Search

Drinking wine is mentioned in the Holy Quran as a crime and a sin and it is strictly prohibited. In this respect, it is one of the hudud crimes, but since the penalty for it is not specified in the Quran, there is no certainty in terms of the hadd penalty. Since there is no Āyah in the Quran regarding the punishment of drinking or khamr (intoxication), it is the hadiths that constitute the primary basis of the punishment of alcoholism and khamr. Reportedly, the punishment during the time of the Prophet (PBUH) for this crime was flogging and it was administered by using palm branches, shoes, hands, clothes, etc. However, an exact amount was not prescribed by the Prophet (PBUH). It is stated in the sources that the number is around forty. It is also true that there have been instances the Prophet (PBUH) did not punish someone for khamr. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objective Substance use disorders pose significant global public health challenges, with India being no exception. Bihar, one of India's most populous states, implemented alcohol prohibition in April 2016 to address the adverse effects of alcohol abuse. However, the impact of this policy on overall substance use behavior among patients in healthcare settings remains to be explored. This cross-sectional study aimed to evaluate the changing trends in substance use behavior among patients in the tertiary care setting following the prohibition of alcohol use in Bihar. Methods A total of 372 patients diagnosed with substance use disorders were recruited from tertiary care facilities in Bihar. Data on demographic characteristics, types of substances used, frequency and quantity of use, reasons for use, and awareness of prohibition laws were collected through structured interviews and reviews of medical records. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for data analysis. Results The majority of the participants were male (n = 346, 93.01%), with a mean age of 38.5 years. While tobacco use remains stable, there are significant increases in opioid and cannabis consumption post-prohibition, highlighting unintended consequences (p-values - opioids: 0.008, cannabis: 0.021). Additionally, heightened daily and weekly substance use after prohibition is evident (p-values: daily: 0.008, weekly: 0.021), emphasizing the necessity for nuanced policy considerations. Reasons for substance use, including coping with stress and peer pressure, showed significant differences before and after the prohibition (p<0.05). Moreover, awareness of alcohol prohibition laws increased significantly after the implementation of the prohibition (p = 0.003). Conclusions Our findings suggest that while alcohol prohibition in Bihar did not significantly lead to any changes in terms of the types of substances used among patients in tertiary care settings, it did influence the frequency and quantity of tobacco and cannabis consumption. Increased awareness of prohibition laws underscores the importance of policy enforcement and public education initiatives in addressing substance use behavior., Competing Interests: Human subjects: Consent was obtained or waived by all participants in this study. Institutional Research Committee, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Patna issued approval AIIMS/Pat/IRC/2020/349. Animal subjects: All authors have confirmed that this study did not involve animal subjects or tissue. Conflicts of interest: In compliance with the ICMJE uniform disclosure form, all authors declare the following: Payment/services info: All authors have declared that no financial support was received from any organization for the submitted work. Financial relationships: All authors have declared that they have no financial relationships at present or within the previous three years with any organizations that might have an interest in the submitted work. Other relationships: All authors have declared that there are no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work., (Copyright © 2024, Prasad et al.)

Why is it that young Italian-American men were shooting each other over turf during the prohibition of alcohol in the 20th century, and young African-American men are shooting each other over turf in the 21st? Was this just a historical accident? Could it easily have been the other way around? That is the question with which the present paper attempts to wrestle.

If alcohol has substitutes, changes in its relative price can encourage the production and consumption of other illicit and harmful drugs. This paper considers if county-level bans on the sale of alcohol in the state of Mississippi encourage the production and consumption of crystal methamphetamine. We estimate the parameters of a drug production function in which the inputs are the density of people and firms, underscoring the importance of learning and knowledge spillovers to production and consumption. Poisson and Negative Binomial parameter estimates reveal that county-level bans on hard liquor sales; but not on beer and wine, increase the number of crystal methamphetamine labs. In the absence of such laws, there would be approximately 308 fewer crystal methamphetamine labs in the state of Mississippi. Our findings suggest that in Mississippi, which is the least healthiest state in the nation, county-level bans on hard liquor sales are not welfare improving as they encourage substitution for a drug that is potentially more harmful to individual health than alcohol.

Background: In September 2012, a series of methanol poisonings occurred in the Czech Republic as a result of an influx of illicit alcohol into (predominantly) cheap alcoholic beverages on the retail market. The public authorities decided to prevent public health risks by prohibiting sales of liquors that contained more than 20% alcohol (> 20% liquor). The "partial" prohibition lasted for almost two weeks, but the poisonings still continued. This article assesses the impact of the methanol poisoning risks and the (partial) prohibition on alcohol drinking patterns, and describes the understanding of risks and their mitigation in vulnerable groups. Methods: The rapid assessment and response method (RAR) was used during the (partial) alcohol prohibition. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with respondents recruited for the study in alcohol-intake settings (e.g., bars and restaurants, street alcohol outlets) in six regions. In total, 107 alcohol users were interviewed, mostly with risky drinking patterns (69% scored ≥ 1 on the CAGE scale), and 53 alcohol retailers/staff members serving alcohol. Results: About one third of the alcohol users in the study (35%) drank > 20% liquors during the prohibition; a higher score on the CAGE scale was associated with a lower probability of drinking > 20% liquors during the period of the prohibition, probably because of the perception of being at high risk of poisoning. There was some increase in drinking liquors with an alcohol content less than 20%. Those who continued drinking > 20% liquors typically did so in the belief that some sources of these were safe. Conclusions: Public policies aimed at reducing the risk of methanol poisonings in emergency situations should adopt broader measures than those focusing on market control. These measures include increased access to brief interventions, addressing the strategies that alcohol consumers adopt to prevent risk, and, in general, helping consumers make informed choices to prevent further fatalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes the recent developments in Brazilian law that led to the enactment of the Sports Fans Statute in 2003. Over the last decade, Brazilian fans have been treated as consumers and are consequently entitled to a bundle of legal rights: fairness of the competition; transparency; access to an ombudsman; transportation; personal safety; insurance; sanitation; fair tickets and food pricing; and ticket selling standards. In addition to these consumer rights, due to the escalation of violence among hooligans, Brazilian authorities established Sports Fans Courts, prohibited alcohol consumption inside football stadiums, and permitted certain sports fans associations to be banned as well as individual spectators. Recently, the organisation of the World Cup provoked a clash between the transnational culture of FIFA executives and the local legal culture of Brazilian lawyers, as the norms adopted to organise the national Brazilian competition will be suspended during the international tournament.

This article describes the recent developments in Brazilian law that led to the enactment of the Sports Fans Statute in 2003. Over the last decade, Brazilian fans have been treated as consumers and are consequently entitled to a bundle of legal rights: fairness of the competition; transparency; access to an ombudsman; transportation; personal safety; insurance; sanitation; fair tickets and food pricing; and ticket selling standards. In addition to these consumer rights, due to the escalation of violence among hooligans, Brazilian authorities established Sports Fans Courts, prohibited alcohol consumption inside football stadiums, and permitted certain sports fans associations to be banned as well as individual spectators. Recently, the organisation of the World Cup provoked a clash between the transnational culture of FIFA executives and the local legal culture of Brazilian lawyers, as the norms adopted to organise the national Brazilian competition will be suspended during the international tournament. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In September 2012, a series of methanol poisonings occurred in the Czech Republic as a result of an influx of illicit alcohol into (predominantly) cheap alcoholic beverages on the retail market. The public authorities decided to prevent public health risks by prohibiting sales of liquors that contained more than 20% alcohol (> 20% liquor). The "partial" prohibition lasted for almost two weeks, but the poisonings still continued. This article assesses the impact of the methanol poisoning risks and the (partial) prohibition on alcohol drinking patterns, and describes the understanding of risks and their mitigation in vulnerable groups., Methods: The rapid assessment and response method (RAR) was used during the (partial) alcohol prohibition. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with respondents recruited for the study in alcohol-intake settings (e.g., bars and restaurants, street alcohol outlets) in six regions. In total, 107 alcohol users were interviewed, mostly with risky drinking patterns (69% scored ≥ 1 on the CAGE scale), and 53 alcohol retailers/staff members serving alcohol., Results: About one third of the alcohol users in the study (35%) drank > 20% liquors during the prohibition; a higher score on the CAGE scale was associated with a lower probability of drinking > 20% liquors during the period of the prohibition, probably because of the perception of being at high risk of poisoning. There was some increase in drinking liquors with an alcohol content less than 20%. Those who continued drinking > 20% liquors typically did so in the belief that some sources of these were safe., Conclusions: Public policies aimed at reducing the risk of methanol poisonings in emergency situations should adopt broader measures than those focusing on market control. These measures include increased access to brief interventions, addressing the strategies that alcohol consumers adopt to prevent risk, and, in general, helping consumers make informed choices to prevent further fatalities., Competing Interests: Declaration of conflicting interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2017.)