Prior to the ban on cigarette advertising the ‘merchants of death’ linked smoking with rugged outdoor pursuits, romance, sport and the arts. Role models on movie screens were tough guys, glamorous women, sophisticated espionage agents, or war heroes. Any review of the ‘swinging-sixties’ will show a cancer stick stuck on the lips of celebrities in every field.
But the perception was in stark contrast to the reality. There was nothing glamorous about sports people who could no longer go the distance, glamour models with harking coughs or rugged heroes clearing phlegm from their blackened lungs.
Despite overwhelming evidence linking smoking to lung cancer and a slow, miserable, premature death, millions still light up. Movies link the habit to a rebellious nature. Many young women consider it a hunger suppressant. Others are just addicted to the habit.
Smoking presents governments with an interesting dilemma. On one hand the addiction reaps millions in taxation revenue. On the other, it costs society much more in hospital care and personal grief.
Banning of smoking from hotels, clubs, restaurants and public areas is a laudable attempt to change behaviour by making the habit socially unacceptable.
The same approach will not work for alcohol. What would life be without a cold beer after a hard day or a good wine over fine meal? Responsible drinking is an accompaniment to social communication for most. On the other hand binge drinking is a form of social destruction.
Government has a responsibility to weigh the options between the massive taxation revenue generated by pubs, clubs, restaurants and advertising agencies against the social and economic cost of excessive consumption. They have a range of options including bans on advertising and sponsorships, restrictions on liquor trading in the early hours of the morning and education.
Powerful lobby groups from the alcohol ‘industries’ and the recipients of sponsorship dollars in arts and sport will exert enormous pressure on government. Taxation revenue and political donations will most likely produce a feeble ‘claytons response’ to the issue.
Bingle drinking amongst the young has many causes. The influence of role models, poor parenting, a lack of meaning in their lives, false expectations seeded by slick advertising and rebellious attitudes.
Responsible governments can make responsible decisions to change attitudes towards alcohol just as they have done for smoking. Kevin Rudd should be congratulated for putting the issue on the public agenda. We now look forward to the legislative changes to restrict advertising, trading hours and sponsorships.
Tags: Health
