‘A serious threat to public health': Doctors warn about delay to mandatory alcohol health labels
The warnings, which would draw a direct link between alcohol and cancer, are among a raft of measures in the Public Health Alcohol Act to reduce consumption. The labels were due to be introduced in May 2026.
However, this week
Tánaiste Simon Harris
confirmed the plans would need to be delayed in light of the potential impact of US president Donald Trump's threatened tariffs on trade. The labels will be delayed until 2028.
The
Irish Medical Organisation
, the largest representative body for doctors in Ireland, has condemned the delay, stating it will result in preventable diseases and alcohol-related cancers.
READ MORE
[
Drinks Ireland warned Taoiseach that alcohol health labelling plans seen as 'trade barrier' by US
Opens in new window
]
Dr Anne Dee, president of the IMO and a consultant in public health, said the delay means 'health being ignored in favour of corporate interests'.
'It will result in preventable incidences of cancer, increased incidences of liver disease, and harm to children because of a refusal to fully enact a bill signed into law seven years ago,' she said.
Under the law, once implemented, all bottles, cans and other containers must contain a back label stating: drinking alcohol causes liver disease; there is a direct link between alcohol and fatal cancers; a warning symbol for drinking when pregnant; and the website www.askaboutalcohol.ie.
The label should also state the quantity of grammes of alcohol and the energy value expressed in kilojoules and kilocalories. The label must be at least 60mm wide and not less than 30mm high surrounded by a black border.
Dr Dee said the labels are about giving people 'basic information' about the risks of cancer.
'These are irrefutable facts. There is no excuse for keeping them off the label. The longer this Government delays, the more irreversible damage is done.'
The IMO is the latest organisation to criticise the delay in introducing the mandatory labels.
Dr Sheila Gilheany, chief executive of Alcohol Action Ireland (AAI) also described the decision as a 'blow for public health'
'In the period to 2028 more than 3,000 people in Ireland will be diagnosed with cancer caused by alcohol. This includes some of the most common cancers in Ireland such as breast and bowel cancer with one in every eight breast cancers arising from alcohol,' she said.
'There will be upwards of 15,000 babies born with [Foetal Alcohol Syndrome Disorder] FASD, which is a completely preventable neuro-developmental condition that has lifelong implications and is estimated to cost the Irish exchequer
€2.4 billion
a year in terms of service need.'
Earlier this week, The Irish Times reported that drinks industry representative organisation, Drinks Ireland, warned Taoiseach Micheál Martin in April that plans for health labels on alcohol have been 'identified as a barrier to trade by the US'.
The comments were made during a meeting sought to discuss the impact of US president
Donald Trump
's threatened tariffs.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Examiner
4 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Government's decision to delay alcohol health labelling is bowing to lobbyist influence
How are decisions made in government? One would hope that decision-makers would have access to facts and that this would form the basis of decision making. However, while officials are certainly in possession of the facts when it comes to alcohol harm, the basis of decision-making seems to rest with who has access to government. Never was this clearer than in relation to the recent decision to delay the introduction of alcohol health information labelling. These labels provide basic information to consumers including that alcohol causes liver disease and fatal cancers as well as a warning about drinking in pregnancy; they also include details of calories, alcohol content and a link to a public health website. The regulations are part of a package of legislative measures, Public Health (Alcohol) Act, introduced in 2015 and passed overwhelmingly in 2018 by the Oireachtas. The aim was to reduce Ireland's alcohol consumption by 20% by 2020 - a modest target still not fully achieved. The labelling had been through extensive assessment and notification processes with the EU Commission and the World Trade Organisation and had been signed into law in 2023 to become operational in 2026. Polling indicated strong public support of over 70% for the measures. Labels had even started to appear on dozens of wines, beers and ciders from at least 10 countries in shops right across Ireland as businesses adapted to the regulations expecting the government to deliver on its own law. However, following extensive lobbying of government by the alcohol industry, a memo was brought to Cabinet last week by the Tánaiste and minister for foreign affairs and trade, Simon Harris, to delay labelling until 2028. Does a postponement matter? Some seemed to regard the labels as merely an administrative issue as opposed to a serious public health matter designed to help address issues such, as, for example, the birth of 15 babies every day in Ireland with the life-long neurodevelopmental condition of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, (FASD), or the fact that three people daily get a cancer diagnosis caused by alcohol, or that rates of liver disease have nearly doubled over the past two decades. According to lobbying records, alcohol industry representatives met with senior members of government, including the Taoiseach, at least seven times between January and April 2025. Freedom of Information requests also revealed that immediately upon the formation of the new government, multiple letters were sent to ministers all making the same points – such as worries about possible tariffs, costs to small businesses and a call to wait for an EU label. Alarmist claims were made about jobs and trade, even though labels have nothing to do with exports and the EU Commission adjudicated that labelling does not constitute a barrier to trade. To be clear, this industry has opposed these labels from the outset and employed variations of all the above arguments for years - in addition to false claims that alcohol has health benefits and doesn't really cause cancer. Whatever industry says to government about supporting public health measures (though not just at this time) what they say to their shareholders is that labelling might lead to reduced alcohol consumption. Perhaps the most ridiculous claim from industry is that as population-level alcohol consumption has decreased in recent years, there is apparently no need for further regulation - an argument akin to saying if road deaths decrease, why not increase drink-driving limits. The various entreaties worked and in early April comments were made by the minister for finance about the regulations needing to be 'examined again'. This opened space for industry and bad-faith actors to rehash all the debates which had already taken place over the past decade – debates which had been settled by evidence and fact. Once again health experts were dragged into discussing whether alcohol really causes cancer; the answer is the same now as it was in 2018 – yes. Moreover, we have since learned even more about alcohol and cancer and that it can cause the disease at even relatively low levels of consumption. The usual, unoriginal, worn-out tropes of nanny statism reappeared as if only the alcohol industry has the right to decide what information consumers are entitled to. Government ministers trumpeted that other measures of the Alcohol Act had been introduced (albeit painfully slowly) as if somehow that reduced the necessity to commence all of the legislation which is designed to work as a package. At the same time, multiple health and social organisations, those who are at the coal face dealing with the impact of alcohol harm, were writing to the government warning of the consequences of delaying the regulations. Academics highlighted that alcohol costs Ireland at least 2.5% of GDP - €12 billion annually – in health, justice and lost productivity. That's 10 times what is raised through excise duties. There are other voices which were raised but were ignored. Some of those most hurt by alcohol including those who have grown up with the trauma of alcohol harm in the home, those who are now in recovery and some who have lost precious family members to this drug wrote to government and the media highlighting the importance of these measures. Dr Sheila Gilheany: 'Perhaps the most ridiculous claim from industry is that as population-level alcohol consumption has decreased in recent years, there is apparently no need for further regulation - an argument akin to saying if road deaths decrease, why not increase drink-driving limits.' Requests were made for meetings to the Taoiseach, Tánaiste, minister for finance and the minister for enterprise. These were refused. Meetings were granted with Department of Health officials including the minister, but it is clear that the running on this issue was being made by other departments and in any case, surely the minister for health didn't need to be convinced of the importance of her own department's regulations? All of this, though, distracted focus from the fundamental question which is not, do we need labels, but rather, why is the alcohol industry getting an opportunity to overturn democratically mandated regulations which are there to protect public health? This assault on democratic processes is being presented as a mere delay due to unfortunate trading uncertainties. There are assurances that the regulations will go ahead in 2028. Yet the alcohol industry is already crowing - 'This pause shall be more than just a delay, it is a much-needed chance to rethink how we ensure consumers are well-informed, while also safeguarding the legal and economic coherence of the European market,' said European wine trade body, CEEV. The twist is that industry wants a weak-worded label buried in a meaningless QR code. So, the government decided to pander to the alcohol industry, choosing to believe their claims over the evidence that was presented to them by unbiased sources. Perhaps they didn't really believe the industry arguments but somehow it was expedient to go along with it, maybe in the hope of obtaining a supposedly better trade deal regardless of the health and economic impacts of ignoring the harm from alcohol. Or maybe it is the default position of elements of government to place shareholder profit ahead of public interest since private whispers are louder than the voices of civil society. If so, the dangers are not just to public health but also to public trust in government. Dr Sheila Gilheany is the CEO of Alcohol Action Ireland
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
‘Immense progress': Use of restraint and seclusion in mental health centres falls
There has been a 'significant' reduction in the use of restraint and seclusion of patients in Irish mental health centres over the last seven years, a new report has found. Since January 1st, 2023, the rules around the use of restrictive practices were changed to prioritise 'dignity, autonomy and wellbeing of services users'. The changes were the latest step by the State to move towards a human rights-based approach to mental health treatment in Ireland. On Thursday, the Mental Health Commission (MHC), which regulates the sector, published a report on the prevalence of restrictive practices. READ MORE According to the data, the number of people who were secluded fell from 473 in 2023, to 434 in 2024. This is a significant drop on 2022 – the last year when the old rules were in place – when 620 people were secluded. This equals a 30 per cent reduction in the number of people secluded between 2022 and 2024, and a 43 per cent reduction from 2018 to last year. Seclusion is defined as a person being unable to leave a room. The number of people physically restrained also decreased, falling from 1,078 people in 2022 to 879 in 2023 and 844 in 2024. This represents a 22 per cent decrease since 2022 and a 30 per cent decrease since 2018. Physical restraint is when one or more individual restrains a person, while mechanical restraint is the use of devices or bodily garments that prevent or limit a patient's movement. Two approved centres reported use of mechanical restraint in 2023, and only one in 2024. Six residents were restrained over nine episodes in 2023, and five residents over 10 episodes last year. [ Why is mental health so much worse among Irish youths than adults? Opens in new window ] All episodes in 2023 and 2024 were described as being used for 'transfer purposes to and from court/hospital' where there was an immediate threat of serious harm. The January 2023 regulations from the MHC also banned the use of mechanical restraint on children. The total number of restrictive practice episodes in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) fell from 2,608 episodes in 2018 to just 238 in 2024. There was a 57 per cent decrease in physical restraint episodes in Camhs between 2023 and 2024, and an 80 per cent decrease in seclusion episodes. Prof Jim Lucey, the State's inspector of mental health services, said children are 'specifically protected' from restrictive practices in Irish mental health care. 'Seclusion and physical restraint can have adverse implications for their emotional development. This approach, underpinned by the principles of trauma-informed care, has been further enhanced by the revised regulations. 'Our report documents a profound decline, showcasing the immense progress we have made by working together with staff in services in protecting a particularly vulnerable group.'
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
HSE paid medical products company €720,000 twice for the same invoice
A company paid more than €720,000 twice by the Health Service Executive (HSE) on foot of the same invoice is now in liquidation. The HSE said it was 'engaged with the liquidator to recover and resolve this overpayment, among other matters'. So far the overpayment has not been recouped. The HSE said that, at the time of the liquidation, the company had maintained it was owed additional money by the health service but this was not paid 'pending the resolution of the double payment issue and other matters'. The HSE identified the company that received the two payments as PMD Device Solutions Ltd. READ MORE In February, PMD Device Solutions Ltd petitioned the High Court for the appointment of provisional liquidators, acknowledging it was 'clearly insolvent', with more than €14.6 million in liabilities set against €4.6 million in assets. The company claimed it was owed approximately €1.2 million by the HSE and had issued High Court proceedings against the health authority. This is being contested. The liquidator did not respond to a request for comment. The Irish Times reported on Friday that the HSE financial report for 2024 showed one company had been paid more than €720,000 from two different parts of the health service on foot of the same invoice. No cross-checking had been carried out. 'The payments were made from two legacy areas [that] were previously on separate ledgers managed by different HSE staff,' it said, adding that the HSE now has an integrated financial and procurement system. [ Provisional liquidators appointed to Cork medical supplies company Opens in new window ] PMD Device Solutions was established in Co Cork in October 2011. It developed medical products for respiratory monitoring. In early 2024 the then minister of state at the Department of Finance, Jennifer Carroll MacNeill, now Minister for Health, attended a ceremony to ring the bell at the Nasdaq Stockholm exchange in Sweden to mark an acquisition involving the company. The HSE annual report, published last Friday, says the supplier paid twice had entered into an arrangement with the health service in 2020 for the supply of diagnostic devices, ancillary supplies and information technology. It says the overall system 'was considered to be of significant value in monitoring the condition of Covid-19 patients in hospital settings'. The supplier received about €15 million between 2020 and 2024. It says the arrangement was initially put in place on an emergency basis during the pandemic and was never then regularised through an appropriate competitive tendering process. The report says different HSE units were invoiced from time to time. 'This included prepayment each quarter from mid-2022 to mid-2024 for supply of a standard number of devices, to be drawn down as required by individual hospitals.' The report says the HSE did not maintain central records of the total number of units paid for, and the number of devices received by hospitals, or paid for and remaining undrawn from the supplier, is not known. 'The executive also does not know how many of the items paid for were actually used in its hospitals.' Separately, the HSE this week provided more details on the write-off of what its financial accounts described as an 'asset' constructed in 2009 at a cost of €1.4 million. It was never used for its intended purposes and was written off last year at a cost of €800,000, according to the accounts. The HSE said the write-off related to a planned initiative to develop a hydrotherapy pool. 'A number of factors arising meant that it could not come to fruition and the space was given over to the further capital development of essential clinical capacity. This capital development has delivered six additional outpatient consulting rooms, expanded clinical storage, and hot desk facilities for clinical staff,' the HSE said.
