Public health vs ‘Big Alcohol’ profits

Part one in a two-part series about tactics used by the alcohol industry to undermine public health information on drinking.

Alcohol is the most widely used drug in Australia and it can seriously impact our health.¹

If we know about the health risks associated with drinking, we can make informed decisions.

But the alcohol industry, or ‘Big Alcohol’, would prefer you didn’t know about the risks.

For years the industry has been downplaying alcohol-related health concerns.²

This is because less people drinking = less profits.

Muddying the evidence

Downplaying the link between alcohol and cancer

In 1988 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) declared alcohol a Group 1 carcinogen – a direct cause of cancer.³

Since then, research has confirmed the direct link between alcohol and 7 types of cancer.

This includes cancer of the:

• bowel
• breast
• mouth
• throat
• voice box
• oesophagus (food pipe)
• liver.⁴

We also know there’s a cancer risk even with low levels of drinking.

The more you drink, the higher the risk.^5-10

But, only half of Australians know that drinking can cause cancer.^{1, 11}

One of the main reasons for this is the powerful influence Big Alcohol has on what we see online and in the media.¹²

Big Alcohol frequently misleads the public about the links between alcohol and cancer.³

Some of their tactics include:

• denying or disputing the evidence, or failing to acknowledge it exists
• misrepresenting the alcohol-related cancer risk. This includes suggesting only heavy drinking comes with risks, that there’s a lack of scientific agreement, or highlighting alcohol as a protective factor by quoting disproven research that alcohol is good for heart health
• distracting people from the impact of alcohol by pointing out other cancer risk factors.^{3, 12-14}

Big Alcohol has also been guilty of ‘pink-washing’. This involves the iconic pink ribbon, or colour pink, being added to products, promotions, or donations to show support for breast cancer.¹⁵

This is an attempt by Big Alcohol to mask the fact that alcohol causes breast cancer.

The amount of pink-washing in Australia is declining. But, partnerships between alcohol companies and breast cancer charities are still used in advertising.¹⁶

Funding public health research

Big Alcohol exploits public health research into the impacts of drinking by manipulating studies in their favour.

They do this to maintain their profits and influence the public and policy makers.

As well as doing their own research, Big Alcohol also provides funding for studies into alcohol health impacts.

And the amount of funding is on the rise – there’s been a 56% increase since 2009.^{17, 18}

This funding creates significant conflict of interest because Big Alcohol is motivated by profits, rather than public health.

The studies can be manipulated so the findings are inaccurate and only show positive health effects.

Big Alcohol-funded research often claims that moderate drinking can help protect blood vessels and the heart and has a positive health impact.

The alcohol industry has even claimed that more women’s lives are saved by moderate drinking due to these positive health impacts than are lost from alcohol-related disease.
But, all these claims are based on flawed and outdated research.

The research compared low-to-moderate drinkers with people who didn’t drink at all (abstainers).

They found people who drank at moderate levels had better health afterwards and proposed that low-level drinking can protect against certain heart conditions and Type 2 diabetes.

But, the abstainer group were actually previous drinkers with underlying health conditions, corrupting the findings.

Some alcohol-funded studies also promote the idea that alcohol dependence is the fault of individuals, and not the alcohol industry.¹⁸

This is an attempt to shift responsibility for negative alcohol effects to the public, rather than Big Alcohol.

Big Alcohol involvement in policy

Globally, the alcohol industry has been more influential in alcohol policy development than scientists or public health experts.¹⁴

Big Alcohol is often involved in the development of alcohol-related policies. This includes initiatives that seek to improve public health, such as Minimum Unit Pricing.

This gives them an opportunity to misrepresent the facts.

A recent review found that 94% of submissions by the alcohol industry had misused research evidence, or denied the effectiveness of evidence-based strategies.¹⁹

The tobacco industry historically used similar tactics to Big Alcohol in an attempt to convince the public that smoking was safe.³ They are now banned from being involved in cigarette-related policy development because of their conflict of interest.^{19, 20}

Undermining the official Australian drinking guidelines

In 2020, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) released its updated Australian guidelines to reduce health risks from drinking.

The guidelines recommend no more than 10 standard drinks in a week and no more than 4 standard drinks on any one occasion.

These recommendations are a guide to help people lower their risks from alcohol. The guidelines are not part of the law or enforced.

Unsurprisingly, the alcohol industry said the guidelines were ‘strict’, ‘harsh’ and ‘unfair’ on Australians. They also questioned the scientific evidence and argued that Australians should have no faith in the NHMRC.²

This is despite the NHMRC being one of the 10 largest funders of health research in the world, well known for its high-quality work.^{21, 22} You can read how the NHMRC developed the research for the guidelines on its website.

Big Alcohol also argued that the ‘protective’ effects of drinking should be included in any new guidelines. They refused to acknowledge that this research was found to be biased and flawed.^23-27

And, even if there was reliable evidence, the strong links between drinking and cancer would outweigh any ‘protective’ effects.^{2, 5-10}

Profits over public health

If everybody drank at the levels recommended in the NHMRC guidelines, Big Alcohol would make a lot less money.^28-30

Around three quarters of alcohol in Australia is drunk by people who average 4 or more standard drinks a day.³⁰ If they drank at the recommended level instead, the total amount of alcohol consumed nationally would decrease by up to 39%.³⁰

In England, it was found that if consumers reduced their drinking to within guideline levels, alcohol sales revenue could decline by 38% (£13 billion).²⁸

The alcohol industry relies on heavy drinkers to boost their profits.³⁰

There’s an obvious conflict of interest in the alcohol industry providing health advice around drinking.

To read more on this issue, see the articles below:

• How big alcohol is trying to fool us into thinking drinking is safer than it really is
• Alcohol increases cancer risk, but don’t trust the booze industry to give you the facts straight
• Alcohol firms promote moderate drinking, but it would ruin them
• Risky business: The alcohol industry’s dependence on Australia’s heaviest drinkers