The document analyzes strategies used by the alcohol industry to influence public policy on alcohol and health. It identifies four key strategies: (1) Denial of the causal link between alcohol and health harms; (2) Distortion of the scientific evidence on health risks; (3) Distraction by emphasizing other risk factors; and (4) Distinction by appealing to cultural traditions. It provides examples of these strategies used by industry groups in opposing public health warnings and policies in Ireland and at the EU level. The document concludes that the alcohol industry's influence poses a democratic problem by disregarding public health evidence in favor of corporate profits.

6. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough evidence to
say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and size of
it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as more
important.
How alcohol industry organisations mislead the
public about alcohol and cancer
Petticrew M, Maani Hessari N, Knai C, Weiderpass E. How alcohol industry organisations
mislead the public about alcohol and cancer. Drug Alcohol Rev. 2018 Mar;37(3):293-303.
doi: 10.1111/dar.12596. Epub 2017 Sep 7. PMID: 28881410.

7. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough evidence to
say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and size of
it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as more
important.
• Distinction: Trying to maintain a distinction in the
way alcohol is regarded compared to other products,
which is mainly done through highlighting the
cultural history of alcohol in Europe.
Strategies used by Big Alcohol on the EU
level
Case study on the Irish Public Health Act

8. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough
evidence to say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and size of
it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as more
important.
• Distinction: Trying to maintain a distinction in the
way alcohol is regarded compared to other products,
which is mainly done through highlighting the
cultural history of alcohol in Europe.
Strategies used by Big Alcohol on the EU
level
Case study on the Irish Public Health Act

9. Denial
The Irish government has not to date produced any scientific evidence of a
“direct link” between the unqualified consumption of alcohol and fatal cancers
or causation of liver disease, as suggested by the wording of the proposed
health warnings.
The warnings fail to reflect the complexities that arise in considering the health
risks for consumers of alcohol, which vary significantly on the amount of
alcohol consumed, the type of alcoholic beverage, the pattern of consumption
and the dietary pattern in which alcoholic beverages are consumed. Thus, the
warnings do not accurately inform consumers.
- Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins (CEEV)

10. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough evidence to
say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and
size of it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as more
important.
• Distinction: Trying to maintain a distinction in the
way alcohol is regarded compared to other products,
which is mainly done through highlighting the
cultural history of alcohol in Europe.
Strategies used by Big Alcohol on the EU
level
Case study on the Irish Public Health Act

11. “Cancer is a multi-factorial disease, the
cancer risk cannot be evaluated in isolation,
and studies suggest that lifestyle factors are
important risk factors for cancer.
In addition, while scientific evidence shows
that excessive consumption of alcoholic
beverages carries an increased cancer risk,
it also shows that drinking wine in
moderation, with a meal, as part of healthy
lifestyles and dietary patterns, in particular
the Mediterranean diet, does not seem to
increase your cancer risk”
- Comité Européen des
Entreprises Vins (CEEV) –
TRIS notification
Distortion
In fact, scientific evidence shows that
the existing links between
nutrition/dietary intakes on the one
hand and associated health risks on
the other are highly complex and
vary from individual to individual
(due to factors such as e.g., age,
gender, lifestyle, genetics).
-World Spirits Alliance
TRIS notification

12. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough evidence to
say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and size of
it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as
more important.
• Distinction: Trying to maintain a distinction in the
way alcohol is regarded compared to other products,
which is mainly done through highlighting the
cultural history of alcohol in Europe.
Strategies used by Big Alcohol on the EU
level
Case study on the Irish Public Health Act

13. “At the same time that the WHO and various countries are fighting
alcohol as the enemy, including criminalising alcohol consumption, at
the same time we see complacency with regard to cannabis use. We feel
more and more that alcohol is evil and beverages are evil and that we
should all switch over to smoking cannabis. “
– Indirect quotation made by a member of the
EU Commission Civil Dialogue Group on Wine,
2018, per anonymous source
Distraction

14. • Denial: Arguing that there is no clear casual
connection, or that there is not enough evidence to
say that there is.
• Distortion: Acknowledge part of the casual
relationship but misrepresent the nature and size of
it.
• Distraction: Empathize other risk factors as more
important.
• Distinction: Trying to maintain a distinction
in the way alcohol is regarded compared to
other products, which is mainly done
through highlighting the cultural history of
alcohol in Europe.
Strategies used by Big Alcohol on the EU
level
Case study on the Irish Public Health Act

15. ““These measures really do directly attack our culture and our wine
culture. We need to work together against such initiatives. It is our
culture, it is our product that is under attack. The measures aim at
doing away with consumption of alcoholic beverages. (..) We need to
fight against measures reducing consumption.
We cannot agree to have these measures imposed upon us. Our culture
is at stake and our sector is at stake. At the same time that the WHO and
various countries are fighting alcohol as the enemy,”
– Indirect quotation made by a member of the
EU Commission Civil Dialogue Group on Wine,
2018, per anonymous source
Distinction

16. “The EP Beer Club believes that Beer is part
of Europe’s heritage and tradition, and
aims to support the responsible growth and
stability of the brewing sector in the
European Union.”
– EP Beer Club mission
Distinction

17. The alcohol industry’s presence in the EU debate on alcohol is a
great obstacle to creating evidence-based public health policy in the
EU and its Member States. This is ultimately a democratic problem,
as the health of people are being disregarded in favour of the profits
interests of a harmful industry.
Conclusion