Psychopath and Narcissist Survivors Support Group

Addiction and Personality

http://samvak.tripod.com/personalitydisorders41.html

Narcissism, Substance Abuse, and Reckless Behaviors

http://samvak.tripod.com/journal66.html

=============================


http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg2 ... 127015.900

Realities of boozing are tough to swallow
a.. 25 March 2009 by Andy Coghlan
b.. Magazine issue 2701. Subscribe and get 4 free issues.
c.. For similar stories, visit the Comment and Analysis Topic Guide
HORROR of horrors: The cost of booze is going up. Whatever you're used to paying for your favourite tipple, prepare to pay more. The days of cheap alcohol are numbered and, apparently, it is for our own good.

In wealthy nations all over the world, momentum is building for big hikes in the cost of alcohol. The rationale is to stop us all drinking to the point where we make other people's lives hell by vandalising property, urinating and vomiting in the street, attacking people including members of our own family, and causing death and injury by driving under the influence. In other words, the goal is to stamp out what England's Chief Medical Officer Liam Donaldson last week dubbed "passive drinking" - the damage done to innocent bystanders and society in general when people drink too much.

The passive drinking concept is borrowed from "passive smoking". It is accepted almost everywhere that damage from passive smoking is real, and measures to curb it - taxing cigarettes heavily and banning smoking in public places, for example - have wide public support. Can a similar concept be applied to alcohol? And can the problem of passive drinking become as widely accepted as passive smoking, as hoped for by the World Health Organization, which last year began drafting a global plan to tackle alcohol abuse?

Tackling passive drinking will be an interesting experiment in social engineering. According to Donaldson, the way to do it is to raise the price of alcohol and limit its availability, however much resentment this may cause among the drinking classes. Donaldson proposed that the minimum price of a unit of alcohol (about as much as in half a pint of beer or a small glass of wine) should be raised to 50 pence.

Other countries are grasping the nettle too. The Scottish government is considering imposing a minimum price of 40 pence per unit of alcohol and banning cheap drink promotions such as two-for-one offers and "women drink free all night". Last year, Australia slapped a hefty tax on alcopops in a bid to reduce heavy drinking among teenagers. And in North America there is much discussion about banning happy hours and similar promotions.

Such measures, however, are politically unpopular. Perhaps not surprisingly in a nation that loves its booze, Donaldson's proposals found little support other than plaudits from health and anti-drinking groups. Some commentators billed them as an attack on freedom; one even called Donaldson a "health fascist". Even his boss, the prime minister, Gordon Brown, was lukewarm about the idea, saying that a price hike would unfairly penalise moderate drinkers.

Nevertheless there is a real problem to be addressed here. In his 2008 annual report, launched on 16 March and entitled On The State of Public Health, Donaldson lays bare the shocking toll from passive drinking in England. The list includes 125,000 instances of alcohol-fuelled domestic violence; 2 million victims of alcohol-related violence; 39,000 sexual assaults; 1.3 million children adversely affected by family drinking; 6000 babies born annually with fetal alcohol syndrome; 660 children killed or injured in alcohol-linked road crashes; 7000 non-drinkers injured by drink-drivers; and 560 fatalities due to drink-driving. There were also 1.25 million recorded instances of alcohol-related vandalism. Binge drinking has made city centres no-go areas for many. A survey of 30,000 adults in the north of England found that 45 per cent avoided town centres at night for fear of meeting drunks.

So what is to be done? Some commentators argue that courts should pass harsher sentences on those who commit alcohol-related offences, but that does not get to the heart of the problem. Like it or not, the best way to cut alcohol consumption across the board is to raise its price and limit its availability. As pointed out by the Scottish Department of Health in its document Changing Scotland's Relationship With Alcohol: A framework for action, alcohol is much more affordable than it was in 1980. This is one reason why consumption has risen by 19 per cent since then.

This magazine has previously pointed out plenty of evidence that raising the price and restricting availability are the two most powerful tools available to governments to drive down consumption (New Scientist, 20 April 2008, p 4).

More recent research led by Petra Meier and her colleagues at the University of Sheffield, UK, showed a clear link between price and consumption. If a minimum price per unit of 30 pence were imposed, consumption would drop by 0.6 per cent. Raise it to 45 pence and it falls by 4.5 per cent. Meier calculates that a price of 40 pence per unit would lead to an overall drop in consumption of 2.6 per cent, with problem drinkers cutting back the most.

Making 50 pence the minimum charge for a unit of alcohol would undoubtedly hit drinkers in their pockets, pushing up the price of a bottle of wine to at least £4.50, a bottle of whisky to £15 and a six-pack of premium lager to £7.50. But consider what it would achieve. Coupled with tightened licensing laws and a ban on cheap drinks promotions in bars and supermarkets, price hikes could prevent 3393 deaths per year in England alone, reduce hospital admissions by 100,000 and prevent 300,000 "sick days" taken off work due to hangovers.

Setting a minimum cost for alcohol would hit drinkers in the pocket, but consider what it would achieve
Far from being health fascists, those who advocate minimum alcohol prices are champions for those whose lives are blighted by alcohol-fuelled disorder, violence and abuse. We should salute them for using the best evidence available to tackle the scourge of passive drinking.

Personally speaking, I will weep into my pint if minimum prices are imposed, but it's a price that I, for one, am willing to pay for the common good.

Andy Coghlan is a New Scientist reporter

If this happens in the US, I can see the hard-core skid-row down-and-out alcoholics resorting to drinking cleaning products, Sterno, and mouthwash because they can no longer afford a bottle of fortified wine, resulting in more emergency room visits, paid for by middle-class taxpayers. I also imagine there will be an increase in huffing glue and paint.

After spending nearly two months in Europe, where alcohol is much less expensive and much more available than in the USA, I can see why there would be sympathy for such actions. I am writing this from Berlin where over the weekend I saw so much drunken behavior I was actually scared at times and I was not in any fringe parts. BTW, I am a native New Yorker too, male, 39, well built and not easily scared. A shopping cart was push down the subway stairs and almost hit me, I saw bottles thrown and kicked, lots of roughhousing, public urination and other intimidating behaviors. Never seen anything like it in New York.