Teenage alcohol deaths rise: Industry resists regulation

[boozwatch]

The UK (following France) is debating at the moment how to further regulate alcohol sales and advertising in the light of a worrying rise in teenage alcohol related deaths (nearly 2 per day - 23% of deaths). Problem is the industry itself which, under the guise of Corporate Social Responsibility, lobbies hard and succesfully to resist regulation.

Via the Portman Group, MEAS and drinkaware.ie (Diageo, Irish Distillers, Heineken etc) it also monopolises drink education, selling a message which is a very equivocal and watered down version of proper advice on the real dangers of alcohol. The BMJ has written unequivocally about "two pressing and uncontested problems: the excessive drinking of young people and their massive exposure to alcohol advertising". Though the Portman group continue to deny it (BBC 5 live yesterday), advertising works to build sales and binge drinking is becoming a growing danger in Ireland too.

Just as Bertie Ahern fuelled the property bubble by deregulating the banks, so the alcohol bubble grew when his government allowed a 70% increase in off licence outlets. Mary Harney as Minister of Heath also shelved regulation legislation after the industry lobbied succesfully via her husband. Surely there needs to be a review of the clearly failing self regulation in Ireland too.

Fuller info on Gargle Nation

[C. Flower]

A nurse in my family, working in the UK, spent a year in a ward of terminally ill liver disease patients. This used to be a complaint suffered mainly by the over 50s. Her ward specialised in the under 30s and there were some young people only in their late 20s dying from liver failure, not a nice way to die. Once the disease has set in it appears not to be curable.

She said they found it very hard to accept what was happening to them and had had no idea that such a thing could happen to them so young as a result of binge and regular drinking.

Drink is also a factor in young male suicides and binge / session drinking has a depressing effect on the brain after the initial euphoria has worn off.

But still, there's money to be made in this great "industry".

[Holly]

As long as alcohol is legal, nobody will need more off-licenses just to stock-up. Drinking is not an impulsive activity but a planned one and where addiction is involved, its purchase will be a priority for spending.
The social problem we have is caused by drunkenness being a condoned activity among the young and having fewer shops and pubs will not change this.

[Dr. FIVE]

Parents fault not the industry imo.
All too easy for them to blame the evil bright yellow alcopops when you have 9 pubs in town and no facilities for adolescents in the evenings.(up and down the country)

I would see any attempt at limiting off-licences the work of the VFI and their friends.
You can close down every offie barr one and kids will still get it if they want.

[Dr. FIVE]

And kids don't follow advertising they follow their peers.
There has only ever been one TV advert for Buckfast about 15 years ago yet everybody drinks it.

[C. Flower]

As long as alcohol is legal, nobody will need more off-licenses just to stock-up. Drinking is not an impulsive activity but a planned one and where addiction is involved, its purchase will be a priority for spending.
The social problem we have is caused by drunkenness being a condoned activity among the young and having fewer shops and pubs will not change this.

Availability has got to make a difference when you are dealing with children who don't have cars.

But I understood from previous reading that price is the best way of reducing drinking and smoking ?

Of course, these days, class A drugs could be cheaper than legal ones. What happened there ?

[Starfire]

It really is simple - make drunkenness in a public place illegal and strip offenders and simply release them in their birthday suit into the wilderness for a few days without anything - they will be so busy trying to find food to stay alive never mind cloths they won't have time for alcohol - a few days would sort them out and they could reapply to join society with an undertaking not to break the rules.

You could put social dissidence with them. and the bankers .

[Holly]

It really is simple - make drunkenness in a public place illegal and strip offenders and simply release them in their birthday suit into the wilderness for a few days without anything - they will be so busy trying to find food to stay alive never mind cloths they won't have time for alcohol - a few days would sort them out and they could reapply to join society with an undertaking not to break the rules.

You could put social dissidence with them.

You might just be onto something here, Starfire.

[PaddyJoe]

I think the OP over simplifies the alcohol issue in this country. Its not just a question of affordability and advertising. We've always had a cultural acceptance of alcohol abuse.
In most European countries getting badly drunk in public is looked on with a certain amount of disapproval. In Ireland its either a badge of honour(depending on age) or is dismissed as kicking over the traces.
Historically alcohol prices in Ireland have been much higher than now in real cost of living terms and never seem to have acted as a brake on consumption.

[Kev Bar]

The VFI have already insulted the adults of the nation with the insult that is the 10pm off-licence closing and the early closing of clubs.

I think we all remember that if you were planning to buy booze as a kid, you weren't going to be thwarted by closing times.

Publicans want people to drink as much as possible in as short time as possible.

Advertising?
Well it's ploughing fertile ground in this country.
But do no underestimate the intent of the drink industry and its advertisers.
I recall seeing a internal ad agency creative brief for a TV ad for a well known youth orientated drink.

The job was to dramatise how product X unleashed the "quick witted super-me".

[boozwatch]

I think the OP over simplifies the alcohol issue in this country. Its not just a question of affordability and advertising. We've always had a cultural acceptance of alcohol abuse.

Historically alcohol prices in Ireland have been much higher than now in real cost of living terms and never seem to have acted as a brake on consumption.

I agree with you that social attitudes encouraging (or at least not disapproving of) drunkenness are a big part of why alcoholism is so prevalent, and why the industry has such an easy ride in Ireland.

Also true to say though that de-regulation, availability and advertising are proven drivers of high alcohol consumption. eg. Prof Gerard Hastings writes in the BMJ that 'Research has established that alcohol advertising....encourages young people to drink alcohol sooner and in greater quantities'.

While individuals are responsible for their choices, an industry that encourages high consumption results in more individuals making that choice, especially the young. No wonder then that the alcohol industry puts so much time and resources into lobbying, advertising and broadening availability, all of which the FF govnt facilitated, with the results we now see.

I agree that public attitudes to alcohol have put no real breaks on this process, but I also think that the public refusal to see things in collective terms is an equal problem. Just as the church tried to palm the child abuse scandals on individual priests when the institution was equally to blame. Similar to the often stated view that people are unemployed because they don't really want to work. So imo we are going down the wrong route simply putting the blame for drinking on individuals, and letting government and industry off the hook.

Our collective failure to hold government to account for its failure to represent public good over big business lobbying is not restricted to alcohol of course. Nama, Anglo Irish, Corrib Gas to name a few. Excessive drinking could be seen as a natural consequence of our collective refusal to take these issues on?

[Holly]

....
So imo we are going down the wrong route simply putting the blame for drinking on individuals, and letting government and industry off the hook.
....

Neither the government not the breweries are responsible for the irresponsibility of the youth subculture that thinks drunken hooliganism, vomiting in public, driving while drunk, etc., is cool. There is no collective societal culpability in this, only the ignorant attitudes of those who freely choose to engage in habitual excessive boozing.

[MediaBite]

Neither the government not the breweries are responsible for the irresponsibility of the youth subculture that thinks drunken hooliganism, vomiting in public, driving while drunk, etc., is cool. There is no collective societal culpability in this, only the ignorant attitudes of those who freely choose to engage in habitual excessive boozing.

I think that's incredibly naive. The 'youth subculture' is not a culture created by and for themselves by young people - it's one they inherit and embellish from adults, from society at large and one moreover that is actively and subtley promoted by the alcohol industry. I'm deeply suspicious of the motives of people who say that this is all down to the individual. The individual does carry responsibility but it is criminally indifferent to pretend that young teenagers and adults should be judged harshly for failing to withstand the immense pressures to drink that they are exposed to every day of their lives. It's no accident either that the 10% of the drinking population who are addicted account for over 50% of the industry's profits. The alcohol industry needs alcoholics to maintain profitability. Your argument suits them perfectly: nothing needs to be done, advertising aggressively to young people is fine, restricing availability is pointless. Meanwhile addiction rates and profits are soaring.

[boozwatch]

Neither the government not the breweries are responsible for the irresponsibility of the youth subculture that thinks drunken hooliganism, vomiting in public, driving while drunk, etc., is cool. There is no collective societal culpability in this, only the ignorant attitudes of those who freely choose to engage in habitual excessive boozing.

Don't agree. The 'hooligans' weren't born that way. A Society can create a delinquent sub-class like this in a number of ways. Stretch the gap between rich and poor, provide a badly resourced, top down education system, fail to invest in infrastructure, disconnect electorate from political decision making, fail to address inequality, fail to provide opportuntities, lack of transparency, cronyism, high advertising and sale of alcohol, build depressing soulless sink estates with poor prospects and resources. Ireland can take credit for ticking every one of these boxes. See the results, (Limerick, Inchycore, Knocknaheeny etc) and compare with countries which have done the opposite.

[Dr. FIVE]

Its also the the majority having to pay the price for the antics of the few.
Most people can walk home minding their own business after a night out. Most of us are responsible, can hold our drink and know our limits

Joe Duffy or Primetime have never done a show about that thus feeding FF/VFI the sensation and moral outrage the needed to keep them mammys outside of something they know nothing about.

How many backbench revolts did we have over licensing while NAMA and the guarantee sailed through?

You will always have fighting and puking when the whole of Dublin are kicked onto the street at the same time to compete for resources and there are limited kebabs.

VFI and FF are at the heart of this.