eMJA     The Medical Journal of Australia

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Classifieds | Contact | More... | Topics | Search | Login | Buy full access   

Letters

Health experts reject industry-backed funding for alcohol research

Trish M Worth
eMJA - Rapid Online Publication 25 May 2009

In reply: I write in response to the letter from Miller and colleagues, recently published online.1 Their letter is an attempt to influence non-Government senators as the Australian Government reintroduces the Bill to increase the tax on some alcoholic beverages. There must have been a better way to do this than by besmirching the good work of DrinkWise and its Directors.

DrinkWise Australia is not an industry-dominated body. It has a balanced board of six members from the alcohol industry and six distinguished community members. Miller and colleagues should know that, in criticising DrinkWise, they also attack the reputations of board members Professor Ross Kalucy, Chair of Psychiatry at Flinders University; Noel Turnbull, Adjunct Professor in Communications at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology; Neil Comrie, former Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police; and Terry Slater, who led the Australian Government’s public health programs before heading up the National Food Authority and the Therapeutic Goods Administration. The sixth community representative position on the board is currently vacant and has been offered to the federal health department.

DrinkWise does not advocate for or lobby government in respect of alcohol taxation policy for a very sensible reason — alcohol industry leaders advocating for or agreeing on matters affecting price could constitute a breach of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cwlth).

DrinkWise programs are strictly evidenced-based, drawing on specifically funded high-level independent research executed by leading academics at universities including Griffith, Macquarie, Monash, Deakin, Flinders, and the Hunter New England Institute. Moreover, the DrinkWise “Kids Absorb Your Drinking” advertising campaign was developed through qualitative, quantitative and ethnographic research, as well as the findings of an extensive literature review by child heath experts and academics.2-9 Campaign tracking results show that 28% of adults surveyed in March 2009 reported having reduced the amount of alcohol they drink in front of their children in the previous 12 months. When parents who had seen the DrinkWise advertising were asked about its impact on their drinking behaviour, 39% said they were more self-conscious of how they drink in front of their children, 18% had changed their drinking patterns, and 14% had actually cut down how much alcohol they consume when their children are around.10

DrinkWise Australia:

  • receives funding from the federal government and the alcohol industry for the development of both its evidence base and its programs;

  • has no associations with any international alcohol or tobacco lobby groups;

  • undertakes research through Australian universities to develop the evidence base for its interventions;

  • does not interfere with specification of the research hypotheses, research design and techniques, or publication of results;

  • ensures that the research it funds is undertaken in accordance with the universities’ protocols for conducting independent research; and

  • grants the researchers it funds a “non-exclusive, royalty-free, perpetual license to use, reproduce, adapt and publish Project IP [intellectual property] for research, education, academic and consulting purposes”.11

I was particularly surprised that the letter’s authors would trivialise the importance of education in successful drug intervention programs and instead advocate for increased reliance on supply-side strategies. DrinkWise delivers interventions in a variety of settings, not only through the Kids Absorb Your Drinking campaign, but also through practical tools such as a website (http://www.drinkwise.com.au), information materials and discussion forums, as well as working at the grassroots level with groups such as local government, school organisations, community newspapers, Sports Challenge Australia and the Good Sports program. Educational programs informed by scientific literature, that are implemented and evaluated effectively and not used as a standalone intervention strategy, can work.12

We at DrinkWise hope that anyone with a strong commitment to public health will be able to work with us and not against us. This will ensure that we will be able to continue to run evidence-based initiatives to reduce alcohol-related harm in Australia.

Competing interests: I receive payment from DrinkWise Australia for my role as Chair, and travel assistance to attend meetings (economy airfares, accommodation and travel costs). DrinkWise Australia is funded by the Australian Government and the liquor industry. I have never been employed by or received funding from any alcohol company.

Trish M Worth, Chair of the Board

DrinkWise Australia, Melbourne, VIC.

trish.worthATactiv8.net.au

  1. Miller PG, Kypri K, Chikritzhs TN, et al. Health experts reject industry-backed funding for alcohol research [letter]. [Published online ahead of print 11 May 2009.] <eMJA full text>
  2. Toumbourou JW, Williams IR, White VM, et al. Prediction of alcohol-related harm from controlled drinking strategies and alcohol consumption trajectories. Addiction 2004; 99: 498-508. <PubMed>
  3. Ellickson PL, Tucker JS, Klein DJ. Ten-year prospective study of public health problems associated with early drinking. Pediatrics 2003; 111: 949-955. <PubMed>
  4. Milgram GG. Alcohol influences: the role of family and peers. In: Houghton E, Roche AM, editors. Learning about drinking. Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge, 2001: 85-107.
  5. Roche AM, Bywood P, Borglagdan J, et al. Young people and alcohol: the role of cultural influences. An examination of the cultural drivers of risk-taking behaviour and their effects on “low-risk”, “risky” and “high-risk” use of alcohol among 14–24 year old Australian drinkers. Adelaide: National Centre for Education and Training on Addiction, 2007.
  6. Radecki TE. Parental role model: abstinence is best. The family transmission of alcohol abuse — 79 studies and counting. 2007. http://www.modernpsychiatry.com/parental_model.htm (accessed Jan 2008; no longer available).
  7. Dawe S, Frye S, Best D, et al. Drug use in the family: impacts and implications for children. Canberra: Australian National Council on Drugs, 2007.
  8. Alati R, Najman JM, Kinner SA, et al. Early predictors of adult drinking: a birth cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2005; 162: 1098-1107. <PubMed>
  9. Toumbourou JW, Duff C, Bamberg J. Family intervention in the prevention of drug-related harm. Prevention Research Evaluation Report 2003; 7: 1-14.
  10. Quantum Market Research. Parents and alcohol (benchmark tracking — March 2009). Melbourne: QMR, 2009.
  11. DrinkWise Australia. DrinkWise research funding guidelines. Melbourne: DrinkWise, 2007.
  12. Fager JH, Melnyk BM. The effectiveness of intervention studies to decrease alcohol use in college undergraduate students: an integrative analysis. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs 2004; 1: 102-119. <PubMed>

(Received 20 May 2009, accepted 21 May 2009)

Home | Issues | eMJA shop | Terms of use | Classifieds | More... | Contact | Topics | Search

The Medical Journal of Australia    eMJA  

©The Medical Journal of Australia 2009 www.mja.com.au PRINT ISSN: 0025-729X ONLINE ISSN: 1326-5377