Australia's biggest drug problem is with alcohol.
The health effects associated with excessive drinking are not only a huge burden on the health system now, they look to be a much bigger burden in the future, as rates of binge drinking rise.
John Howard's solution?
Distract everyone from the issue by announcing that he will be spending $150 million of taxpayers' money tackling the crystal meth problems in the community.
That's not to say that programmes aimed at eliminating the problem of crystal meth use are not worthy of government funding. It's just a little... insidious... that despite the mounting evidence for the scale of the problem, and the push by public health experts for government action, none of the major parties have so much as offered a peep on the issue.
Surely the political influence of the alcoholic beverages industry couldn't be overriding the health needs of the Australian public?
"At the moment it's a bit like David fighting Goliath. Government revenue is directly related to the economy of the alcohol industry, and it has powerful political connections with both sides of politics. That makes cultural change very difficult."
An Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report of GP visits in 1999 found that 40 per cent of men 18 to 24 had at-risk levels of alcohol consumption. By last year the figure had increased to 49 per cent.
Rates for women rose from 33 to 36 per cent. Rates for 25 to 44-year-old men grew from 35 to 41 per cent and 22 to 25 per cent in women.
*cricket*
*cricket*
UPDATE: In my Food Safety and Quality Management lecture on labelling last Monday, I realised that there is an anomaly in the laws regarding mandatory warning statements for pregnant women on certain beverages: caffeine-containing beverages are required to warn that pregnant or lactating women should avoid consuming the product, but alcoholic beverages are not currently required to be labelled as such.
10 comments:
Thats because there is no evidence that proves alcohol consumption is harmful to pregnant women and their babies. Obstitricians and GPs advise differently.
GPs advise no alcohol, whereas obstitricians advise low consumption is fine. (with the exception of when a mother is breastfeeding).
Low consumption of alcohol is actually relatively 'safe' for pregnant women... it's purely a political move as to why no one wants to actually broadcast that there is no evidence that proves ANY alcohol consumption is harmful to pregnant women.
Have a look at the Australian Alcohol Guidelines www.alcohol.gov.au its purely a RECOMMENDATION that pregnant women do not consume, because of the lack of evidence.
Sorry, but what utter rubbish. There is no conclusive evidence for harmful effects of caffeine upon the foetus either, yet the risk is deemed sufficient to include a mandatory warning upon the label of drinks that contain no more caffeine than the average cup of coffee.
Alcohol, on the other hand, when consumed during the first trimester, particularly in the first few weeks of pregnancy (before most women even know they are pregnant) can cause devastating neurological effects. Have you never heard of foetal alcohol syndrome?
There is also mounting evidence that the consumption of alcohol even at low levels increases the likelihood of learning disorders and disordered behaviour in the child; this, obviously, is harder to measure.
There is no level of alcohol consumption for pregnant women that can be deemed safe by health professionals.
i'm sorry aj but i think you're mistaken in your assumption. as someone who works with FAS kids i can tell you first hand that you're rolling the dice if you drink and you're pregnant. everyone's familiar with the stereotypical FAS symptoms but most people don't know that FAS is a spectrum of disorders that ranges from mild to severe. in most cases the mothers of the kids i work with were alcoholics, in some way they didn't make a choice to destroy the lives of their children. why would anyone choose to take that sort of risk instead of just not drinking for 9 months?
Of course I am not advocating that pregnant women continue to consume low levels of alcohol - if i were in that position of course I would eliminate alcohol. Because it's better to be safer than sorry - like Gam says, why take an unnecessary risk.
Unfortunately many women may not even be aware that they are pregnant and continue to consume alcohol (possibly at high rates) in the early stages of pregnancy, which obviously dramatically increase the risk of Foetal Alcohol syndrome, and please don't think that I am ignorant to its possibility.
However, show me where in the Alcohol Guidelines for Women that LOW consumption of alcohol is harmful:
http://www.alcohol.gov.au/internet/alcohol/publishing.nsf/Content/fs-women
I think your post advocates a view that would gain considerable community support... along with increasing the drinking age, without any conclusive evidence.
Why the hell do we need to label everything that may potentially cause problems? Where does it stop???!
No offence, but those are government guidelines. They are written by experts but, just like the nutrition guidelines are written by nutritionists yet influenced by various industries, the alcoholic beverage industry influences what gets published in those guidelines. It probably pisses the public health experts off no end.
It may interest you to know that even the US government is more progressive than our own in this regard, with advice to pregnant women that no alcohol at all is consumed during pregnancy.
Thalidomide was once not 'proven' harmful as well... surely no-one could advocate a 'wait and see' policy for alcohol when there is growing evidence that low levels of alcohol consumption by pregnant women do pose a risk to the child?
There is no established safe level of consumption of alcohol by pregnant women.
I will see if I can find some useful links; I'm mostly going by journal articles I've read, which I'd have to search for in order to provide proper references... it is a very important issue so I will try and get around to it. There is a lot of misinformation on this topic, and it's not due to lack of effort by people working in public health. The government has a vested interest in letting the alcoholic beverages industry have its own way.
"I think your post advocates a view that would gain considerable community support... along with increasing the drinking age, without any conclusive evidence."
where is that coming from? advocating pregnant women not drinking at all might lead to the drinking age being increased? what? did i miss something?
as for no evidence:
here, here and here strongly suggest that even moderate/low alcohol consumption during pregnancy leads to an increased risk of abnormalities during and after pregnancy.
the govt. article you cited doesn't provide its references so neither of us are in a position to judge the value of its advice. that's why i would strongly suggest caution in interpreting it as support for low levels of alcohol exposure being ok.
i should also point out that those links are open to interpretation because no one yet knows what high, moderate and low levels of alcohol exposure are in relation to fetal exposure. the overall message is that the picture is far from clear and the best advice is for pregnant women to simply avoid alcohol. it's only 9 months. as someone who's seen the guilt on parents' faces because they blame themselves for their child's problems, it's not worth it.
In response to the articles listed by Gam, admittedly just from reading the abstracts, they do not specifically articulate or provide evidence that low (and remember that’s the distinction that I am trying to make) consumption levels prove harmful.
In reference to this article you listed Moderate prenatal alcohol exposure and psychomotor development at preschool age" it quotes:
CONCLUSIONS. This study showed that moderate to heavy alcohol consumption during pregnancy, at levels well below those associated with fetal alcohol syndrome, has effects on children's psychomotor development.(emphasis added).
No mention of low consumption.
Furthermore, the AMA have come out today and said this:
“ More research is needed to determine the true effects of low to moderate alcohol consumption on the developing fetus, and the impact on pregnant women of different policies on alcohol consumption in pregnancy, child health researchers say.
Recommendations for safe levels of drinking during pregnancy vary across English-speaking countries and between states and organisations in Australia, according to new report written by Colleen O’Leary and her colleagues at the Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, Perth.
“The policies and guidelines for alcohol and pregnancy … range from an abstinence message to advice that the risk from low amounts of alcohol is minimal,” Ms O’Leary said in the latest issue of the Medical Journal of Australia.
“However, Australia and the UK are the only two countries where a quantity of alcohol has been specified.”
The UK recommends a maximum of four standard units per week, while Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) recommends no more than seven standard drinks per week, with no more than two on one day. Both advise against binge drinking. The NHMRC is reviewing its guidelines this year.
Some Australian States have adopted the NHMRC guidelines. In other States and Territories, guidelines range from complete abstinence to non-specific advice that consumption of alcohol should be reduced.
“Lack of clarity in the published literature about the relationship between low to moderate alcohol consumption and fetal harm has allowed a range of interpretations and conclusions to be drawn from the data,” Ms O’Leary said.
“Research is needed to elucidate the true association between low to moderate alcohol consumption and fetal harm, the impact of different policies on the rates of maternal alcohol consumption during pregnancy, and any untoward outcomes of an abstinence message, to inform and underpin future policy development in Australia.”
The Medical Journal of Australia is a publication of the Australian Medical Association.”
As per my first sentence of my initial post – “there is no evidence that proves alcohol consumption is harmful to pregnant women and their babies” and then ”its purely a RECOMMENDATION that pregnant women do not consume, because of the lack of evidence”. The AMAs view supports this. Do you disbelieve the AMA? Or are their political donations also influencing this debate???
In regards to my comment about it being a view that easily gains community support – what I mean is that simply saying we should label anything that has the potential to be harmful is an easy bandwagon to jump on. For some reason parts of our society seem to think we need to protect ourselves from ourselves, even when conclusive evidence cannot be produced.
And again, Gam, I recognise that the risk is not worth it, I would not consume any alcohol during pregnancy, along with taking all other health precautions.
Finally, to be clear, there is no evidence to support labelling as the original blog suggests, however, there is also no evidence to definitively articulate low consumptions of alcohol are “safe” for pregnant women.
Thanks very much. There is no evidence to support labelling for caffeine either, as the evidence is so far inconclusive, yet you don't seem to have a problem with that...
What the AMA is saying is that more research is needed- that position in no way disagrees with my own.
Besides that, your entire argument is a fallacy; despite the fact there is more research needed on the effects of low level alcohol consumption, there are levels of alcohol consumption by pregnant women at which health professionals can almost universally agree that adverse effects are caused for her foetus, yet there is still no labelling whatsoever on the bottle . Go ahead and justify that one.
please define what a "low" alcohol consumption is, in terms of ml of pure alcohol. when you've done that we can have a discussion.
as for labelling, it is well established that binge drinking and moderate/heavy drinking while pregnant is harmful to the foetus. why wouldn't you warn pregnant women that alcohol may be dangerous to their fetus? how would a label prevent anyone from drinking it if they wanted to anyway?
and as you've argued, there's no conclusive evidence that 'low' alcohol consumption is harmful to the fetus. yet i notice you wouldn't drink if you were pregnant. you agree that there is at least a potential risk yet you are against warning people that there is a risk? why are you so against informing the public on a risk you're willing to avoid?
the ama are arguing for a consistent position on maternal alcohol consumption. they want guidelines on what 'low' consumption should be for instance. until that picture appears only a reckless person would advise women that drinking 'low' amounts of alcohol while pregnant is ok. the lack of a conclusive picture doesn't mean we can't advise women to do the safest thing till more evidence comes to light.
the original post only mentioned the fact that there are no warnings of any kind on alcohol products for pregnant mothers (or anyone else for that matter). despite the fact that we know that binge/heavy/moderate drinking does cause foetal harm.
there are warnings on chewing gum about laxative effects of excessive consumption. there are no warning labels on alcohol. it is impossible to kill yourself by chewing too much gum, yet it is very easy to consume enough alcohol to kill you outright.
Post a Comment