Skip Navigation

Alcohol and Alcoholism 2009 44(3):226-228; doi:10.1093/alcalc/agp021
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heather, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heather, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Medical Council on Alcohol. All rights reserved

The Importance of Keeping Regular: Accurate Guidance to the Public on Low-Risk Drinking Levels

Nick Heather*

School of Psychology & Sport Sciences, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

* Corresponding author: Division of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 8ST, UK. Tel: +44-191-227-4521; E-mail: nick.heather{at}northumbria.ac.uk

Received 2 September 2008; first review notified 26 March 2009; in revised form 27 March 2009; accepted 30 March 2009


   Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to argue that recommendations to the general public on daily amounts for low-risk alcohol consumption must retain the word ‘regular’ in order to avoid being rejected. Method: Narrative review of the evidence-base for daily limits to alcohol consumption, the guidance the public actually receives in the UK and media reactions to this guidance. Results: Evidence for daily limits (not more than 3–4 units for men and 2–3 units for women) rests on epidemiological surveys that enquire about ‘average’ or ‘usual’ amounts of consumption and this is reflected by the use of ‘regular’ or ‘consistent’ in the UK Government's Sensible Drinking report in 1995 and in guidance currently issued by the English Department of Health. In contrast, guidance the public actually receives often omits the word ‘regular’ and implies that the limits in question are maximum daily amounts. Media reactions to this inaccurate information suggest that the general public is likely to find these recommendations incredible and to reject them. Conclusion: If guidance to the public on daily drinking amounts is to stand any chance of being credible and effective, it must be accurate and must therefore retain the word ‘regular’.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
M. Roerecke and J. Rehm
Irregular Heavy Drinking Occasions and Risk of Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Am. J. Epidemiol., February 8, 2010; (2010) kwp451v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.