five (21%) know someone who has driven while over the legal alcohol limit. And 51% know someone who has been a victim of alcohol-related violence, or has been attacked themselves.
The survey also found that 14% of children are being brought up in a family where at least one adult has a drink problem.
The YouGov poll paints a graphic picture of alcohol’s many negative consequences. The survey found that:… (Source: Eurocare Newsletter January-February 2011)

Letter from MEP Alojz Peterle to his fellow MEPs about the pros and cons of the alcohol consumption
On Tuesday 7 December 2010, the MAC (MEPs Against Cancer) organized a round table discussion on the topic of Alcohol and Cancer. The outcome of this round table was clear: drinking alcohol can cause different types of cancer, such as cancer of the mouth, larynx, pharynx, oesophagus, breast, colorectum and liver.
In the discussion that followed, attention was also drawn to the potential beneficial effects of alcohol.
In an attempt to break down the misunderstandings about the effects of alcohol on health, the president of the MAC, Mr Alojz Peterle, has sent out a letter to his colleagues in the European Parliament. This letter aims to provide a balanced vision on the relationship between alcohol and health, based on the latest scientific insights.
Click to read the Short version of the letter or if you want to download the Extended version.
(Source: Eurocare Newsletter January-February 2011)

Food and alcohol firms are obliged to maximise profit. To include them in health policy planning is a recipe for disaster.
by Anna Gilmore and Jeff Collin
Alarm bells rang in the public health community when Andrew Lansley announced last summer that leading food and alcohol companies were being invited to join a „partnership“ with government to help address the obesity and alcohol epidemics. As further details of the Public Health Responsibility Deal for alcohol emerge, much through investigative work by the Guardian, the bells ring ever louder.
The Public Health Responsibility Deal, part of the government’s „big society“ idea, is just one of several such deals. For alcohol and obesity, it brings together large numbers of food and alcohol company representatives with far fewer government and public health representatives in a series of „networks“ charged with encouraging and enabling consumers to adopt better diets and drink sensibly. However, full details of their function or how they relate to broader public health policies have yet to emerge. (Source: Alcohol Reports, 02/22/11) guardian.co.uk, 21 February 2011 our Comment: This is a very competent article. But most of the readers are not informed enough to understand and accept it. Education is needed. Not in order to reduce alcohol harm but to understand the problem and which control measures are necessary to reduce consumption and alcohol related harm. We are all passiv-drinkers. We suffer from reduced quality of life and we pay without beeing asked to, our whole life for immense alcohol related social costs. This is a big loss of freedom.

The State Workforce System.
The growing financial cost of drug and alcohol abuse puts tremendous pressure on every social sector.
The present report, part of a larger Family Funding Study project, is the fifth and last in the series that examines the cost of drug and alcohol abuse to West Virginia’s criminal justice, healthcare, education, welfare, and workforce systems. A comprehensive report, incorporating estimates from all these sectors, will be produced at the end of this project. (Source: Alcohol Reports, 02/15/11)

..invest to save says Alcohol Concern amidst rising hospital admissions.
Alcohol-related hospital admissions could hit 1.5 million a year by 2015 if further investment in alcohol is not prioritised, say Alcohol Concern. The charity calls for increased investment as the rising trend of alcohol-related hospital admissions could bring to the cost of alcohol to the NHS to £3.7 billion per year.
Read the report ‚Making alcohol a health prority: opportunities to reduce alcohol harms and rising costs‘ [pdf] An Alcohol Concern press release