Alcohol labels should warn of cancer risk, urge health groups
The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), a charity based in London, has launched a campaign urging the government to require companies to put 'bold and unambiguous' health warnings and calorie information on alcoholic drinks.
One in 25 cases of cancer in the UK — about 17,000 each year — are caused by alcohol, research shows. Alcohol can cause seven types of cancer, including breast and bowel.
A group of health organisations have signed a letter to Sir Keir Starmer demanding a new 'national alcohol strategy', which would include mandatory product labelling.
It is also calling for minimum alcohol pricing of 65p per unit in England — the level already in force in Scotland — as well as marketing and advertising restrictions on alcoholic drinks.
The organisation said that this would reduce cancer risks as well as cutting other deaths from alcohol, after a 42 per cent increase in alcohol-specific deaths between 2019 and 2023.
Alcohol has been shown to cause seven types of cancer
OSCAR WONG/GETTY IMAGES
Kate Oldridge-Turner, head of policy and public affairs at WCRF, said: 'The evidence is clear: health labelling on alcoholic drinks is urgently needed in the UK to help save lives.
'Health warning labels must be bold, unambiguous and completely separate from any marketing on the product. They should carry strong, clear messages about the health risks, which include the risk of cancer — far beyond vague advice like 'consume in moderation'.
'The goal must be to reduce alcohol use, given it increases the risk of seven types of cancer. Even if people continue to drink on social occasions, cutting down their regular intake would be a major step forward.'
A poll of UK adults found that only one in 13 people knew that alcohol increases the risk of cancer and more people thought red wine had health benefits than knew of its cancer risk.
Dr Helen Croker, assistant director of research and policy at WCRF, said: 'England prides itself on food safety, so why are our alcohol labelling and marketing restrictions far behind so many other countries? Why hasn't there been a national alcohol strategy in England since 2012? And why do bottles of beer show less information than bottles of orange juice?
It is not mandatory in the UK to put health warnings on labels of alcoholic drinks
MATTHEW HORWOOD/GETTY IMAGES
'We urgently need proper public awareness so that people understand the risks that come with drinking alcohol.'
Sir Ian Gilmore, chairman of the Alcohol Health Alliance, said: 'One of the reasons public awareness is so low is that we are being kept in the dark about the true cost of drinking. People have the right to know the full picture so that they can make informed choices about what they consume.
'To reduce the impact of alcohol on our health, we need change at a national level. We urgently need a national alcohol strategy to open up honest conversations about the risks of alcohol, while putting measures in place to tackle and prevent its harms.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Parents, beware the devastating consequences of measles
After reading the letters about vaccine misinformation and hesitancy (Measles surge shows why vaccinations are crucial, 20 July), I felt I must write to tell you of one unrecognised cause of the drop in vaccine uptake: when I worked as a community school nursing sister in the 1980s, with 11 state schools and a number of private schools that took up the vaccine service, we had 98% uptake of vaccines in the school setting. This was due to the system of sending letters home to parents requesting their consent and following up by phone, if necessary, by the school office staff. The children came in class batches. Then the local health authority decided that this service should be discontinued and parents were invited to take their child to the local GP surgery for their vaccinations. The uptake plummeted to less than 40% of eligible children due to children not taking the letters home, or parents forgetting or losing the letter – or being unable to take time off to take their child to the surgery. When I asked the GPs at the local health centre what the uptake for the cohort of eligible children was, they looked at their records and were surprised, but reluctant to do anything about it. Health visitors were responsible for, and very successful in, advising new mothers when vaccines were due, where to get them and encouraging uptake. It should be compulsory for all vaccines for preschool children (which includes measles) to be done before a child is admitted to school, as in many other countries. As a midwife, I saw a baby born to a mother who had contact with rubella in early pregnancy. The little girl was born with a body rash, had bilateral cataracts and was totally deaf. She was was very ill. Schools for deaf children may return again for these children if vaccination is not taken up for whatever reason. How StephensLiphook, Hampshire I contracted measles just before the NHS was established. With it came serious ear infections, burst eardrums, etc. There were no vaccines, just ear drops. Over the years the infections and operations continued and now, aged 82, I have no hearing with complications. I beg people to think seriously about vaccination. The consequences of measles can sometimes be devastating. Jean JacksonSeer Green, Buckinghamshire I caught measles aged six in 1953, at a time when parents hoped their children would get it (and chicken pox and mumps) so as to gain immunity. My dad, aged 54, had not had measles as a boy, caught it from me and nearly died. The risk of not vaccinating children is not just to WallLondon
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Nurses set to reject pay offer as further strike action looms
Nurses will this week overwhelmingly reject their pay deal, raising the prospect that they will join junior doctors on strike. The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) will warn ministers that they must come back to the table over the summer to avoid a formal strike ballot in the autumn and additional unrest that will further set back NHS recovery. However, public support for doctors' strikes appears to be waning, as ministers accuse them of holding the country to ransom and hospitals report fewer staff joining picket lines. Resident doctors, formerly known junior doctors, are in a five-day walkout after rejecting a 5.4 per cent pay rise, which came after a 22 per cent increase last year. Polling for The Times found that 55 per cent of voters oppose the strike, up from 49 per cent earlier this month, while 32 per cent support it, down four points from the second week of July before the walkouts began. Tom Dolphin, the head of the British Medical Association (BMA), insisted that doctors 'don't want to be on strike', but said the walkouts were necessary because doctors were 'undervalued' and were 'leaving the NHS in large numbers'. He said that pay had to be 'enough to recruit and retain the best doctors'. Ministers have refused to reopen pay talks and negotiations on working conditions collapsed in acrimony last week as ministers accused the BMA of acting in bad faith, while the union said the government had failed to make any concrete offers. • NHS patients told to brace for strikes until Christmas and beyond The BMA is holding out for a full return to 2008 levels of pay and Dolphin said salaries 'reflect the responsibility of these doctors' who were making 'life and death decisions'. He said: 'Even nurses who've had a pretty bad time [are] not as badly off as doctors in terms of lost pay.' Nurses, however, are furious that their 3.6 per cent pay rise this year was lower than doctors' increases for the second year in a row. The RCN is holding an indicative vote on the pay award, which closed on Sunday. The vote is understood to show 'overwhelming' rejection of a deal, with turnout likely to be well over the 50 per cent threshold that would be needed for industrial action. The union is due to announce final results later this week with a call for ministers to return to the table. While the BMA is adamant that headline pay must rise, nurses are thought to be more open to talks on wider pay structures. The RCN has repeatedly complained that nurses can remain on the lowest rung of the NHS pay scale for decades and is expected to press ministers for reforms that would allow them to move up the scale as they gain experience. If no progress is made, a formal strike ballot is likely to be launched in the autumn. A spokesman for the union said: 'The results will be announced to our members later this week. As the largest part of the NHS workforce, nursing staff do not feel valued and the government must urgently begin to turn that around.' It came after ambulance and other hospital staff in the GMB Union voted to reject the 3.6 per cent offer last week, with strike action now being considered. The BMA consultants' committee is also holding an indicative vote over a 4 per cent pay deal it described an 'insult' to senior doctors. Dolphin said the vote was 'a testing of the waters to see where people are', but warned: 'We're certainly very aware already, even before we've done this ballot, the consultants are also very much down on their pay [compared with 2008].' He told Sky News he did not recognise reports that doctors were being paid £6,000 a shift to cover for strikes, but said overtime rates were 'whatever they can manage to negotiate with their employer'.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Wes Streeting ‘thought he had struck deal to halt strike by doctors'
Wes Streeting thought he had struck a deal with resident doctors to stop a five-day strike in England, only for the British Medical Association to then reject it, sources have claimed. The health secretary believed he had secured a verbal agreement with the co-chairs of the BMA's resident doctors committee for a deal that involved progress on tackling five non-pay issues. Whitehall sources say Ross Nieuwoudt and Melissa Ryan decided the agreement made during face-to-face talks last Tuesday was enough for the suspension of the strike, which started on Friday. The deal would have involved resident doctors – formerly junior doctors – getting access to hot meals when working overnight, having some exam fees paid, receiving funding for equipment such as stethoscopes and getting mess rooms and changes to the way their postgraduate training was organised. But when Nieuwoudt and Ryan relayed the potential deal to the full committee, they were told they could not approve it because it did not address the BMA's demand that resident doctors receive a 29% pay rise over the next few years. 'They were told by the committee that they could only talk about pay and none of this soft stuff matters. Wes was furious. They had come incredibly close to a deal,' a source said. Resident doctors in England receive basic pay of between £38,831 and £73,992, with extra payments worth up to 15% of their salaries for working at weekends. The failure to reach a deal underlines the gulf between the BMA and Streeting. He has refused to reopen negotiations over the 5.4% salary increase he has given resident doctors this year. But the union is adamant it will call off industrial action only if he agrees to talk money. The BMA denied that it was responsible for the failure to strike a deal and blamed Streeting. A spokesperson said: 'We cannot be clearer: it was the government that ended the talks. 'Resident doctors do not want to strike. However, we have been compelled to take action because Mr Streeting's ultimatum, which demanded we call off strikes in exchange for nothing more than further talks was simply not acceptable. 'We want to continue our negotiations with Mr Streeting and strongly urge him to get back around the table with a serious proposal, rather than a handful of platitudes.' NHS bosses warn the strikes could 'snowball' and even continue into next year. They fear that nurses, consultant doctors and other NHS staff might stage strikes too. Sir Jim Mackey, the chief executive of NHS England, told the Sunday Times: 'We know that continued disruption over the coming months could see a snowball effect for patients and for staff. 'We've seen that before and it has take a huge effort over the last year to build momentum back up on reducing waiting lists and times.' His deputy, David Probert, who is also chief executive of University College London hospitals trust, told the same paper: 'This could be a marathon. We could be doing this until Christmas or maybe beyond.' The BMA's 55,000 resident doctor members have a legal mandate to take strike action for six months, until 6 January. Kemi Badenoch has pledged to outlaw strikes by doctors, bringing them into line with the police and army, if she becomes prime minister. 'Doctors hold lives in their hands. No one should lose critical healthcare because of strikes but that's what's happening now', the opposition leader posted on X on Sunday. 'That's why a Conservative government led by me would ban doctors' strikes, just like we do the army and police.'
