![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
This rather-confused BBC report on drinking is irritating me.
Firstly, it's reporting three findings in a confusing manner. There's one report which states the proportion of people reported they had drunk over the "recommended daily limit" at least once in the previous week (41% of men, 34% of women, 37% of respondents), and that this figure varied a little by type of household (43% of managerial and professional households cf 31% of routine and manual households)[1]. Separately, another report suggests that ~20% drank over twice the "limit" on their heaviest drinking day (though this isn't clear as to over what period).
Secondly, it ignores (as the government does) the unfortunate fact that these "daily limits" (replacing the previous weekly limits, since there was concern that people were saving up their entire "allowance" for one night of boozing) are based on pretty tenuous science - we don't have a good handle on what a safe level of alcohol consumption is, but what research there is suggests it's somewhat higher than the UK guidelines. Sure, excessive drinking is harmful, but saying that someone whose biggest drinking session of the previous week was more than four units (which you could achieve by 2 pints of a typical real ale) is a heavy drinker is misleading. Binge drinking should, I think, be related more to the effect it has on you rather than a finger-in-the-air number of units. Things like how long you consume the alcohol over is important too: if I drink four pints over a long session in the pub, I won't be noticably drunk, but if I neck the same number of units as spirits quickly, then the effect is much more bingey.
I can sort of see the argument that "people will ignore the limits, so we should set them very low as that will at least somewhat reduce excess drinking", but I don't really buy it. If you treat people like idiots, they're going to be cynical about your guidance.
[1] The article is worded so it looks like each m+p household drinks more (i.e. exceeds the limit by a greater amount), where actually a higher proportion of them drink over the limit.
Firstly, it's reporting three findings in a confusing manner. There's one report which states the proportion of people reported they had drunk over the "recommended daily limit" at least once in the previous week (41% of men, 34% of women, 37% of respondents), and that this figure varied a little by type of household (43% of managerial and professional households cf 31% of routine and manual households)[1]. Separately, another report suggests that ~20% drank over twice the "limit" on their heaviest drinking day (though this isn't clear as to over what period).
Secondly, it ignores (as the government does) the unfortunate fact that these "daily limits" (replacing the previous weekly limits, since there was concern that people were saving up their entire "allowance" for one night of boozing) are based on pretty tenuous science - we don't have a good handle on what a safe level of alcohol consumption is, but what research there is suggests it's somewhat higher than the UK guidelines. Sure, excessive drinking is harmful, but saying that someone whose biggest drinking session of the previous week was more than four units (which you could achieve by 2 pints of a typical real ale) is a heavy drinker is misleading. Binge drinking should, I think, be related more to the effect it has on you rather than a finger-in-the-air number of units. Things like how long you consume the alcohol over is important too: if I drink four pints over a long session in the pub, I won't be noticably drunk, but if I neck the same number of units as spirits quickly, then the effect is much more bingey.
I can sort of see the argument that "people will ignore the limits, so we should set them very low as that will at least somewhat reduce excess drinking", but I don't really buy it. If you treat people like idiots, they're going to be cynical about your guidance.
[1] The article is worded so it looks like each m+p household drinks more (i.e. exceeds the limit by a greater amount), where actually a higher proportion of them drink over the limit.
(no subject)
The whole 21/14 units as a weekly limit was a completely made up number, so I don't tend to worry too much if I have anything up to 8 units in an evening as a one off event every so often. If I was doing that every night, it would be a problem - cos I can't afford that much booze!
(no subject)
The real idiocy is taking the weekly limit, transforming it to a daily limit and randomly defining a binge as twice that amount. It's nonsensical.
(no subject)
I'm sure I "binge drink" on a regular basis; although I don't usually keep track :-) I do know that the 'recommended' level is a long way before "clearly drunk" (and that I have never been violent when drunk; although maybe being loud and annoying is an ASB).
(no subject)
Most weeks I won't exceed this, I might have a bottle of 4.5% cider or a smaller glass of wine at home with a meal, but will be just about under 3 units. But if I go out to a party or the pub I expect to be able to drink twice that over the course of a day with food without even getting tipsy. And I find it hard to believe that's enough to make me worry for my liver.
(no subject)
I suspect that people underreport their consumption. Last time I looked into it, the total amount that the UK population claim to have drunk when asked was roughly half the total amount of alcohol sold in the UK (from excise returns). That's a lot of spillage.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Have another pint after work and you'll be close enough to it to probably count.
(no subject)
That said, I couldn't *hope* to function in the afternoon if I had two pints at lunch. (Or two pints of coke for that matter!)
(no subject)
I know if I drink at lunchtime I can't really tell until I sit in front of a computer and try concentrate and type. Mind you yesterday afternoon I felt like I'd been drinking at lunchtime even though I hadn't!
(no subject)
As you say, binge drinking shouldn't be "measured" by the imbibed units, but by how they are consumed.
I can start a bottle of wine during dinner and finish it over the course of the evening without feeling much (and no hangover in the morning) but I will have consumed quite a few units.
Now, if I did that every day, I might well turn into an alcoholic, but it still wouldn't be binge drinking.
Binge driking is when I drink the same number of units in the form of pints of strong lager, some stupid sweet mixer drinks and maybe a few shots of spirits in the space of a few hours, just for the effect of getting drunk as quickly as possible. Not that I would even consider doing that.
(no subject)
Limits are a blunt instrument to change the population's behaviour, not about what's safe for an individual (like Five-a-Day) but I agree that these particular ones are a bit silly. It's a bit arrogant of the gummint to suppose that their "weekly limit" guidance significantly increased the already massive British binge drinking culture!
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
There seems (to ill-informed me) that the alcohol-free days are the things to worry about, not the days when one drinks double the divided-out-by-the-day limit.