Re: Identification, assessment, and management of gambling-related harms: summary of NICE guideline
Dear Editor
The summary of the NICE clinical guideline was a truly excellent summary of a complex piece of guidance in a difficult and emerging space. Most are clear that gambling causes harm that cuts across clinical, social, family and financial spheres. The guideline and BMJ summary set out a comprehensive approach with regard to clinical practice.
The associated editorial (1) highlighted the obvious point that the NICE guideline focused on clinical practice but was not a public health guideline, and the product and the nature and practices of the gambling industry escapes significant scrutiny from a population health perspective.
The editorial highlighted the need for “a public health approach”. This is an often mis-used phrase, however we do, on this occasion, agree. With the Faculty of Public Health, the UK Association of Directors of Public Health have set out what a definition of a “public health approach” (2), with the Faculty and the Royal Society of Public Health (3) we have set out recommendations to govt for change. ADPH has argued that the measures in the previous government’s White Paper didn’t go far enough and essentially we need a new Gambling Act (4).
A number of Public Health experts have argued (5) that the statutory levy would do more harm than good, and that the levy is not a substitute for reform and regulation of policy and product.
We encourage the government to play its hand in their plans with regard to policy interventions to reduce the harm from gambling. Meanwhile local authorities are making progress on this locally using the powers local government has (4), specifically including licencing (6), advertising and sponsorship (7), the development of comprehensive strategies locally (8) and regionally (9) (10).
Mr Greg Fell, President, UK Association of Directors of Public Health
Professor Kevin Fenton, President, Faculty of Public Health
Mr William Roberts, Chief Executive, Royal Society for Public Health
Rapid Response:
Re: Identification, assessment, and management of gambling-related harms: summary of NICE guideline
Dear Editor
The summary of the NICE clinical guideline was a truly excellent summary of a complex piece of guidance in a difficult and emerging space. Most are clear that gambling causes harm that cuts across clinical, social, family and financial spheres. The guideline and BMJ summary set out a comprehensive approach with regard to clinical practice.
The associated editorial (1) highlighted the obvious point that the NICE guideline focused on clinical practice but was not a public health guideline, and the product and the nature and practices of the gambling industry escapes significant scrutiny from a population health perspective.
The editorial highlighted the need for “a public health approach”. This is an often mis-used phrase, however we do, on this occasion, agree. With the Faculty of Public Health, the UK Association of Directors of Public Health have set out what a definition of a “public health approach” (2), with the Faculty and the Royal Society of Public Health (3) we have set out recommendations to govt for change. ADPH has argued that the measures in the previous government’s White Paper didn’t go far enough and essentially we need a new Gambling Act (4).
A number of Public Health experts have argued (5) that the statutory levy would do more harm than good, and that the levy is not a substitute for reform and regulation of policy and product.
We encourage the government to play its hand in their plans with regard to policy interventions to reduce the harm from gambling. Meanwhile local authorities are making progress on this locally using the powers local government has (4), specifically including licencing (6), advertising and sponsorship (7), the development of comprehensive strategies locally (8) and regionally (9) (10).
Mr Greg Fell, President, UK Association of Directors of Public Health
Professor Kevin Fenton, President, Faculty of Public Health
Mr William Roberts, Chief Executive, Royal Society for Public Health
(1) Tackling gambling harm requires a public health approach | The BMJ https://www.bmj.com/content/388/bmj.r447
(2) Protecting the public from being harmed or exploited by gambling and the gambling industry | ADPH https://www.adph.org.uk/2022/06/protecting-the-public-from-being-harmed-...
(3) ADPH, FPH and RSPH call for tighter regulation on gambling | ADPH https://www.adph.org.uk/2023/02/adph-fph-and-rsph-call-for-tighter-regul...
(4) Why we need a new Gambling Act | ADPH https://www.adph.org.uk/2024/03/newgamblingact/
(5) Statutory levy on gambling may do more harm than good | The BMJ https://www.bmj.com/content/381/bmj-2023-075035
(6) Licensing Appeal for Adult Gaming Centre Dismissed https://www.ftbchambers.co.uk/news/news-view/licensing-appeal-for-adult-...
(7) Sheffield City Council Advertising and Sponsorship Policy https://democracy.sheffield.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=33968
(8) Gambling Harm Prevention Strategy for Sheffield 2024-2034 https://democracy.sheffield.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=47561
(9) A Public Health Framework for Preventing and Reducing Gambling Harms in Yorkshire and the Humber https://yhphnetwork.co.uk/links-and-resources/coi/gambling-harms/a-publi...
(10) Greater Manchester Combined Authority Chapter One https://www.chapter-one.org/
Competing interests: GF has been part of a regional gambling harm reduction project funded by a Regulatory Settlement from the Gambling Commission.