The Alcohol Health Alliance (AHA) have launched a 'right to know' campaign calling for an end to the self-regulation of alcohol labels which it says is currently 'failing consumers'.
The campaign follows a review of 320 alcohol product labels across 12 UK locations which found 'only 24 labels out of 320 informed consumers of the Chief Medical Officers’ (CMOs) low-risk weekly guideline of 14 units, more than two and a half years after the guideline took effect.'
Two thirds of alcohol products (211) included 'out-of-date daily or weekly unit guidelines', including products which launched after the revision of the current guidelines in January 2016. Most products (284) included the ‘no drinking in pregnancy’ logo but many were 'small and difficult to see'. No products were found advising consumers to spread their drinking across the week, have drink-free days or contain health warnings of specific illnesses or diseases.
The AHA state mandatory labelling of all products is needed 'to ensure they convey the information the public is entitled to'. The report identifies the only mandatory requirement under EU law is that labels display the % strength of the product by alcohol by volume (ABV). However it states:
'EU law permits member states to implement additional national specific regulations to protect public health and consumers, with the proviso that these regulations adhere to international trade law. This clause has been successfully used in France to introduce mandatory pregnancy warnings. The Republic of Ireland is also planning to introduce specific health warnings about cancers, as part of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill. Furthermore, the UK’s exit from the EU in 2019 may provide scope for change.'
No weekly guideline within voluntary framework?
In a BBC article, John Timothy, CEO of the industry body the Portman Group said "a deadline has been agreed with the Department of Health for out-of-date information to be removed by September 2019." Timothy also defended the current "robust system of self-regulation" and said that "producers are currently in the process of updating products to include three clear elements; units in products, a pregnancy warning and a link to the Drinkaware website."
The absence of any intention to include the weekly guidelines likely reflects the Portman Group's previous decision to no longer advise its members to include the low-risk guidelines. However a Department of Health spokesman said last year; “We have been clear to the industry that we expect the UK Chief Medical Officers’ guidance be reflected on alcohol labels, and have provided clear advice and examples of how best to display the message", reffering to Department of Health (DoH) labelling guidance. However a Bristol TARG blog predicts that 'without legislation compelling drinks manufacturers to include the new drinking guidelines on their products, we will have no drinking guidelines on the majority of alcohol products.'
A short history of alcohol labelling
Regular readers will know that alcohol labelling is a regularly recurring theme. Earlier this year health and consumer groups in England re-iterated calls for mandatory alcohol labelling of health relevant information including calories, criticising a new self-regulation proposal from European alcohol industry bodies.
Under the former responsibility deal, a pledge to 'ensure that over 80% of products on shelf (by December 2013) will have labels with clear unit content, NHS guidelines and a warning about drinking when pregnant' was claimed to have been met in 2014. However research from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) reported its own analysis found otherwise, whilst the alcohol pledges overall were deemed to be ineffective. A previous voluntary labelling pledge also failed to deliver according to an independent report in 2010 which identified just 15% of drinks gave consumers sufficient information as per the voluntary code.
Whilst many public health groups may wish to see labelling requirements including calories made statutory, others may point out the limitations of providing information in terms of affecting behaviour change. Indeed two research studies found little attention was given to responsible drinking or warning messages, although the findings may have partially reflected the limited space typically given to alcohol warning labels. Other recent research identified 'a poor understanding of the calorific and alcohol content' amongst consumers, with better labelling practices offering 'a relatively low-cost, population-level approach to providing consumers with information about the content and potential harms related to alcohol consumption'.
Further recent findings include those from the 2018 Global Drugs Survey which found high degrees of cynicism towards such information. However the GDS authors still argue the case for legislating for mandatory labelling requirements, stating that whilst 'it’s true that information in isolation of other public health and health promotion strategies may be of limited value ... when it comes to motivating behaviour change, it can be helpful to raise awareness and challenge people’s beliefs about their behaviour.'
Health groups may hope that the announcement of a new alcohol strategy brings the possibility of further statutory labelling requirements, though with no evidence of any intention from Government on this yet, efforts to campaign for a 'right to know' may be set to continue for sometime.
Comments