Browsing by Author "Room R"
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- ItemBeverage-specific consumption trends: A cross-country, cross-sectional comparison.(Elsevier B.V., 2023-05-12) Torney A; Room R; Huckle T; Casswell S; Callinan SINTRODUCTION: The price of alcoholic beverages can vary for a range of reasons, including tax. Risky drinkers purchase more low-cost alcoholic drinks than moderate drinkers, contributing to beverage-specific risks for that category. The study aimed to examine the proportion of total alcohol consumption comprised by each beverage type and their correlates. Australian and New Zealand populations were compared, where drinking cultures are similar, but taxation of alcohol differs. METHOD: Data was taken from the International Alcohol Control study in Australia (N=1580) and New Zealand (N =1979), a cross national survey that asks questions on beverage specific alcohol consumption at a range of different locations. Tax rates were obtained from previous analyses run on the dataset. RESULTS: Ready to Drink (pre-mixed) beverages are more popular in New Zealand and the proportion of these drinks consumed out of total alcohol consumption by risky drinkers was correspondingly higher there. Conversely, the proportion of wine consumed by risky drinkers was higher in Australia. The consumption of spirits and beer by risky drinkers was similar in both countries. DISCUSSION: Differences found for the proportion of beverages consumed by risky drinkers between the countries are fairly well aligned with differences in the taxation of each drink type. Future adaptations in taxation systems should consider the impact of taxes on preferential beverage choice and associated harms.
- ItemClassifying Alcohol Control Policies with Respect to Expected Changes in Consumption and Alcohol-Attributable Harm: The Example of Lithuania, 2000-2019(MDPI (Basel, Switzerland), 2021-03-02) Rehm J; Štelemėkas M; Ferreira-Borges C; Jiang H; Lange S; Neufeld M; Room R; Casswell S; Tran A; Manthey J; Efird JTDue to the high levels of alcohol use, alcohol-attributable mortality and burden of disease, and detrimental drinking patterns, Lithuania implemented a series of alcohol control policies within a relatively short period of time, between 2008 and 2019. Based on their expected impact on alcohol consumption and alcohol-attributable harm, as well as their target population, these policies have been classified using a set of objective criteria and expert opinion. The classification criteria included: positive vs. negative outcomes, mainly immediate vs. delayed outcomes, and general population vs. specific group outcomes. The judgement of the alcohol policy experts converged on the objective criteria, and, as a result, two tiers of intervention were identified: Tier 1-highly effective general population interventions with an anticipated immediate impact; Tier 2-other interventions aimed at the general population. In addition, interventions directed at specific populations were identified. This adaptable methodological approach to alcohol control policy classification is intended to provide guidance and support for the evaluation of alcohol policies elsewhere, to lay the foundation for the critical assessment of the policies to improve health and increase life expectancy, and to reduce crime and violence.