My name is Sally Marlow and I research alcohol problems in women at the Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College London. I started this blog to communicate the science, psychology and culture underlying drinking problems, and to put right some of the misinformation out there about women and how they use alcohol. All views expressed here are my own.
Seen recently on a shelf on a branch of Tescos in Scotland. Note the flowery bottles next to the brand called Skinny. Thanks to Jane Wilson of Alcohol Focus Scotland
The Financial Ombudsman has just found in favour of someone whose insurance company refused to pay out for a claim on travel insurance on the grounds that the policy holder had been drinking. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29325740
As a society we have made a decision that alcohol is legal. As a society, we also know that some people are more vulnerable to getting into problems with alcohol than others, and that the reasons for this include a person’s biology, their psychology, their life experiences, and their situtation at any given time. If we continue to sanction alcohol, then we also have a duty to pick up the pieces when it goes wrong for some people, and for the insurance companies not to play their part is simply hypocritical. I wonder how many board members on alcohol companies also have interests in insurance companies, and vice versa.
I’m in Edinburgh on a course organised by the UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies UKCTAS where the subject under discussion is Alcohol Policy in Practice. There are two areas where I’m learning loads – the course itself is filling in gaps about alcohol policy for me; but also post referendum, the other delegates have already opened my eyes to aspects of Scottish independence debate I hadn’t even considered.
So, here are some images which capture both: First a list of companies the 45% campaign is urging fellow Scots to boycott.
And second, a reminder of the importance of the alcohol industry in Scotland: an instantly recognisable association.
I recently did another Radio 4 documentary, Painful Medicine, about being addicted to painkillers. You can find it here Radio 4: Painful Medicine
There were some reviews, and they certainly covered the spectrum. Whilst Catherine Nixey at The Times was good enough to pick the programme as a Radio Choice, her review opened as follows:
It’s not the most exciting programme opening I’ve ever heard. “I’m outside a pharmacitst in London” says presenter and scientist Dr Sally Marlow, “and I’m just going to pop in and buy a codeine-based painkiller.” I won’t ruin the suspense of whether she gets any.
I will admit to laughing. She did then go on to be quite kind about the programme.
Meanwhile Priya Elan at the Guardian wrote a fabulous review saying the only thing wrong with the programme is that it wasn’t a series. And as this is my blog, I’m posting that one up here Guardian review of Painful Medicine
I want to share with you some definitions of the adjective mortal.
From the Urban Dictionary (www.urbandictionary.com)
To be very, very drunk. Contrary to the guy before me, the word ‘mortal’ is also used in the North-East of England (ie: Newcastle and Sunderland)
Last night, I was proper mortal!!!!
And now read this from the Oxford Dictionary website http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/ bearing alcohol in mind when you read each of the different usages.
There’s a news story today that sunbathing may be addictive. You can read it here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-27866407
I am all for exploring possible addictions which may not currently be recognised as addictions by doctors or the scientific community. I even made a programme on whether food addiction exists last year, which you can find here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01s4g7v
However, there’s a problem. By using the word “addictive” to describe behaviours or use of substances which don’t actually have any of the characteristics of addiction, (and by characteristics of addiction I mean things like tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, being unable to stop and being out of control), we effectively weaken the word addiction. Many of us use the word to describe how we feel about things we like very much – we may talk of being addicted to chocolate, or to House of Cards. I’m as guilty of this as anyone else.
However, these are not really addictions – they don’t impact our lives overly much, destroy relationships, or cause us real harm. We may do more of them than we want to, but that’s not the same as being addicted. By using the two, we create confusion, and don’t help with the public understanding of the devastation true addiction can bring.
I have a hunch that alcohol stories tend to run on the news in the mornings, and are dropped by the evening. A case in point was yesterday, when it was reported that the government are going to increase fines four-fold for drink driving and disorderly behaviour, amongst other things.
Cue the interviewee in a mid morning television news slot to talk about how anyone who is drunk and disorderly is probably unemployed, on benefits and an alcoholic (whatever that word actually means). Er, no actually, check out Friday and Saturday nights in town centres for disorderly behaviour, and look at both police and A&E admission statistics if you really want to know who is arrested for being drunk and disorderly.
And why didn’t this story survive until the evening broadcasts? I totally understand that more news happens, that it happens during the day, and that new news bounces old news. I know this is one case, but I think there might be a trend, and that alcohol stories are considered as good day-time fillers, but not as weighty night-time news. Fortunately my next study involves watching the news for a month and examining how alcohol stories are treated, so I can test my theory. I’ll let you know what I find.
PS I’ve just emerged from an extended period of jury service – three months. Expect a bit more action on the blog now that I’m back at my desk.
Today a briefing from Alcohol Concern dropped into my inbox, with the following highlights
- In 2010, the FIFA World Cup 2010 tournament was associated with a 37.5% rise in assault attendances across 15 hospital emergency departments on England match days.
- It’s also been reported that incidents of domestic violence increased by up to 30% on the days of England’s fixtures during the World Cup in 2006.
- Research examining data from a police force in the north west of England across the 2002, 2006 and 2010 World Cups found the risk of domestic violence rose by 26% when the English national team won or drew, and a 38% increase when the national team lost.
I know I write this blog to comment on alcohol issues, but what more is there to say on this one? The facts speak for themselves.
You can read the full briefing here: Alcohol Concern football briefing 2014
I caught a train last Friday to London from the North East. Next to me were four men from Stockton, which you might remember is not only my home town, but is also where the UK’s first Pound Pub has recently opened. These men were discussing the pound pub. Highlights of the conversation: bemusement that the Pound Pub opens at 8am; shock that you can drink that cheaply; and a suggestion that it might be a good thing, as “all the pissheads are in the same place”.
A story which has received wide coverage recently is the drop in violent crime in the UK. The Guardian has a good summary and comment here www.theguardian.com/society/2014/apr/23/alcohol-prices-violence-study-binge-drinking
Like other articles, it makes the link between the increasing cost of alcohol and decreasing violence. It’s difficult to get to the bottom of the relationship between alcohol and violence. There is no doubt that there is a relationship, but it’s almost impossible to prove causality. The only way really to do that would be to take some fairly large groups of randomly selected people, give one group no alcohol, the next group a little bit of alcohol, the group after quite a lot of alcohol, and the final group tons of alcohol, and then see what happens, and if one group would behave more violently than another. For good measure, you’d have to set the experiment in a realistic situation, but you’d also have to exclude anything else which have been shown to have links with levels of violence, and these could be internal such as tendencies in a person’s personality, and/or external such as hot weather….. to do this would be very expensive, difficult, and it probably would not pass the strict ethical rules which surround scientific testing. However, testing things in this way, ie by randomised controlled trial, is considered the ultimate in terms of scientific evidence, because it demonstrates cause. Without it we cannot say that alcohol causes violence.
Yet there clearly is a link. Alcohol is implicated in the vast majority of domestic violence cases, and is around half of all violent crime, including assault and rape. Alcohol makes people less inhibited – maybe it turns of the checks and balances which prevent violence in some people. However we all know that different people behave in different ways when drunk, and often these are polar opposites: sad, happy, argumentative, withdrawn, gregarious. Difficult as it might be to explore the relationship between alcohol and violence, we need to keep trying, and if a randomised controlled experiment is not possible, then we need to use other ways to investigate.