I received an email response to my post on the possible health benefits of alcohol from a lady in Canada who had experienced severe negative health effects from alcohol – notably seizures. Her late husband had been similarly afflicted and had in fact died as a result.
I asked her about their alcohol consumption, and she said that they used to drink a “mickey” of vodka between them every day. I wasn’t familiar with the term, but when I looked it up, it is 375ml, which at 40% alcohol by volume comes out to about 10 standard drinks – definitely not moderate drinking, even between two people.
What she said, though, was that she and her husband had no idea that their drinking could lead to such consequences. The impression I had was that they weren’t even aware that drinking this much was considered excessive.
Which is why I support current moves to include health warnings on alcohol labels, similar to the ones that have been on cigarettes for years. The 1996 Liquor Review brushed past this; the Food Standards Association in 2000 decided that warnings would be ineffective, although they approved a warning for caffeinated beverages a year later despite the fact that caffeine carries much lower health risks.
The Alcohol Advisory Council is again pushing for warnings, similar to those in the USA but hopefully better legislated so as to be more visible and effective, and the NZ Government is supportive. Of course, we will almost certainly get a change of government soon, to one which is much less keen on “social engineering”, so it remains to be seen whether these changes will go through.
Part of the problem is conveying a convincing, but not oversimplified, warning in a brief text. As Alcohol Health Watch notes in a briefing paper on alcohol labelling, there is no level of consumption that can be considered safe for all people at all times; alcohol is a drug. That’s the hardline position, and I can see the sense of it. However, on the other hand, moderate drinking is safe for most people most of the time, and there is a place for education around what is and is not moderate, since many consumers are simply unaware (like my correspondent was).
Whether the place for this is on an alcohol label is, of course, debatable. Should the label say something like, “Alcohol can cause health issue X. Drinking more than 4 standard drinks is unsafe, and drinking less than that may be unsafe for many people.”? (The number of standard drinks is already on the label.) Or should it simply give a warning about alcohol consumption and its effects and leave the rest of the message to be communicated in other ways? Probably it should.
The big push is to get warnings to women about the risks of drinking while pregnant, which is the biggest issue with alcohol. But warnings about other consequences, such as brain damage, liver damage, some forms of cancer and the many other harms excessive alcohol does, should go on the labels too, I believe.
Technorati Tags: alcohol, alcohol labeling, alcohol warning, consumer warning, drinking, fetal alcohol syndrome
Related posts:
- Alcohol: the possible benefitsIf health was the sole consideration being used to make...
- Beginning moderate alcohol consumption in middle age may have health benefitsThe American Journal of Medicine has published a study entitled...
- Alcohol in moderation plus exercise for heart healthA follow-up to yesterday’s post about small lifestyle changes for...
- The two faces of alcohol: dangerous drug and health benefitTwo recent articles in TVNZ’s Health News highlight the two...
- Less alcohol, more movement recommended to prevent future health crisisTwo interesting articles on BBC Health recently. The first talks...