Search

Objective: Following recent work examining alcohol industry involvements in science, this is a case study that examines the ways in which the alcohol research community engages in "boundary work"--in which scientists define and defend the demarcation between their community of knowledge makers and others, justifying their claim to legitimacy and authority--in response to alcohol industry-sponsored interventions. The case here involves an economist who disputes the research consensus positions and policy recommendations of the field, having been funded by the key global alcohol industry political organization., Method: We examine the "functional" statements of both sides of this issue to show the ways in which the scientific and policy consensus of the field is disputed. Three examples of the responses of the alcohol research community, presenting different types of responses, are interrogated., Results: In late career and retirement, this economist published extensively in alcohol and health economics journals within the peer-reviewed literature on two key topics in alcohol policy: pricing/taxation measures and advertising restrictions. These commentaries, reviews, and correspondence propose alternative policies favored by the alcohol industry, which are at odds with the alcohol public health evidence base. The three examples examined of boundary work performed by alcohol public health researchers illustrate the variety of ways in which the legitimacy of these interventions has been questioned: on technical grounds, on explicitly normative grounds, and as a body of work as a whole., Conclusions: Interventions in the scientific literature create important resources for alcohol industry actors to oppose alcohol policy measures globally. The alcohol research field may benefit from discussion about how to respond to these kinds of interventions.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine the extent and nature of email interactions between National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) leaders and the alcohol industry from 2013 to 2020., Method: We performed a thematic content analysis of 4,784 pages of email correspondence obtained from Freedom of Information Act requests to the National Institutes of Health on three senior NIAAA staff members., Results: A total of 43 NIAAA staff were identified interacting with 15 industry bodies (companies and other organizations). NIAAA leaders provided industry with extensive information about scientific and policy developments. Discussions were facilitated by the willingness of NIAAA leaders to meet with industry and have other informal contacts, as well as NIAAA leadership presence at industry-sponsored and other events. Key industry actors asked NIAAA leaders for help on science and policy issues. At times, NIAAA leaders heavily criticized public health research and researchers in correspondence with industry., Conclusions: Institutional practices of engagement with the alcohol industry have been sustained by NIAAA leaders' activity. There is an urgent need to better understand the extent to which commercial rather than public health interests have shaped alcohol research agendas, both within and beyond NIAAA.

Objective: This study examines how the alcohol industry responded to developments in Irish alcohol policy leading to the 2018 Public Health (Alcohol) Act, a set of measures designed to reduce overall alcohol consumption in order to reduce harm to health and society. Previous research has emphasized the political and economic strengths of the alcohol industry in Ireland and elsewhere. This study examines the origins of and the debates over this legislation to better understand the political tactics of the alcohol industry., Method: The study focuses on developments between 2009 and 2018, tracing activities by industry actors to shape the policy process at different junctures. Data for the study are drawn from 18 semi-structured interviews with politicians, government advisors, public health experts, and advocates as well as from relevant primary documents, public statements, and newspaper articles., Results: The study identifies three interrelated tactics used by alcohol industry actors--obstruction through participation, coalition-building and mobilizing proxies, and making use of extensive political resources in lobbying--and traces their impacts at different points in the policy process. We find that industry actors had some success in influencing policy, defeating particular provisions by averting their inclusion, and winning amendments to others, but ultimately failed to defeat the legislation. Specific opportunities and constraints present in the Irish context for alcohol industry actors are identified., Conclusions: Public health considerations withstood a range of challenges from alcohol industry interests in passing public health legislation in Ireland. The findings have important implications for the study of the alcohol industry's political tactics in Ireland and elsewhere, including the use of lobbying registry data as a potential data source.

Objective: There is little formal study of alcohol industry involvement in science, despite longstanding concerns about various activities and broader evidence of corporate manipulation of research. Our aim was to explore the experiences of researchers who had no relationship with the alcohol industry, including how industry involvement in alcohol science more broadly had impacted their research work., Method: This was a qualitative, semi-structured interview study with senior researchers working on alcohol policy-relevant topics who had not received any form of payment from the alcohol industry or performed any unpaid work for alcohol industry companies or organizations they have created ( n = 14). A thematic analysis of transcripts using NVivo software was undertaken., Results: Despite not having worked with industry, contact with industry was nonetheless unavoidable for these alcohol researchers. This was particularly the case at conferences and policy-related events, which formed a key strand of broader industry surveillance of the research field, including individuals in the research community, and research outputs. Monitoring of the research community at conferences also afforded opportunities for informal relationship building and attempts to exercise influence. Where research findings were contrary to business interests, surveillance served as a platform for interventions of various kinds, including issuing legal threats., Conclusions: The alcohol industry extensively monitors research and researchers. Researchers who study the alcohol industry are targeted in particular, both covertly and overtly. Researchers experience the alcohol industry as ubiquitous in alcohol policy-related research, with conferences and policy-related events key venues for both relationship building and surveillance.

Objective: This article describes the origins and purposes of alcohol industry "social aspects organizations" as portrayed in internal tobacco industry documents., Method: We systematically searched the Truth Tobacco Documents Library for information regarding alcohol industry social aspects organizations. Using content provided by industry actors themselves, we identified a series of episodes in their evolution from the early 1950s to the early 1990s., Results: Hill and Knowlton, a public relations company, developed and managed the tobacco industry's scientific programs from the early 1950s onward. At the same time, the company performed a similar function for the U.S. distilled spirits industry, with research funding central to advancing what were conceived as public relations goals. They sought to persuade the public and policy makers that the cause of alcohol problems was the people who drank distilled spirits, rather than the product itself. Facing the existential threat posed by the developing population-level understanding of alcohol problems in the 1980s, national and international trade associations collaborated with the tobacco industry in various ways. The largest companies sought to bring together the different sectors of the alcohol industry to support a global network of national-level social aspects organizations., Conclusions: Alcohol industry social aspects organizations were developed to advance long-term public relations goals to manage both policy and science.

Objective: One research group has recently published three articles on the ways in which alcohol companies and industry social aspects organizations (SAOs) communicate with the public. These articles show how the information produced by the alcohol industry works to produce doubt and uncertainty. Replies from SAOs were published in the respective scientific journals. This article examines these "moments of controversy," asking in what ways, on which grounds, do the SAOs contest the claims made about them?, Method: Three moments of controversy were examined, prompted by articles on SAO information on cancer, on use of Twitter, and on pregnancy and fertility. The articles ( n = 3), the responses from the SAOs ( n = 8), and the replies by authors Petticrew and colleagues ( n = 4), were analyzed, identifying the rhetorical repertoires at work., Results: The responses by SAOs use two main strategies: 1. Posing narrow questions of accuracy rather than engaging with the overall findings of the articles on the context and framing of information; and 2. Making normative claims about what it is to do good science, suggesting that the articles and their findings are not. The second strategy questions the very legitimacy of research examining SAOs. The credibility of being published in the scientific literature affords the responses themselves a rhetorical function, a resource for later use to signal doubt and uncertainty., Conclusions: The SAO interventions in the scientific literature generate controversies. Furthermore, the published traces they leave in the scientific literature enhance SAOs' ability to make credible claims that the original findings were controversial.

Objective: In 2016, the U.K. Chief Medical Officers published revised low-risk drinking guidelines, based on an updated evidence review. These guidelines advised that men and women drink no more than 14 units per week--a reduction for men--while emphasizing the dangers of drinking in pregnancy and as a risk factor for cancer. The aim of this study is to examine how the alcohol industry responded to the publication of the guidelines., Method: This article draws on 26 semi-structured interviews with civil servants, parliamentarians, and public health and civil society actors. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, anonymized, and analyzed using thematic coding., Results: Following the publication of the new draft guidelines, the U.K. alcohol industry criticized their exclusion from the guidelines development process. They then mounted a major public relations campaign that strongly criticized the guidance produced and rejected the association of drinking with cancer without recourse to evidence. The Portman Group, which was prominent in the industry response, did not recommend that members or other companies carry the revised content on product labels and sought to undermine them via high-level political lobbying. There was no formal campaign to communicate the guidelines to the public., Conclusions: The present case adds new insights into the political strategies of alcohol industry actors to undermine public health, providing evidence of confrontational tactics. It draws attention to the failure of self-regulatory regimes to incorporate basic public health messaging., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Objective: The Anglo-Celtic colonists of Australia and New Zealand brought with them heavy beer-drinking customs, and each country later developed similar temperance movements and alcohol policies. Yet their beer markets differed throughout the 20th century; for example, Australian men typically drank lager with 5% alcohol-by-volume (ABV), whereas New Zealand men drank ale with 4%ABV. We investigated the public health implications of recent developments in product availability, marketing, and country-level consumption patterns., Method: We analyzed official data reporting beverage- and strength-specific volumes of ethanol available for sale in beer from 2000 to 2016, a period in which the countries had similar consumption trends; and did a thematic analysis of "market intelligence" reports., Results: Per capita ethanol beer sales fell in both countries, accompanied by increases in market share of higher %ABV categories. Different definitions of beer strength hampered comparison between countries. In Australia, consumption of ethanol in mid-strength beer (3.01%-3.5%ABV) increased, whereas consumption of low-strength beer (<3%ABV) decreased. In New Zealand, consumption of high-strength beer (4.351%-5%ABV) increased whereas that of traditional mid-strength beer (2.501%-4.35%ABV) decreased substantially. Market reports cited consumer health concerns and demand for "craft beer" (typically high-strength) as competing influences in both markets, and reduced-alcohol beer as "the alcoholic drinks industry's-potentially lucrative-shield against accusations of irresponsibility.", Conclusions: Declines in both high- and low-strength beer in Australia have potentially important implications. In New Zealand, the failure of low-strength beer to establish significant market share, along with increased consumption of high-strength beer, are noteworthy developments. Trend data on product ethanol content warrants scrutiny in public health surveillance globally, whereas research is needed on the role of ethanol content within industry strategy.

Objective: This review examines public health surveillance (PHS) studies of alcohol industry actors that explore the implications of the integration of business and political strategies for public health., Method: Eligible for inclusion were studies published in English language peer-reviewed journals since 1980 that sought to investigate both alcohol industry business and political strategies and their implications for public health. Studies were also required to present economic, political, and health data together. Seven databases were searched until May 2018., Results: Six studies were identified as eligible for inclusion in this review, undertaken in high-, middle-, and low-income countries and published between 2000 and 2015. Political strategies are driven largely by business interests, whether at the company, sectoral, or industry level, and corporate social responsibility activities may be integrated within overall strategies. There is a high degree of collaboration in political strategy development between companies, facilitated by growing concentration among global producers operating in increasingly oligopolistic markets. There are limited insights into the dynamics of market competition and limited methodological data available., Conclusions: PHS studies play a valuable role in identifying aspects of alcohol industry strategies that warrant more detailed and carefully designed research, as well as in elucidating global health implications. Further research in PHS and other kinds of studies will assist efforts to reduce the global burden of disease caused by alcohol.

Objective: To investigate reporting of alcohol consumption, we manipulated the contexts of questions in ways designed to induce social desirability bias., Method: We undertook a two-arm, parallel-group, individually randomized trial at an Australian public university. Students were recruited by email to a web-based "Research Project on Student Health Behavior." Respondents answered nine questions about their physical activity, diet, and smoking. They were unknowingly randomized to a group presented with either (A) three questions about their alcohol consumption or (B) seven questions about their alcohol dependence and problems (under a prominent header labeled "Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test"), followed by the same three alcohol consumption questions from (A)., Results: A total of 3,594 students (mean age = 27, SD = 10) responded and were randomized: 1,778 to Group A and 1,816 to Group B. Outcome measures were the number of days they drank alcohol, the typical number of drinks they consumed per drinking day, and the number of days they consumed six or more drinks. The primary analysis included participants with any alcohol consumption in the preceding 4 weeks (1,304 in Group A; 1,340 in Group B) using between-group, two-tailed t tests., Results: In Groups A and B, respectively, means (and SDs) of the number of days drinking were 5.89 (5.92) versus 6.06 (6.12), p = .49; typical number of drinks per drinking day: 4.02 (3.87) versus 3.82 (3.76), p = .17; and number of days consuming six or more drinks: 1.69 (2.94) versus 1.67 (3.25), p = .56., Conclusions: We could not reject the null hypothesis because earlier questions about alcohol dependence and problems showed no sign of biasing the respondents' subsequent reports of alcohol consumption. These data support the validity of university students' reporting of alcohol consumption in web-based studies.