WRONG CURE
Friday, July 3, 2009 at 08:41AM Correctly analysing an illness but then prescribing the wrong treatment does the medical profession no good at all.
Children as young as eight are being brought into hospitals unconscious after getting drunk on cheap cider, spirits and alcopops such is the ease of access to cut-price alcohol, according to doctors.
The problems of binge-drinking are now so serious that small hospitals that used to treat one intoxicated child a month are now receiving several under-age drinkers every Friday and Saturday night, the British Medical Association’s annual conference was told.
The warnings from doctors were backed today by figures suggesting that a child under 12 is being admitted to Accident & Emergency departments because of alcohol every other day. Of the more than 4,500 hospital admissions of children under the age of 16 caused by alcohol last year, 181 involved under-12s. Reporting that drink-related problems had become “much, much greater” over the past decade, doctors called for a minimum price per unit of alcohol, clearer labelling of alcoholic content and a ban on the advertising of beers, wines and spirits.
Let us assume that the figures concerning VERY young children consuming alochol are correct - and I see no reason why this would not be the case. This being the case the issue here is WHY have the parent(s) of the kids concerned not been brought in to legal custody for questioning? After all, the parents are responsible for what their children get up to, Imbiding alcohol is clearly a VERY bad thing for children to do and should be prevented but once again the totalitarian instinct in the BMA comes out and urges draconian bans and the destruction of the advertising industry in this area. Total nonsense.
The parents must be HELD RESPONSIBLE for their kids behaviour and if an 8 year old child is out getting drunk then the parent needs an intense and sober questioning. The core issue lies in the home, not the off-license. But the BMA doesn't like to be judgemental.
Health. 
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (21)
Alcohol abuse has been a growing problem in the UK for several decades. That coincides with a steady decline in its price when adjusted for inflation and increases in earnings. It is significantly cheaper in real terms, so people can afford more of it. This is reinforced by supermarkets using it as a loss leader, often selling it below cost.
The BMA proposal for a minimum price per unit is a good one and should be seriously examined.
Sorry Peter, but lets look at the price of packet of ciggs. Now more expensive than ever before and kids are still buying them and smoking. Raising the price might make drink more difficult to buy but I can guarantee you it won't stop kids from drinking. David is right here, while a certain amount of responsibility lies with the Off-licence trade, most of the responsibility lies with the parents.
I had my first taste of alcohol at 15, I certainly wasn't binge drinking and getting drunk week in and week out nearly 15 years ago but there were 2 or 3 of my age group that were. Compare that to today and the increase is staggering.
When did my fellow readers and our authors here have their first drink? Can we pinpoint when this increase in underage drinking begin?
Alcohol is much cheaper in many European countries where this kind of thing never happens. No, the price of booze has nothing to do with it. Are some honestly stating that since little Johnny, all 8 or 10 or 12 years of age, can stretch his pocket money to buying booze, booze must be taxed more?
People, let's plug our brains in here.
Little Johnny is getting out of his skull because of the decrepit state of British civil society. We know the causes because the causes are all the same - the abandonment of morality, marriage and responsibility and the undeniable cancer of the welfare state.
If little Johnny's educated, proud father has been working hard all day to pay the family way, little Johnny won't be getting blotto that night, no doubt about it. But little Johnny's old man has no idea what he's doing because the old man has never been around. His single mother's never minded since the council gave her a flat for being knocked up.
It's so clear, so obvious, it's about time medics scanned the brains of those who still don't get it.
Totally agree, question the parents then fine them, if that doesn't do the trick jail them.
No, the price of booze has nothing to do with it.
Pete, you make some valid points about British society, but to claim that price has nothing to do with it is plain daft. Price affects demand for every known product and service, always has and always will.
Peter -
The BMA conference heard of children between the ages of 8 and 16. Regardless of the price, they should not be getting their hands on booze!
Surely the point is that their home life must be so rotten, so decrepit and empty of love and guidance and direction that price is immaterial. By thinking of the price you're ignoring the actual cause.
This is such a glaring point it seems hardly worthwile to mention (oh but I will) that I shouldn't be penalised because of the behaviour of others. I'm already taxed to penury to pay for the liberal State's underclass, if they want nay more they can go whistle for it.
There are many effective ways to keep children sober (did I really have cause to type those words about the United Kingdom?) and none of them involve more taxes and more laws.
Pete
I was widening the point to alcohol abuse at all ages. Price is definitely a factor.
I agree with you about children - broken families, drug addicted parents and general social depravity all play a significant part in delinquent behaviour.
That coincides with a steady decline in its price when adjusted for inflation and increases in earnings.
I dont agree. As far as I can see, what is happening is, a combination of two main things
1. The price of a pint in pubs is too expensive for young people. Therefore people are drinking at home before going out. They are getting tanked up on spirits before heading to a pub or club. Where they may have a few pints or more than likely hit the shots.
2. There is a deadline set for drinking. People are told that by 11/12 pm you will be kicked out. Therefore there is a mad rush to consume as much as possible by the deadline. This deadline has been in place for over a century (or there abouts), however, I think young people these days believe that 10 or 11pm is "early" and want to continue their night.
I think the move towards young people drinking spirits more than pints is a large element of this. The price of the pint in the pub is one factor (amongst others) of what drives people to spirits at home. Another is the price of spirits and mixers in a pub. Mixer bottles have decreased in size and increase in price dramatically over the last few years. In Dublin it can cost you 7 euro for a vodka and coke.. Easily.
Putting the price up is just a cop out. It doesnt target the actual problem. Same with the smokes. Hitting everyone for the problems of some, is just to lazy an option, and not a solution
Price is definitely a factor.
A pint of Guinness in a Dublin pub will set you back from 4.50 to 5.80 euro. A pint of larger from 5 .20 to 6 odd euro. A spirit and mixer from 7 euro to 9 euro. A can of red bull, 5 euro. A bottle of coke 3 euro and its only a poxy small specially made for the pub mixer.
And yet, every weekend in Dublin we have the same problems in A&E. Are those prices not expensive ?
Its people drinking before heading out or drinking shots in pubs that are a large part of the problem.
As for the young people. Thats parenting isnt it. If a kid is drinking alcohol then the parent should know about it, and would know about it if they were paying attention. If a kid that age is drinking alcohol then the parents should be asking what type of people their child is hanging out with, and should deal with it
I can't even imagine little ones out there who are my kids' ages getting drunk. Something is terribly wrong, and it's not the price of booze. Someone isn't watching out for those kids.
I agree with Pete that price is not really a factor.
Here, you can usually buy a 12 pack of 12 oz cans / bottles of popular lagers for $12 to $14 when its on special ( and it always is " on sale " in the big markets )
That price is at least comparable if not less than it is in the UK. Yet there is not the level binge drinking that there is in England.
Even if the price of beer were to be doubled, or tripled, nearly everyone could still afford it
Price is neither the cause nor the solution to any drinking problems.
Unlike tobacco, alcohol is a good product that harms no one when used properly. The problem is that too many people don't know how to drink - not the price of the drink itself.
I agree with Pete that price is not really a factor.
It's remarkable how the free-market ideologues claim the rules of supply and demand (with price as the regulating mechanism) do not apply to alcohol. Presumably they would not claim the same for drugs, even though a tsunami of cocaine has led to its price falling dramatically and consumption increasing dramatically.
Whether alcohol is good or bad is beside the point. Its consumption is influenced by its price, just like anything else. Price may not be the only factor, but it is crazy to claim it has no effect whatever.
Peter -
You need to keep with the line instead of flying off in an odd direction. Clearly demand would tail off if you tax alcohol sufficiently.
But that's irrelevent to the point. The point is that the BMA conference heard about underrage drinking. If your response to children getting drunk is to impose higher taxes then you're implying that the law should not be enforced as it is against children getting boozed up and that everyone ought to be penalised.
This is tosh.
If you are arguing that taxes should be increased on alcohol to combat alsohol abuse generally, you are arguing for a general penalty against everyone for the irresponsibilty of the few. We have enough laws to deal with the harm that we do to others drunk or sober. We do not need yet more interference in our private lives.
In order for price to be a realistic factor. you'd have to increase taxes on booze ten times or so. It's a bullshit issue. As stated, beer is probably cheaper than in the UK, yet we in the US don't have your binge drinking issue. Why is that?
Even if you did jack up the price of alcohol, its really easy to home brew it.
And I support legalizing drugs. The price of cocaine hasn't stopped the idiots from using that last time I looked.
As stated, beer is probably cheaper than in the UK, yet we in the US don't have your binge drinking issue. Why is that?
I blame the weather! ;)
If you are arguing that taxes should be increased on alcohol to combat alsohol abuse generally, you are arguing for a general penalty against everyone for the irresponsibilty of the few. We have enough laws to deal with the harm that we do to others drunk or sober. We do not need yet more interference in our private lives.
Rubbish Pete. Our private lives are increasingly impinged by public drunkeness and our hospitals are over-run with the results. Alcohol is significantly cheaper in real terms than 20 years ago - let's re-set real prices to the level when Maggie was kicked out in 1990 and keep them there.
In order for price to be a realistic factor. you'd have to increase taxes on booze ten times or so.
Eh? Says who?
Putting taxes back to the real level they were 20 years ago (roughly when the binge epidemic started) would mean nothing like that sort of increase.
Peter -
We know that 'cheap' booze does not cause mass violence. We know this because booze is cheaper in many countries compared to here, yet in these places the violence does not follow.
Instead of arbitrarily setting and holding prices (don't you people ever learn?) how's about we roll back other things to other times? How's about we roll back 50 years of catastrophic social policy, hmmmm?
Pete, the Social Policy that you talk about also exists in places like France, Germany and Sweden, were there isn't mass alchohol problems. But I also agree that the price of Alchohol won't have a massive effect on Alchohol consumption.
If an 10 glass of Vodka costs say £15 and an alchoholic drinks 1 of these bottles per night. Doubling the price to £30 won't make him drink half as much, it will make him spend £30 instead of £15. Increasing Alchohol price won't have a serious effect of Alchohol consumption, it will just cause people to spend far more money on it, and less money on other things. Simply put, increasing Alchohol price will cause a serious flux in the economy, not on Alchohol consumption.
When they tried big price hikes / supply restriction in Russia some years ago ( during the Gorbachev era? ) the hard core drinkers started drinking industrial products. A number died from it. Which cause the policy to be reversed.
Its simply not a price issue - its an educational and societal and in some cases a medical issue. Prohibition is not the answer and restriction is at best only a small part of the solution.
"a child under 12 is being admitted to Accident & Emergency departments because of alcohol every other day."
He should probably cut down.