Today’s post is by way of an update on an issue we’ve addressed before– adding cancer to warning labels on alcoholic beverages. Here’s a link to an earlier post on the subject: Worth the Effort?
Now the outgoing Surgeon General, Vivek Murthy, has officially called for Congress to require the change.
Surgeon General calls for new label on drinks to warn Americans of alcohol’s cancer risk
As in the past, we can anticipate significant support for the move from the public health sector, and equal or greater opposition from the alcoholic beverage industry.
Why the resistance? Because Americans tend to fear cancer more than any other disease. That was certainly of use during the long campaign to reduce the number of smokers. Why not apply it to drinking?
And the public does seem to be in need of education on the subject: In one poll, only 45% of respondents were aware of the link between drinking and the risk of cancer.
If a clear statement appeared on the label, drinkers might be incentivized to drink less, or at least less frequently. And yes, that would mean less revenue for the people who make and sell us alcoholic beverages.
It would almost certainly result in better overall health outcomes, since (per the Surgeon General), “…alcohol directly contributes to 100,000 cancer cases and 20,000 related deaths each year…”
“It comes down to our lives versus their money,” remarked one expert. “Same as it did with smoking.” Be interesting to see how this plays out politically.
In a related topic, we have a movement to include screening for Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) at the level of primary health care. Translation: When you visit your doctor’s office, you’d be asked about your drinking habits along with other behaviors. Depending on your response, you might be given a further assessment, probably using the AUDIT screening instrument, to see if you have an Alcohol Use Disorder.
In some ways, I’m surprised to learn this isn’t already standard practice. Apparently, it never has been. Why not? I suspect that physician attitudes have something to do with it.
“I don’t like to talk about drinking with patients who came to see me for something else,” one physician told me, a few years ago. “I just feel like it’s none of my business. And besides, what can I do about it? I’m not a psychiatrist. If a patient asks for help with drinking, then sure, I might refer them. But most of my patients won’t do that.”
That’s quite different from that same physician’s attitude towards smoking: “Cigarettes cause cancer,” he protested, as if drinking didn’t. “Smoking and cancer, now that’s a health issue.”
When we consider the many barriers involved, it’s no surprise that so small a percentage of those who qualify for a diagnosis of an SUD ever receive any kind of treatment for it.
