Search

Aims Buying and consuming no- (per cent alcohol by volume, ABV = 0.0%) and low- (ABV = >0.0% and ≤ 3.5%) alcohol beers could reduce alcohol consumption but only if they replace buying and drinking higher-strength beers. We assess whether buying new no- and low-alcohol beers increases or decreases British household purchases of same-branded higher strength beers. Methods Generalized linear models and interrupted time series analyses, using purchase data of 64,280 British households from Kantar Worldpanel’s household shopping panel, 2015–2018. We investigate the extent to which the launch of six new no- and low-alcohol beers affected the likelihood and volume of purchases of same-branded higher-strength beers. Results Households that had never previously bought a same-branded higher-strength beer but bought a new same-branded no- or low-alcohol beer were less than one-third as likely to go on and newly buy the same-branded higher-strength product. When they did later buy the higher-strength product, they bought half as much volume as households that had not bought a new same-branded no- or low-alcohol beer. For households that had previously purchased a higher-strength beer, the introduction of the new same-branded no- or low-alcohol beer was associated with decreased purchases of the volume of the higher-strength beer by, on average, one-fifth. Conclusions The increased availability of new no- and low-alcohol beers does not seem to be a gateway to purchasing same-branded higher-strength beers but rather seems to replace purchases of these higher-strength products. Thus, introduction of new no- and low-alcohol beers could contribute to reducing alcohol consumption.

Background Lowering the strength of alcohol products could lead to less alcohol being bought and drunk. In its prevention White Paper, the UK Government aims to promote a significant increase in the availability of alcohol-free and low-alcohol products by 2025. Methods Through descriptive analysis and ARIMA modelling of >4 million alcohol purchases from 69 803 British households, we study the potential impact of lower strength alcohol products in reducing household purchases of grams of alcohol over 2015–2019. Households are divided into predominantly beer, wine or spirits purchasers. Results Over 5 years, there were decreases in purchases of grams of alcohol within beer amongst beer-purchasing households and increases in purchases of grams of alcohol within wine and spirits amongst, respectively, wine- and spirits-purchasing households. Almost all the changes were due to beer-purchasing households buying less regular strength beer, and wine and spirits-purchasing households buying, respectively, more regular strength wine and spirits, rather than increases in purchases of no- and low-alcohol products. Conclusions In general, lower strength alcohol products have not contributed to British households buying fewer grams of alcohol over the 5-year follow-up period during 2015–2019.

Screeningandbriefinterventions(BI)havebeenshowntobeeffectiveinthemanagement of alcohol consumption for non-treatment-seeking heavy drinkers, who are at physical and social risk, but not yet dependent. The robust evidence base for the effectiveness of BIinprimaryhealthcaresuggestsanimplementationinothersettingscouldbebeneficial. Giventheassociationbetweenalcoholandsocialproblems,socialworkhasa longhistory of working with persons with alcohol-use disorders, and social workers are often the first service provider to come into contact with heavy-drinking individuals. This critical commentary summarises the existing literature on BI effectiveness in social services and criminal justice settings, and discusses to which extent the social work field might be a promising area for BI delivery.

Aims: The aim of the study was to assess the cumulative evidence on the effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary healthcare in order to highlight key knowledge gaps for further research. Methods: An overview of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the effectiveness of brief alcohol intervention in primary healthcare published between 2002 and 2012. Findings: Twenty-four systematic reviews met the eligibility criteria (covering a total of 56 randomized controlled trials reported across 80 papers). Across the included studies, it was consistently reported that brief intervention was effective for addressing hazardous and harmful drinking in primary healthcare, particularly in middle-aged, male drinkers. Evidence gaps included: brief intervention effective- ness in key groups (women, older and younger drinkers, minority ethnic groups, dependent/co-morbid drinkers and those living in tran- sitional and developing countries); and the optimum brief intervention length and frequency to maintain longer-term effectiveness. Conclusion: This overview highlights the large volume of primarily positive evidence supporting brief alcohol intervention effects as well as some unanswered questions with regards to the effectiveness of brief alcohol intervention across different cultural settings and in specific population groups, and in respect of the optimum content of brief interventions that might benefit from further research.

Background. This study examines interrelationships among age, hormones, and cognition for middle-aged and elderly men, and tests whether hormones predict lower cognitive functioning and mediate the age–cognition relationship. Methods. We analyzed Time 2 data from the Massachusetts Male Aging Study, a population-based cohort study. Selection criteria included complete information on cognition and hormones (n ¼ 981). Cognitive measures included working memory (Backward Digit Span test), speed/attention (Digit Symbol Substitution test), and spatial ability (Figural Relations test). Hormones included free testosterone, total testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA), dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS), androstanediol glucuronide (3 a-A-diol-gluc), luteinizing hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), sex hormone-binding globulin (alternatively known as a ‘‘binding protein’’) (SHBG), prolactin (PRL), estrone (E1), and cortisol (CRT). Age was measured in years. Adjusted analyses added educational attainment, health conditions and behaviors, body mass index, and depression. Results. Older age was associated with lower cognitive functioning. In unadjusted models, logged free and total testosterone, DHEA, and DHEAS related to higher functioning in at least one cognitive domain; logged FSH, SHBG, and LH related to lower functioning in at least one cognitive domain; and logged E1, CRT, and PRL were not significant. In adjusted models, logged hormones did not relate to cognitive function except for logged E1 and CRT, which had negative effects. Logged hormones did not mediate the age–cognition relationship. Conclusions. The direct effects of hormones on cognition are not significant when salient factors are considered. Further, hormones do not mediate the age–cognition relationship; it is necessary to look to other explanatory pathways.