Let me start by saying I’m not a big fan of alcohol. Apart from the odd Guinness now and then, or a sweet liqueur, I don’t drink. In my experience the vast majority of psychoactive substances aren’t worth the bother, especially if you factor in the next day ‘hangover’. In fact I would count only two, or three if you count caffeine, and one of those is borderline.
A major new analysis has laid bare the health burden booze is causing in New Zealand, with its role in hundreds of deaths and tens of thousands of hospital cases.
An advocacy group says it is also “frightening” alcohol was implicated in nearly 129,000 ACC claims over the year captured by the new Otago University-led stocktake.
All very alarm sounding until you realise that given an average of one drinking session per adult per week, the number of times people drink is around 210 million times yearly. Or to put it another way the percentage of instances of alcohol use resulting in an ACC claim is... wait for it... 0.061 per cent. Wow, quick, someone do something! And, of course, it’s a advocacy group.
In June, a Ministry of Health-commissioned report estimated the cost of alcohol harm at around $9.1 billion – half of it due to fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) alone.
So at least half is indirect harm, in particular stupid women who have no regard for their unborn child.
Now, the first national study of its kind in more than a decade has teased out its impact on a wide range of health conditions and diseases.
It found in 2018, just over 900 deaths, along with 29,282 hospitalisations and 128,963 ACC claims were attributable to alcohol.
About 42% of deaths were from cancer, with another 33% from injuries and the rest stemming from conditions liver cirrhosis, pancreatitis and epilepsy.
So 42 per cent of deaths from cancer. And how many of those deaths do we know for sure had alcohol as a ‘but for’ factor? Even if Uncle Joe wasn’t such a boozer, how do we know he wouldn’t have gotten cancer anyway? To put it bluntly, it’s total bullsh*t.
Men accounted for the vast bulk of health harm – and the rate of alcohol-attributed deaths was twice as high for Māori.
Yeah, well. We all know guys get stupid when they get pissed. And, while I’m here, if a particular race or people collectively have a problem with, say, alcohol, maybe, just maybe, collectively, they’re the problem and not everybody else.
[...] The report set out several policy options to better tackle the burden, including restrictions on booze marketing and availability, introducing new national screening and intervention programmes – and a higher excise tax.
Yes, that’ll work. Those with a drinking problem will just stock up. Which means they’ll drink more, because they’re alcoholics and there’d be more alcohol in the house. Meanwhile if you happen to forget to buy that six-pack and only just remembered, you’re out of luck (if it’s past 9pm or whatever). Anyone remember the five o’clock swill?
[...] “Alcohol is our most harmful drug, and its social and economic cost was recently estimated at $9.1b – so it’s a big deal.”
Roughly the same as obesity.
[...] Alcohol Beverages Council executive director Virginia Nicholls said NZ Health Survey data showed more than 80% of Kiwi adults drank responsibly, and rates of hazardous drinking were falling over time.
Of course this is buried at the bottom of the article.
She said the pan-industry group didn’t support population-wide policies that resulted in higher prices and instead favoured targeted measures.
“These measures should prioritise the individuals who need the most help without negatively impacting the majority of moderate drinkers who consume alcohol responsibly.”
In other words, target those with a problem and leave the rest of us alone. And this applies to any recreational drug, whether it’s cannabis, nicotine or ecstasy. And, yes, even methamphetamine.
You also can’t measure the harmfulness of alcohol or any recreational drug without also taking into account its benefits. Pleasure is a benefit. Enjoyment is a benefit. Socialisation is a benefit. People drink alcohol for these reasons and more. And since 80 per cent of adults drink responsibly, this means the benefits must far outweigh the harm.
The big question though is why is this even a story? Shouldn’t the report be something that’s sent to the MOH to have a look at and make recommendations on? Could it be because alcoholism is rife amongst journalists and there’s a bit of projection going on? I mean, if collectively journalists have a problem with alcohol, then it must mean the whole country has a problem, right?
Kevin is a Libertarian and pragmatic anarchist. His favourite saying: “There but for the grace of God go I.” This article was first published HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.