NICE recommends minimum price for alcohol to curb high risk drinking

Skepticism is often deadened when the evidence backs your
pre-existing prejudices. NICE have fallen into the same trap
as Liam Donaldson and the BMA in how they interpret evidence
about what affects the level of alcohol consumption. All
risk implementing simple direct solutions that will
pander to their desire to do something but will not help in
the long run.

All have failed to read the evidence carefully. We have
convincing evidence that short term increases in price cause
a drop in consumption (and vice versa). It does not follow
logically or evidentially that price increases have an
affect on the long term behaviour of the population
(otherwise Norwegians would be virtuous teetotallers and the
French would be drunken louts). Deep seated social habits
are not cured by simplistic government actions like minimal
prices.

NICE also recommends restrictions on availability. There is
even less evidence here. It seems obvious (at least to
tabloid headline editors, NICE and the BMA) that tightly
restricting opening hours will curb the amount we drink. The
current lax licensing hours presumably explain why the
English drink so much more than they did before the
relaxation of the rules. Except that they don't: consumption
in England has fallen every year since the rules were
relaxed.

Alcohol consumption has been an English problem for a long
time. Simplistic efforts to combat the problem look good,
but don't work and distract from the slow search for long
term solutions that tackle the underlying culture.

Competing interests:
None declared