Alcohol liars could claim 250,000 falsehoods in the next 20 years.

Thousands are 'at risk of alcohol death' say doctors

Poor alcohol regulation could cost up to 250,000 lives in England and Wales over the next 20 years, doctors warn.

It's a good job I am no longer naive enough to think doctors are paid to heal the sick, otherwise I would be quite surprised at this righteous rant by our Hippocratic brethren on the BBC.

Neither am I naive enough to imagine the BBC would check the stats it's given before publishing them.

Once again, the work of rubbishing the rubbish to get to the truth is left to those of us outside the mainstream media. Are you sitting comfortably (preferably with a tipple in hand)? Then lets begin.

Writing in The Lancet, leading liver disease specialists say measures including a minimum price of 50p per unit are urgently needed.

Why 50p. Why not 45p or 52.5p? In what format, tax? What if the breweries just increased their prices to 50p per unit and made more profit? would that be ok?

We know full well that putting up the price of booze would just penalise the poor and encourage more people to brew their own, unregulated and untaxable grog.

Home brewed beer has to be done with a lot of skill and patience. Having more people do that would lead to bigger problems than we have now, that's for sure.

They also said the coalition government was "too close" to the drinks industry.

I think Clegg comparing the smoking ban to the death penalty, and refusing even a review of the smoking ban while pubs close down by the thousand, proves that statement to be woefully inaccurate.
But the Department of Health said it was taking "tough action", while the drinks industry said it was "playing its part in tackling alcohol misuse".

As I'm sure, JJB Sports are doing their bit to tackle baseball bat misuse.

The scientists predicted UK deaths from liver disease in four different scenarios.
The best case was based on the UK following the example of France, which had a deep-seated problem in the 1960s, with high liver disease deaths linked to the consumption of cheap alcohol.

And I thought France was a paragon of responsibility with it's "European cafe culture". So how did they overcome the horrors of alcohol misuse?

Drinking levels there were reduced by imposing strict marketing restrictions.

Of course! Because if you ban advertising, everyone stops using the product. Just like smo.... oh.

Following that example, the doctors predict the UK could reduce the current level of deaths from liver disease of 11 per 100,000 by a third.

Interesting. Liver disease deaths of 11 per 100,000. So out of a population of 38 million adults, that's.... let me think... *steam*.... 4,180 deaths per year. Or 83,600 deaths over the next 20 years.

Yes?
But they warn if nothing is done, deaths from all alcohol-related causes - including cancers and road accidents - could claim the lives of 250,000 people in England and Wales over the coming two decades.

Meh?

Oh, that's all alcohol related deaths. If a piano falls on your head when you walk out of the pub, that's alcohol related.

So if we deduct 83,600 liver disease deaths from the total, that gives us 166,400 deaths due to cancers, road accidents an pianos. Staggering. Absolutely fucking staggering.
He added the claim that the government was "too close" to the drinks industry had come from the health select committee, who said ministers listened too much to the drinks industry and not enough to their own health experts.

That's because their own health experts talk complete and utter arse wibble.

The doctors also criticise government moves to include representatives from the drinks trade - but not alcohol health experts - on its "responsibility deal" board, which will help steer public health policy on drinking.

Because alcohol health "experts" have lost all credibility by making continuous statements like the one we are discussing today.
If you sit in a field crying wolf, the villagers will stop listening.

Don Shenker of Alcohol Concern added: "Government need to decide whose side it is on, that of the general public or drinks industry shareholders?

May I take a brief moment to point out that the drinks industry shareholders ARE THE FUCKING PUBLIC!!

Sorry. Got a little annoyed there.

But a spokesman for the Wine and Spirit Trade Association said: "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."

He also had the courtesy not to take that further and point out that Don Shenker obviously has no clue what he's whacking on about, and that's why he never got invited to the "responsibility deal" party.

"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."

Quite. Particularly not on the public dime.

13 Comments:

Dioclese said...

Bucko said...

The Wasp said...

Bucko said...

Bucko said...

The Wasp said...

Trooper Thompson said...

JuliaM said...

Ivan said...

Bucko said...

Guy Jean said...

George Speller said...

Angry Exile said...