Many hospitalisations and deaths involve injury where the person injured had consumed alcohol, referred to here as “alcohol-related” injury. This report presents data from 2019–20 on 30,000 hospitalisations and almost 1,950 deaths from alcohol-related injury. For both males and females, falls, intentional self-harm and assault were the leading causes of hospitalisation. Among all hospitalisations for injury, 1 in 4 intentional self-harm and 1 in 5 assault cases involved alcohol.

Source: Australian Institute of Health & Welfare

by CAA | Mar 18, 2023

Drunkenness has been a community issue since time immemorial, and there is no empirical data to show it is any worse or otherwise than it has been for many decades, relative to the size of the population.
Decriminalising public drunkenness is fixing a problem that does not exist to any significant degree.

As public drunkenness can be confused with homelessness, vagrancy, mental illness and drug abuse, it is, therefore, sensible that the ‘sobering up’ process should be done under medical supervision, which the Community Advocacy Alliance Inc. (CAA) supports. Equally, because the likelihood of belligerent behaviour is inclined to be more prevalent with drunkenness, securing and safety of these people and the community is and must remain a Police responsibility.

Once the affected person settles and the community is safe, the police can hand them to a facility where clinicians take responsibility.

This whole policy seems to have been designed by people without experience with drunks in the field.

Perhaps a little research should be undertaken, and then the proponents of this social adjustment may just find the number of persons convicted each year for drunkenness as a percentage of the population is meagre. And of those arrested and charged, even fewer are actually convicted, and no record of their indiscretion is recorded.

We reject absolutely the need for racial profiling in this process. Irrespective of the drunk’s heritage or race, they all need the same care.

Exposing the naivety of this proposal, the Herald Sun reports, “Patients at the sobering up site can only be taken with their consent and police or paramedics will need to step in if they become a safety risk or need urgent care.”

This statement alone raises very serious questions and exposes a lack of knowledge of a drunk person’s usual demeanour or the law.

1. With decriminalising drunkenness, the Police have no power to ‘Step-in’ when the contractor’s management of the drunk goes pear-shaped.
   
2. Drunks always consider they are not drunk enough to need care or admit to what they have consumed.
   
3. A person who is perceived to be drunk cannot give Informed consent at law.
   
4. Entering into a debate about sobriety, consent or otherwise, is a recipe for belligerence.
   
5. Our experience is it would be a rare drunk who would agree to the time out in the drunk tank.
   
6. How can a government sub-contractor physically intervene with a drunk?
   
7. What happens when a drunk is involved in a crime, either as a victim or a perpetrator – it does happen?
   
8. A serious risk assessment for contractors out on the street without powers is a disaster waiting to happen. The legal minefield this opens up for the liability of the government and contractors is breathtaking.
   
9. Another legal minefield will occur when the drunk decides they are sober enough to leave the facility, but the clinicians know they are not. Holding them even with their uninformed consent would be unlawful. (currently, Police have four hours to detain somebody who is drunk.)
   
10. Contractors will find difficulty hiring or retaining staff for this high-risk and filthy foul job.
    
11. Another small matter is suitable transport for drunks. The inevitable mess that often is associated with their transport is why police use a Divisional Van that can be hosed out. Putting a drunk in a traditional vehicle is impractical as vomit and other bodily fluids often exuded by drunks tend to permeate every nook and cranny and cannot be removed easily.
    
12. The consequence of placing multiple drunks in a facility not properly designed, quasi cells, will lead to inevitable conflict and a huge risk to clinicians.
    

All police know that when it is determined that a person is drunk, they must be decisive, not enter into debate and secure the drunk immediately to minimise the risk of injury to the drunk, the Police or the public. This skill is learnt and cannot be assumed to exist with untrained subcontractors. A questionnaire is no substitute for years of onsite experience.

The police power of arrest for drunk and disorderly must be left in place to protect the drunks, the Police and the public.

For complete article

In their latest policy brief, the World Heart Foundation (WHF) establishes the evidence base that no amount of alcohol is good for the heart.
The latest scientific evidence shows that any amount of alcohol use, even low-doses, can harm cardiovascular health. The policy brief by WHF calls for urgent and decisive action to tackle the unprecedented rise in alcohol-related death and disability worldwide.

The World Heart Federation has released a policy brief establishing that no amount of alcohol is good for the heart. The brief calls for urgent and decisive action to tackle the unprecedented rise in alcohol-related death and disability worldwide.

“The portrayal of alcohol as necessary for a vibrant social life has diverted attention from the harms of alcohol use, as have the frequent and widely publicised claims that moderate [alcohol use], such as a glass of red wine a day, can offer protection against cardiovascular disease,” said Monika Arora, Member of the WHF Advocacy Committee and co-author of the brief, as per WHF website. These claims are at best misinformed and at worst an attempt by the alcohol industry to mislead the public about the danger of their product.”

Monika Arora, member of the WHF Advocacy Committee, co-author of the brief

For complete article

See also

• Does ‘Moderate’ Drinking Really Protect Against Heart Disease?
  
• There’s No Safe Level for Drinking Alcoho
  

A winning combination, if one of your goals for alcohol use is to induce cancer – But and utter disaster if your design is to minimise cancer risk.
You’d think this now unassailably confirmed health harm reality would be getting major media attention and robust government enabled public health action, yet we have seen thus far, it would appear merely an ‘eyebrow’ raise.                                                                                                                                 
One could launch into a speculative diatribe as to why this revelation – years in the emergence – is raise so little ire in the government and health sector at least. Big Alcohol’s spin, perhaps the tacit leverage that their industry can exercise due to their fiscal contributions to our ‘Night-time Economies’. Perhaps other less observable measures that curry favour within the political sphere – regardless of leanings?
Again, speculation, but one thing doesn’t change is that the ever mounting harms from alcohol are continuing to take both short and long-term toll on our private and public health.                                                                                                                                                                                                           
The historically paraded and deeply concerning health harms of alcohol have traditionally been the demolition of the vital organ of our livers. Of course, the damage to the brain from alcohol use, let alone misuse is well-documented, and (after years of study) the shocking harms alcohol does to the developing foetus saw a new spectrum of life long  and incurable harms done known as Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder.

Now, we have cancer!

Alcohol has been rated a Group One Carcinogen, alongside other ‘fun products’ such as asbestos, and it’s not merely a correlation issue with one cancer, but causal in at least seven cancers types, including breast, mouth and throat cancers.

This is really, really bad news for Big Alcohol and there is no doubt that there will be industry vested interests in keeping a lid on this as long as possible – perhaps that’s another factor in the underwhelming response to this emerging public health nightmare?

We know from research released as far back as 2015, alcohol companies saw the emerging, (then) correlation with heavy alcohol consumption and breast cancer and cynically started incorporating anti-cancer branding in their promotions. This‘Pink Washing’ of their carcinogenic products was called out in a study released by Alcohol Justice as “devaluing and undermining of vital breast cancer charity work.”

Of course, this strategy of faux philanthropy is common place with addiction for profit industries like Big Tobacco, Big Alcohol and now Big Cannabis, all downplaying harms, but simultaneously conceding that…“if there may be some minor side effects, we’re willing to chip in a few dollars to manage that minimal damage”, well so the sentiment goes.

Decision Making: Knowledge is Power – Creating Awareness in a Culture of Silence
Returning to the low hum response to this clearly disturbing reality that, along with all the other harms of this legal ‘recreational’ or self-medicating product, cancers are now a very real outcome of alcohol use.

It would appear it’s not all about consumer indifference, i.e. putting their fingers in their ears and trying to ignore it – no, there’s much more going on than wilful ignorance.

In data released in 2018, via an article posted in Prevention in Oncology, discussing the raising awareness on alcohol and cancer, it was more than wilful ignorance that is undermining awareness. Whilst only around 30% of the 4000+ poll was aware of alcohol as a cancer risk only about 38% of those would limit their alcohol consumption to reduce cancer risk. In this poll however, there were around 70% of people still unaware of this concerning connection.

One can only speculate, but if a more aggressive campaign of awareness was in motion, then (at least on extrapolation of the above statistics) around 40% of the entire polled cohort may adjust their drinking habits, but we’d suspect it may be much more.

For instance, A study conducted as early as 2017, by the University of Adelaide discovered that once genuine awareness was created around this issue, protective decision making was engaged, especially by the youth cohort; “More than 2800 school students aged 12-17 were surveyed about their drinking behaviour by Adelaide University and South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute (SAHMRI) researchers. Those aged 14-17 were deterred from drinking if they knew about the link between alcohol and cancer, but only 28 per cent of students were aware of the connection.”

There are different ways one can do that. Certainly, raising alcohol excise can generate awareness. Hitting the ‘hip pocket nerve’, has known to be an effective way to amend some behaviours.

In 2021 The World Health Organization – Europe release a study and recommendation that stated the following; Doubling current alcohol excise duties could avoid just under 6% (or 180,900 cases and 85,100 deaths) of new alcohol-attributable cancers within the WHO European Region, particularly in Member States of the European Union where excise duties are in many cases very low. So, enacting such an excise is certainly a weapon in the public health arsenal against alcohol induced cancer.

Early this year a credible noise was not only coming out of the Canadian health sector, it got some global traction. Whilst they were not the first to push for Cancer Warning Labels on alcohol products, they were the first to glean some global attention. Part of that attention may also be due to the accompany recommendation that healthier drinking styles should now be officially promoted as only two standard drinks per week (as opposed to a current general medical recommendation of no more than two standard drinks a day)

Dalgarno Institute, as one of scores of members of Movendi International, have not only commended them for their early leadership in calling for cancer warning labels on alcohol products, but joined with them in promoting their research and advocacy.

But there is more we can still do. Dalgarno Institute is again pleased to join with and support Movendi International’s call for a ‘louder voice’ in the marketplace.

As previously mentioned in this article, the public health voice and the citizen advocacy that should accompany that is being dimmed, dulled, diminished by a number of influences – some we have suggested and some we don’t fully know. However, we do need to get louder and louder on this.

Consequently, on this World Cancer Day 4th February 2023, we want to not only point out the need for a greater voice on this public health crisis, but call for you to join with us in creating that louder voice.                                                                                                                                                                  
Dalgarno Institute is joining the Movendi International LOUD 4 CHANGE campaign in actively generating greater awareness of the Alcohol and Cancer Crisis.
You can join with us in simple ways, for starters,

• Share this article on social media and within your networks.
  
• Visit the Loud of Change – Alcohol & Cancer Campaign site
  
• Make your own ‘louder for change’ masterpiece and share it with your networks
  

This World Cancer Day, let’s make some real noise for proactive and protective change
Shout Loud 4 Alcohol Change

References

• Alcohol Directly Causes Cancer, New Study Shows
  
• Alcohol is one of the biggest risk factors for breast cancer (W.H.O)
  
• Pinkwashed alcohol products & promotions exposed in new study
  
• Alcohol Induced Cancer – a Wake Up Call, which is Good News?
  
• Teens drink less if they know alcohol causes cancer — but most don’t — Adelaide University
  
• Raising Awareness of the Link Between Alcohol and Cancer
  
• Increase Alcohol Tax – Reduce Cancers – Save Lives: Modelling the impact of increased alcohol taxation on alcohol-attributable cancers in the WHO European Region
  
• Alcohol Cancer & Canada – It’s Time for Cancer Warning Labels
  
• https://www.loud4change.movendi.ngo/
  

“No studies have shown that the potential existence of a protective effect for cardiovascular diseases or type 2 diabetes also reduces the risk of cancer for an individual consumer. Evidence does not indicate the existence of a particular threshold at which the carcinogenic effects of alcohol start to manifest in the human body. As such, no safe amount of alcohol consumption for cancers and health can be established. Alcohol consumers should be objectively informed about the risks of cancer and other health conditions associated with alcohol consumption.”

For complete statement

Also see,

• Alcohol Induced Cancer – a Wake Up Call, which is Good News?
  
• Alcohol consumption and liver, pancreatic, head and neck cancers in Australia: 2017