The propaganda war against drinkers continues though. In the same edition of the Liverpool Echo a headline proclaims '40% of Liverpool tipplers "at risk"'. The article states 'Regularly drinking two pints a day is enough to impact on health according to government guidance so the focus isn't so much on alcoholics but the 42% of Liverpool drinkers who are storing up problems without even knowing it.'
Alright, Scousers like a drink. We know that. But can we really believe that 42% of those who drink alcohol 'are storing up problems'? Anyway isn't it supposed to be MORE THAN 2 pints a day that is bad for health. I thought that 2 pints was the maximum so called 'safe' level. Where is the evidence for this 2 pint danger limit? I remember some years back when it was 4 pints. Why the cut?
When one of these 'experts' provides reliable data showing that 1½ pints a day is o.k. for health and
2½ pints isn't then I'll accept it. Until then I'll ignore them.
I'm unable to see how any council can bring in minimum pricing without being guilty of creating an illegal cartel. Councils can't ignore competition legislation, which I suspect is the real reason this proposal has been dropped.
ReplyDeleteAs for 2 pints a day: all based on units which have little scientific basis, as one of the scientists involved admitted a couple of years ago.
It's a good job we can rely on investigative reporting from our journalists, all noted for their sober habits and going to bed by 10.00pm after a cup of Horlicks. Which 'expert' did they quote unquestioningly this time?