In an article in The Lancet, the experts say that the current policy to reduce cheap alcohol sales falls far short of the measures needed to prevent hundreds of thousands of lives being lost to liver disease.
Commenting on the article, Sir Richard Thompson, president of the Royal College of Physicians, said in a statement: “How many more people have to die from alcohol-related conditions, and how many more families devastated by the consequences before the government takes the situation as seriously as it took the dangers of tobacco.
“We already know from the international evidence that the main ways to reduce alcohol consumption are to increase the price and reduce the availability of alcohol, yet the government continues to discuss implementing marginal measures while ignoring this evidence.”
France had seen “phenomenal success” in cutting death rates, partly by curbing availability of cheap alcohol, claimed the article.
Writing in The Lancet, Ian Gilmore, a former president of the Royal College of Physicians, Nick Sheron and Chris Hawkey say: “Plans to ban the sale of alcohol beverages below cost (duty plus value added tax) and to increase duty on beer over 7.5 per cent strength are inconsequential because of the tiny fraction of sales that fall into either category.
“These policies suggest that the Government remains too close to industry and lacks clear aspiration to reduce the impact of cheap, readily available and heavily marketed alcohol on individuals and society.”
They say that other countries with comparable cultures, genetics, and attitudes to alcohol had similar levels of liver disease in the 1980s, with around 5 deaths per 100,000 each year. But while in most countries this level has remained stable, in the UK it has more than doubled to 11.4 deaths per 100,000.
Continued on next page They predict that there could be up to 250,000 lives lost
They predict that there could be up to 250,000 lives lost over the next 20 years owing to alcohol induced liver disease.
The authors say that “UK drinks producers and retailers are reliant on people risking their health to provide profit”.
But the Wine and Spirits Trade Association (WSTA) attacked the data.
WSTA Spokesman Gavin Partington said in a statement: “The various projections take no account of the most recent Government data showing a continued fall in consumption of alcohol and a decline in the number of deaths from alcohol related illnesses.
“The authors ignore the fact that alcohol taxes and prices are among the highest in Europe in contrast to France, a country with low prices yet cited as a nation having achieved a reduction in liver-related deaths.
“The drinks industry is rightly playing a constructive role in discussions with other stakeholders as part of the Government’s public health responsibility deal. We are committed to playing our part in addressing the issues associated with alcohol misuse.”
Don Shenker, chief executive of Alcohol Concern, backed the article in The Lancet. “Government needs to decide who’s side it is on, that of the general public or drinks industry shareholders,” he said in a statement. “We have to accept that in order to save both lives and our quality of life certain measures which the industry won’t like must be introduced to protect the public’s health.
“This includes raising the price of the cheapest drinks to at least 50p per unit and giving local councils the right to refuse licenses on health grounds.”
David Poley, chief executive of the Portman Group, responsibility body for the UK drinks producers, said in a statement that the statistics show alcohol-related deaths falling.
“That´s why the industry puts its energies into funding health education campaigns and working with people who are serious about reducing alcohol misuse in the UK. Creating doomsday scenarios is not in anyone’s best interests, least of all the responsible majority of people who enjoy alcohol in moderation as part of a healthy lifestyle."
