Jump to content

Minimum Alcohol Pricing


scottsdad

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Affordability means that it's more affordable in real terms now than in 1980, I don't know what it is you're challenging or why.

The affordability of alcohol, as quoted by you in the posts above, refer to a measure of the price of alcohol against the average incomes.  Alcohol has risen in price in real terms during the time period reported on but incomes have risen more, meaning that the measure has increased.  You can see this in the tables - the affordability figures peak in 2007 and then fall in subsequent years due to incomes going down because of the recession.  Real terms mean relative to inflation, that isn't what is being measured here.  The inflation is included and taken into account in the affordability measurement.

What I'm challenging is you saying that alcohol is cheaper in real terms than it was in the 1970s.  It isn't.  if you look at the MESAS report in the link above it shows that the alcohol price index figure for 2014 is 471, with the retail price index figure as 383 (1980 = 100).  That shows that alcohol is not cheaper in real terms, it has risen in price greater than inflation.

Why I'm challenging it is because a very significant number of the statistics and figures in discussions around alcohol are misunderstood or misrepresented.  If the Scottish Government reduced everyone's income levels by 50% then alcohol would be far less affordable - hooray!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we need in addition to ration stamps and means tested supermarket purchasing and breathalyzer-activated home locks is a certification system from various government experts that states what each individual is deemed fit to purchase. Think gun licenses, but for sausages and pencil sharpeners.

#progressivelandliberty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Why?

Because I have lived the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC life - hard as it may be to believe I used to drink cans of lager and sometimes even did shots of spirits before I went out to the pub when I was a student and since.  If any current PRE-LOADERS would like to reach out for help, my DMs are open.  You can beat this, I did.  

To describe this behaviour as something new or a recent development is ridiculous.  The claim that the article that you can attribute increased A&E visits to the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC is also pretty spurious.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

Because I have lived the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC life - hard as it may be to believe I used to drink cans of lager and sometimes even did shots of spirits before I went out to the pub when I was a student and since.  If any current PRE-LOADERS would like to reach out for help, my DMs are open.  You can beat this, I did.  

To describe this behaviour as something new or a recent development is ridiculous.  The claim that the article that you can attribute increased A&E visits to the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC is also pretty spurious.  

You are an anecdote not a statistical trend. Stop being stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The affordability of alcohol, as quoted by you in the posts above, refer to a measure of the price of alcohol against the average incomes.  Alcohol has risen in price in real terms during the time period reported on but incomes have risen more, meaning that the measure has increased.  You can see this in the tables - the affordability figures peak in 2007 and then fall in subsequent years due to incomes going down because of the recession.  Real terms mean relative to inflation, that isn't what is being measured here.  The inflation is included and taken into account in the affordability measurement.

What I'm challenging is you saying that alcohol is cheaper in real terms than it was in the 1970s.  It isn't.  if you look at the MESAS report in the link above it shows that the alcohol price index figure for 2014 is 471, with the retail price index figure as 383 (1980 = 100).  That shows that alcohol is not cheaper in real terms, it has risen in price greater than inflation.

Why I'm challenging it is because a very significant number of the statistics and figures in discussions around alcohol are misunderstood or misrepresented.  If the Scottish Government reduced everyone's income levels by 50% then alcohol would be far less affordable - hooray!

Alright, 60% more affordable in real terms, like the link I provided on the previous page.  Happy now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

Alright, 60% more affordable in real terms, like the link I provided on the previous page.  Happy now?

That is still inaccurate.  

3 minutes ago, Baxter Parp said:

You are an anecdote not a statistical trend. Stop being stupid.

The article you linked to didn't actually present any evidence that the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC is any sort of epidemic.  Lets have a look at what it says:

The sole statistic or figure in the report is that 40,000 more 15-29 year olds were admitted to A&E with alcohol problems that year compared to ten years ago, an increase of 58%.  That seems a very significant increase, particularly as the number of people drinking in that age group has fallen during the same time period - there is nothing that links that increase to greater numbers of 'pre-loading', nothing that says that 'pre-loading' is increasing.  As I said above, the debate around health and alcohol and the impact of alcohol is filled with poorly used and understood statistics, with a number specifically related to A&E admissions due to alcohol.  Just saying that stat x  implies cause y isn't enough.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found a literature review on pre-drinking, what a time to be alive

https://academic.oup.com/alcalc/article/49/2/213/205233

Quote


 

Abstract

Aim: To review the international literature concerning pre-loading (PL); this is drinking before going out to pubs and bars. Method: A literature review conducted in May 2013 using the EBSCO database entering the following search terms ‘pre-loading’, ‘front-loading’, ‘pre-partying’ and ‘pre-drinking’. Thereafter, the reference lists were checked for further relevant articles. The review consisted of 40 articles of which 11 were excluded because PL was not the primary unit of analysis or they did not fulfil a quality assurance criterion. Results: Despite being an internationally widespread development to date, most of the research on this has been from the USA and UK. The majority of US studies have been concerned with PL in a college and high school setting, while the research in the UK has mainly concentrated on the correlation/relationship between PL and what takes place when drinkers enter pubs and bars later in the evening. A consistent finding was that PL is associated with greater alcohol consumption, intoxication and alcohol-related risks. The price of alcohol and achieving intoxication were the main motivations for PL. However, other reasons included a chance to meet members of the opposite sex or own friends in surroundings that encouraged interaction rather than intoxication. Conclusion: PL should be regarded as part of a wider drinking culture and understood within the context of what individuals require from a night out or staying in when drinking. There is little evidence to suggest that PL is a risk factor for admissions to accident and emergency services.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ICTChris said:

That is still inaccurate.  

"Alcohol is now 60 per cent more affordable in the UK than it was in 1980. It is possible in Scotland today to exceed the new lower risk guidelines for alcohol (14 units per week) for around £2.50. This is an unacceptable position and we have a responsibility to address this problem."

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum-pricing

For the nth time.  Also a stat in the link you provided.  Suck it up.

3 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The article you linked to didn't actually present any evidence that the DANGEROUS PRE-LOADING EPIDEMIC is any sort of epidemic.  Lets have a look at what it says:

I didn't say there was a dangerous pre-loading epidemic, I just defined the word and provided the link for colour.

4 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 Just saying that stat x  implies cause y isn't enough.

What evidence do you have that pre-loading isn't an issue? "I say so" doesn't cut it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, welshbairn said:

5ae998978d3e2_DSC_0199(1).thumb.JPG.d777a78bad41c61905e5f6ef0a50be6c.JPG

Honestly, what we need if we're going to save people from the perils of their liberty is a Council of Bold and Brave Commissars.

oEu3nfx.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Baxter Parp said:

"Alcohol is now 60 per cent more affordable in the UK than it was in 1980. It is possible in Scotland today to exceed the new lower risk guidelines for alcohol (14 units per week) for around £2.50. This is an unacceptable position and we have a responsibility to address this problem."

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Health/Services/Alcohol/minimum-pricing

For the nth time.  Also a stat in the link you provided.  Suck it up.

The first time you used this statistic in this thread you said that it showed that alcohol had been "coming down in price in real terms for decades".  This statistic doesn't show that, as explained.  I'm not doubting that the statistic itself is accurate, although personally I think it's a bit of a slippery measurement to use in relation to this because it relies on income increases.

Quote

I didn't say there was a dangerous pre-loading epidemic, I just defined the word and provided the link for colour.

The link that you provided "for colour" used it, hence why I quoted it.

Quote

What evidence do you have that pre-loading isn't an issue? "I say so" doesn't cut it.

I don't have any evidence that pre-loading isn't an issue. If you want to use the pre-loading as an argument for minimum pricing of alcohol the burden of proof is on you to provide evidence to show: 1) that pre-loading is specifically harmful; 2) that minimum alcohol pricing would reduce pre-loading and 3) that introducing it won't have such severe consequences on others that would outweigh the advantages.

The article you linked to about pre-loading doesn't establish any of that.  There's also the presupposition that it's a new phenomenon, which it absolutely is not.  The article was basically a pearl-clutching Daily Mail-style think-of-the-children piece about something that is completely normal behaviour.   One of the studies in the literature review above puts it best, young people like getting drunk, they like meeting people of the opposite sex, they like having a laugh and pre-loading is part of that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The link that you provided "for colour" used it, hence why I quoted it.

You seemed quite taken with it, yes.  Still not my argument.

5 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

If you want to use the pre-loading as an argument for minimum pricing of alcohol

I'm not, I didn't.  I said minimum pricing combats pre-loading.  I didn't approve or disapprove or pass judgement. I think pre-loading does contribute to extreme pished-ness at the end of the night and early morning (since few folk can afford to get mortal in a nightclub exclusively) and I have no interest in proving it one way or the other but it's a small part of the Scottish Government's and health professionals reasoning for instituting minimum pricing.

10 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 One of the studies in the literature review above puts it best, young people like getting drunk, they like meeting people of the opposite sex, they like having a laugh and pre-loading is part of that.  

One of the studies showed pre-loaders had a higher alcohol content in their blood stream.  It doesn't mean it reviewed every study, it was a review of studies made in the UK and US, all of which had different parameters to the other. Not definitive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

I'm not, I didn't.  I said minimum pricing combats pre-loading.  I didn't approve or disapprove or pass judgement. I think pre-loading does contribute to extreme pished-ness at the end of the night and early morning (since few folk can afford to get mortal in a nightclub exclusively) and I have no interest in proving it one way or the other but it's a small part of the Scottish Government's and health professionals reasoning for instituting minimum pricing.

 

I was using the impersonal "you" rather than  meaning you specifically.  However,  you've spent the whole thread banging the drum for minimum unit pricing, you quote a story about pre-loading stating that combating it is one of the things that minimum unit pricing is designed to do but you didn't "approve or disapprove or pass judgement"?   Really odd posting, worthy of the PeterGrant, HB, xbl era of P&B.

32 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You aren't the P&Ber I would most associate with that character tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...