Report conducted at the University of Sheffield provides ‘clear and compelling’ new evidence on the effectiveness of minimum unit pricing.

Alcohol consumption will cause 63,000 deaths in England over the next five years according to a new report from the University of Sheffield Alcohol Research Group.

alcoholThe report, published by the Foundation for Liver Research, predicts that 32,475 of the deaths – the equivalent of 35 a day – will be the result of liver cancer and another 22,519 from alcoholic liver disease.

In its new report, Financial case for action on liver disease, endorsed by the independent Lancet Commission on Liver Disease, the Foundation for Liver Research urges the Government to implement a suite of policy measures designed to mitigate the rising health and financial burden of alcohol, including the introduction of minimum unit pricing (MUP), re-institution of alcohol duty escalator and advertising restrictions.

  • Between 2017 and 2022 the total cost to the NHS of alcohol-related illness and deaths will be £17 billion.
  • Study shows introduction of minimum unit pricing for alcohol could significantly reduce the burden.

Providing evidence in support of Government intervention, new modelling shows that within five years of its introduction in England, a 50p MUP alone would result in:

  • ian gilmore quote21,150 fewer alcohol-related deaths
  • 74,500 fewer alcohol-related hospital admissions
  • Savings of £325.7m in healthcare costs
  • Savings of £710.9m in crime costs

The total financial savings to the public purse of MUP is forecast to be £1.1 billion – the equivalent cost of the Government’s recently announced investment package for Northern Ireland.

Colin Angus, Research Fellow at the University of Sheffield and part of the Sheffield Alcohol Research Group who conducted the research, said:

“These new findings show there will be 35 deaths and 2,300 hospital admissions due to alcohol every day in England over the next five years. We estimate this will cost the NHS £17 billion at a time when healthcare resources are already overstretched. Our research also shows that policies such as Minimum Unit Pricing have the potential to significantly reduce this burden.”

Liver disease is one of Britain’s biggest killers, claiming about 12,000 lives a year in England alone. The number of deaths associated with it has risen by 400% since 1970. It is estimated that 62,000 years of working life are lost every year as a result of it. People who develop serious liver problems also suffer some of the worst health outcomes in western Europe.

Continue reading

Healthier central England or North–South divide? Analysis of national survey data on smoking and high-risk drinking

In England, around 20% of the population are smokers and 13% drink excessively. These behaviours are leading risk factors for several non-communicable diseases, including cancer, diabetes and chronic respiratory and cardiovascular conditions. It is estimated that around 8000 deaths/year are alcohol-related and 80 000 deaths of adults aged 35 and over are attributed to smoking annually. The prevalence and adverse effects of high-risk drinking and tobacco use are not equally distributed across the country, with large regional variations.

A North–South divide exists for smoking, with higher rates of tobacco use, smoking-related deaths and smoking-related harm in northern regions. 

In contrast, excessive alcohol consumption tends to be lowest in central and eastern regions, while an East versus West divide is seen in the prevalence of alcohol dependency and alcohol sales. These regional variations in consumption do not always map onto experienced harm, a phenomenon known as the Alcohol Harm Paradox. In 2014, alcohol-related death rates were significantly higher among regions in the north of England compared with those in the south.

Objectives: This paper compares patterns of smoking and high-risk alcohol use across regions in England, and assesses the impact on these of adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics.

Design: Population survey of 53 922 adults in England aged 16+ taking part in the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies.

Measures: Participants answered questions regarding their socioeconomic status (SES), gender, age, ethnicity, Government Office Region, smoking status and completed the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT). High-risk drinkers were defined as those with a score of 8 or more (7 or more for women) on the AUDIT.

Results: In unadjusted analyses, relative to the South West, those in the North of England were more likely to smoke, while those from the East of England, South East and London were less likely. After adjustment for sociodemographics, smoking prevalence was no higher in North East (RR 0.97, p>0.05), North West (RR 0.98, p>0.05) or Yorkshire and the Humber (RR 1.03, p>0.05) but was less common in the East and West Midlands (RR 0.86, p<0.001; RR 0.91, p<0.05), East of England (RR 0.86, p<0.001), South East (RR 0.92, p<0.05) and London (RR 0.85, p<0.001). High-risk drinking was more common in the North but was less common in the Midlands, London and East of England. Adjustment for sociodemographics had little effect. There was a higher prevalence in the North East (RR 1.67, p<0.001), North West (RR 1.42, p<0.001) and Yorkshire and the Humber (RR 1.35, p<0.001); lower prevalence in the East Midlands (RR 0.69, p<0.001), West Midlands (RR 0.77, p<0.001), East of England (RR 0.72, p<0.001) and London (RR 0.71, p<0.001); and a similar prevalence in the South East (RR 1.10, p>0.05)

Figure 2Figure 2: Association between Government Office Region and high-risk drinking: (A) unadjusted;
(B) adjusted for gender, age, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (reference region: South West). Note: this shows the relative risk difference for each region relative to the South West (dotted reference region). Increasing red tones reflect increasingly higher significant risk and increasing blue tones reflect increasingly lower significant risk. Regions shaded white have a similar risk to the South West. Online supplementary figure S9 labels the Government Office Regions in England.
Expand Image – More diagrams in the main report

Conclusions: In adjusted analyses, smoking and high-risk drinking appear less common in ‘central England’ than in the rest of the country. Regional differences in smoking, but not those in high-risk drinking, appear to be explained to some extent by sociodemographic disparities.

Strengths and limitations of this study

  • Used a representative survey about smoking and drinking conducted on a large sample of the adult population in England.

  • Based on the most up-to-date information in England on regional differences in smoking and high-risk drinking accounting for disparities in gender, socioeconomic status (SES), ethnicity and age.

  • Respondents may have underestimated or failed to report their drinking and smoking.

  • Patterns of smoking and alcohol use were only available at the Government Office Region level, whereas important variation may occur at a more micro-geographical level.

bmj

Copyright information:
Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited.

 

Read the full report here!

Kettil Bruun Society 43rd Annual Alcohol Symposium | Sheffield 5-9th June, 2017

The 43rd annual symposium of the Kettil Bruun Society is hosted by the School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR) at the University of Sheffield. The symposium will be held in the Inox Dine area of the Student’s Union building.

For information about the Kettil Bruun Society, the Symposium, and to register, submit abstracts and book social tours, please click here.

To go straight to registration, please click here.

The conference is generously supported by the Insitute for Alcohol Studies, Alcohol Research UK, and the Society for the Study of Addiction.

The Kettil Bruun Society (KBS):

The principal aims of the Kettil Bruun Society (KBS) are to investigate social, epidemiological and cross-cultural research on alcohol use, to promote the exchange of scientific knowledge and experiences among researchers from various disciplines and to encourage international collaboration. The comparison of social and epidemiological developments found in different countries makes it possible to disentangle major trends from underlying patterns of alcohol use. This is particularly useful for the development of effective strategies to regulate alcohol use – an aspect which is of great interest to many countries.

The Symposium:

The primary purpose of the symposium is to provide a forum for researchers involved in studies on alcohol to exchange ideas about their ongoing research. The scope of the symposium includes studies of determinants and consequences of drinking, drinking culture and drinking patterns, social and institutional responses to drinking related harms, prevention and care. Empirical research, theoretical papers and reviews of the literature are welcome. Social and epidemiological studies have to be interpreted in a broad context as they include research in a variety of disciplines, such as psychology, sociology, criminology, economics, history and other sciences. Papers on other forms of substance use such as tobacco and drugs are also accepted, particularly papers considering the way they relate to alcohol use.

The symposium focuses on the discussion of papers that are pre-circulated electronically on this website. The author introduces the paper in a 10-minute segment, followed by prepared comments from a discussant and general audience participation. Any person submitting a paper may be asked to be a discussant or chair of a session.

Abstracts:

Please submit an abstract by 20 January 2017. The word limit for the abstract is 250 words and you should also include a conflict of interest statement and a maximum of three keywords (these are not included in the word count). For reports of empirical research, the abstract should be structured into sections: introduction, methods, results and conclusion.

All abstracts must include a conflict of interest statement. This should identify any author who has a relationship (financial or otherwise) which could be viewed as presenting a potential conflict of interest and give a full disclosure of this relationship.  If there are no conflicts of interest to report, please write ‘None’.

If you know in advance that you will only be able to attend the conference on certain days then please use the option in the submission form to indicate this and we will try to accommodate you when scheduling sessions.

 

Landmark report reviewing #alcohol policies across the UK! @NiamhCreate @VictimOfMaths @UK_AHA @A4UEvidence

UK Government’s alcohol policies are weaker than devolved nations!

The UK Government’s alcohol policies are weaker than those implemented by the devolved nations, a landmark report from the Universities of Stirling and Sheffield has found. Alcohol policies across the four UK nations vary widely in the extent to which they are grounded in scientific evidence, with political considerations appearing to have significant bearing, the research shows.

The report was commissioned by the Alliance for Useful Evidence and reviewed policies from the UK Government and devolved administrations against recommendations from Health First, the independent expert-devised UK alcohol strategy, in the first such audit of its kind.  Overall strategy, pricing, marketing and availability of alcohol were amongst the areas examined.

Scotland had the strongest approach overall, seeking to implement the most evidence-based policies, working to clear outcomes, and with a taskforce in place to monitor and evaluate the Scottish Government’s alcohol strategy.

By contrast, the UK Government did not support the most effective policies, made inconsistent use of evidence, and was the most engaged with the alcohol industry.

While Wales and Northern Ireland took strong positions in areas such as taxation and restrictions on young drivers, they have fewer legislative powers than the Scottish Parliament.

The report was co-authored by Dr Niamh Fitzgerald, at the University of Stirling and Colin Angus at the University of Sheffield.

Dr Niamh Fitzgerald, University of Stirling – Lecturer in Alcohol Studies

“Alcohol policy at UK Government level is in disarray, with it choosing to reduce taxation despite evidence that consumption and alcohol-related harms will increase as a result, putting even greater pressure on NHS and emergency services.

In contrast to the UK Government, the devolved administrations – especially Scotland – are taking steps to address the widespread harms due to alcohol, recognising that they are a ‘whole population’ issue. All four nations, however, engage in partnership with the alcohol industry, despite clear conflicts of interest and its history of failure to support those policies most likely to work.

Colin Angus, University of Sheffield – Sheffield Alcohol Research Group

“A clear illustration of the gap in effective policy across the UK relates to the marketing of alcohol. The devolved administrations have indicated support for mandatory action on product labelling, but the UK government has favoured self-regulation which has proven ineffective, with over 40 percent of products on the shelf still failing to meet the industry’s own best practice guidelines.

On alcohol advertising, a reserved matter, the devolved administrations have called for stronger regulation to protect children, but this approach has been rejected by the former UK coalition government. The Scottish Government is currently updating its alcohol strategy while the other devolved nations continue to progress evidence-based policies to reduce alcohol harms. It may be that they will call for greater powers to go it alone in bringing in effective policy options, if Westminster is not prepared to act.”

Peter O’Neill, Alliance for Useful Evidence – Evidence Exchange Manager

“Devolution in the UK provides opportunities for exchange of evidence and learning about what works through experimentation with different policies across the four nations. This report calls on administrations to support such learning, by engaging openly and maturely with the alcohol policy evidence, being honest about reasons for policy decisions, and robustly evaluating policy initiatives. Unfortunately, the report also suggests that alcohol policy may sometimes be underpinned by ideology more than by evidence, and is likely to be less effective as a result.”

Four Nations: How Evidence-based are Alcohol Policies and Programmes Across the UK? has been presented to representatives of the four administrations as part of the work of the British-Irish Council, which meets later this month.

PhD studentships @sheffielduni @ScHARRSheffield in Public Health, Economics and Decision Science

The University of Sheffield and ScHARR are pleased to announce a brand new Wellcome Trust PhD Doctoral Training Centre in Public Health, Health Economics and Decision Science.

“We seek to train the next generation of researchers in conducting high-quality research into the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of complex multi-component public health interventions and policies to reduce chronic disease.”

Funding is available for 15 top-calibre PhD students to work on some of the most pressing public health challenges!

Each of the four-year doctoral studentships provides:
• A stipend of £19,919 pa increasing to £23,997 pa over the 4 years
• Tuition fees for 4 years, worth £5,052 pa for Home/EU students or £18,750 pa for international students
• A generous training and travel fund of around £44,000 per student for cohort events, internships, courses, data collection, conferences and research travel.

This PhD programme is unique in its focus on interdisciplinary public health, health economics, mathematical modelling and statistics. To equip candidates in the relevant skills, the first year combines multi-disciplinary methods training tailored to the candidates’ background, cohort-based learning activities and exposure to public health decision making practice. This is then followed by PhD research on a topic that is mutually agreed between student, our pool of expert supervisors and the programme directors.

Applications open on the 2nd November and close on the 4th of January.

Find out more on the Sheffield website here!

@SARG_ScHARR team present Research Rap at UKCTAS Early Career Researchers’ Day!

shef

**To the tune of Fresh Prince of Bel Air**

From South Yorkshire, born and raised

SARG members examined an alcohol craze

Minimum pricing, taxation galore,

Just a few of the things we like to explore…

We first formed in two thousand and ten

When the MRC gave us money to spend

The Sheffield Alcohol Model we built,

Based on those who were drinking, while wearing a kilt!

We’ve got 15 members in our research group…

But we still like to keep UKCTAS in the loop

We research policy and many other things

So here’s a big list of what we bring…

Policy appraisal and price modelling,

Treatment capacity for heavy drinking,

Understanding why Brits drink a lot

Examining elasticities of what they bought

Adapting our model for tons of nations,

Like Wales, Scotland, and other relations

Developing models to curb tobacco smoking

Preventing risky drinkers from prematurely croaking

Awareness of drinking and cancer risk,

Hearing focus groups shout nanny state, ‘tisk, tisk!’

Reviewing drink guidelines in South London

Improving survey measures of alcohol consumption

Adapting our model for local authorities

Examining harms to others, close families

Defining what is meant by a drinking occasion

Addressing court appeal for EU persuasion

So these are the things SARG is working on now

We hope you enjoyed, now it’s time for the bow

If you have final comments for any one of us,

Please come and shout, future collaborations are a plus!

View more: SARG News and Activities 2015