FactCheck: How many lives will alcohol strategy save?
The claims
“Last year there were 1.2 million admissions to hospital associated with alcohol.”
Andrew Lansley, 23 March 2012
“Estimates suggest that in a decade, removing one billion units from sales would result in almost 1,000 fewer alcohol related deaths per year.”
Department of Health press release, 23 March 2012
The background
The government launched a two-pronged attack on problem drinking today.
A minimum unit price will be brought in for the first time, with the floor price reportedly due to be set at around 40p, intended to hit sales of the cheapest spirits and super-strength beers.
At the same time, the Department of Health (DoH) announced the details of a Public Health Responsibility Deal – essentially an agreement with the big drinks manufacturers to cut the strength of various lines of beer, wine and cider.
The press release was accompanied with a flurry of statistics pointing out the evils of drinking to excess. Do they all stand up?
The analysis
Hospital admissions
Mr Lansley quoted the frightening figure that there were 1.2 million hospital admissions “associated with alcohol” last year.
That carefully-worded phrase covers a multitude of sins.
First of all, we should point out that 1.2 million admissions doesn’t mean that 1.2 million individuals are ending up in casualty thanks to booze.
One person can be admitted a number of times during the course of an episode of ill health, so the number of people will always be smaller than the number of admissions.
It’s also important to point out that this number is an entirely notional one based on statistical extrapolation, not on a headcount of actual drunken patients done by doctors and nurses.
Analysts decided that a certain fraction of people who, say, fall over and twist their ankle, do so because they are drunk. Extensive anecdotal evidence collected by FactCheck suggests that may well be true.
But what the analysts do next is to assign a value based on the estimated likelihood of a certain percentage of injuries or illnesses being caused or exacerbated by alcohol to every patient.
So if you fall over and twist your ankle for whatever reason you become a fraction – 0.22 per cent of a single drunk patient. And that number is then multiplied by all the people admitted to hospital for falls.
It follows that, if the total number of patients admitted to hospital goes up, then the portion of those admissions theoretically attributed to alcohol automatically goes up too.
So when we see headlines stating that the total of hospital admissions caused by alcohol has soared to a dangerous level, we ought to ask what’s happened to the admissions total.
That big scary number of 1.2 million hospital admissions hides a smaller, harder piece of evidence.
The NHS Information Centre says that, of the 1,057,000 alcohol-related admissions in 2009/10, only 265,200 were for diseases or injuries “wholly attributable” to alcohol consumption, rather than based on abstract fractions.
And cases where the alcohol-specific condition was the “primary diagnosis”, or the main reason for the admission, totalled just 68,400 in 2009/10.
That number has gone up in recent years but part of the rise may be due to more types of condition being included in the data since 2009, so that doesn’t tell us a whole lot about what’s really going on.
A thousand fewer deaths?
The total number of deaths related to alcohol consumption in England has been climbing steadily for years but actually fell for the first time by 2.7 per cent from 6,768 deaths in 2008 to 6,584 in 2009. The main reason was a 5.6 per cent decrease in deaths from alcoholic liver disease.
It’s not clear that figures from other parts of the UK are exactly comparable, but our best estimate for alcohol deaths for the whole country is about 10,000.
DoH say their agreement with the big brewers and supermarket chains will lead to a billion fewer units of alcohol on sale, and that will reduce alcohol-related deaths by 1,000 a year.
A billion units of alcohol disappearing from the shelves sounds like a lot, but it’s about 2 per cent of the total consumed in Britain each year, according to figures from the OECD and the British Beer and Pub Association.
They put the annual consumption of alcohol in the UK at 50 billion and 52 billion units respectively (a unit is 10ml of pure alcohol).
So DoH appear to think that a 2 per cent reduction in alcohol consumption will lead to a 10 per cent reduction in fatalities.
On the face of it, that doesn’t pass the common sense test, but there is apparently an academic basis for the prediction, and we don’t have much information to go on about how the calculations were done.
A DoH spokesman did tell us that the figures were obtained from “modelling done by Department of Health analysts/economists” based on research into the health effects of alcohol by experts at the University of Sheffield.
But this study by the same team suggests a 2 per cent reduction in consumption would save fewer than 200 lives.
We weren’t able to discuss the findings in detail with the team from Sheffield. When we do, we’ll update this blog.
The verdict
Research done by the leading analysts at Sheffield University does provide academic ammunition for minimum pricing, suggesting that there should be fewer deaths and hospital admissions as prices rise and consumption falls.
But if that’s true, then the government’s recent position – that booze-related admissions have gone up while consumption has fallen – doesn’t make much sense.
Perhaps one explanation is the lack of robustness of those figures on how many people are really being hospitalised due to drinking.
We’re not going to give Mr Lansley a Fiction on the 1.2 million admissions but we think this theoretical number should be taken with the pinch of salt that many statistics deserve.
On the supposed life-saving effects of a cut in alcohol sales, we’ll have to sit on the fence until we get to the bottom on how DoH did their modelling.
Patrick Worrall


There are 6 comments on this post
Isn’t it curious that, as UK alcohol consumption has fallen, concern about alcohol related incidents has risen? Maybe there always were drunken incidents that were ignored in the past?
Could it be that there’s always been problems with a minority of drinkers (mostly middle & higher income folks) that are only now being highlighted by the availability of CCTV in City Centres and wider NHS reporting?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
So the government imagines that putting up the price of a 6 pack of ale by a £1 will stop binge drinking and reduce alcohol related crime and deaths?
Like or Dislike:
0
0
As you say it is difficult to comment fully without knowing more about the modelling technique. However I think that the DoH are probably looking at a 2% reduction across the board whereas any actual reduction is likely to be mostly amongst those who are the least likely to bother the NHS. The problem drinkers are the least likely to cut back.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Here are the sums and the methodology – Enjoy!
I think I trust NWPHO/JMU expertise more than easily stated journalistic scepticism.
http://www.nwph.net/nwpho/publications/alcoholattributablefractions.pdf
NB: As I understand it, much of this calculation comes from WHO ICD definitions and is consistent across the Western world.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Alas, none of those academic reports supports ANY contention that the most at-risk drinkers would curtail their habits if prices increase. Nor does the study show reliable data on the proportions of alcohol related conditions over time.
The University of Sheffield’s study simply rounds-up a wide range of existing academic studies, none of which is an adequate test of potential changes in discrete consumer behaviours.
On the whole, nobody knows how to reliably test reactions to price changes on specific cohorts of
consumers. That’s why commercial products tests adopt ‘test markets’ which they hope will quantify projections in ‘real’ conditions.
What this ‘alcohol price policy’ is hoping for is a reduction in the behaviours of alcohol addicts. I suggest we wait for the Scottish test market to learn whether those hoped-for outcomes are actually achieved.
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Alcohol related hospital admissions could have gone up while consumption has fallen because the people being admitted developed their problems over a number of years. Ie you don’t drink today and get liver problems tomorrow, it takes a number of years of drinking for this to occur. And admissions for liver disease have skyrocketed.
It may be if consumption has really fallen (and that’s debatable) that over time (ie 20 – 30 years) you’ll see admissions fall. But is it a good idea to wait that long without doing anything to see if we’re right about consumption levels? No data on alcohol sales is kept centrally so it’s impossible to have accurate consumption figures either.
Also admissions don’t cover A&E presentations (of which A&E departments don’t keep any mandatory data about). So someone who has fallen over due to their drinking but not badly enough to be admitted to a hospital ward won’t feature in any statistics.
It’s not rocket science to know that when price falls consumption of a product goes up. Wine with dinner use to be a weekly treat now it’s an everyday necessity.
Like or Dislike:
0
0