Everyone is talking about the two-drink limit

MONTREAL—The determination of what constitutes “news” is a paradox. It can be shocking or mundane, thousands of kilometres away or in your home. In journalism school, we were told people follow the news to educate themselves about public policy, to learn what people of interest are up to, and to have something to talk about with friends or colleagues around the proverbial water cooler. In a week of stories about the Kraken variant of the COVID-19 virus, the continued fighting in Ukraine, and mass murders in the United States, everyone was talking about a study by the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction (CCSA) about alcoholic drink limits. The study presented a list of health risks linked to drinking, including breast and colon cancer, heart disease, and stroke. It recommended limiting oneself to one to two drinks per week. From coast to coast to coast, everyone had an opinion. Entire call-in shows were devoted to it, op-eds debating the value of the study appear every day. In the National Post, the guidelines were called “unsupported and puritanical kill-joys,” while the Globe and Mail said the study data were “largely removed from actual human behaviour, interactions, and experiences.” In addition to the commentaries, there have been some interesting effects. On the Radio-Canada talk show Tout le Monde en Parle, guests chose to drink water instead of the normal glass of wine. In many households, including my own, “dry January” was in effect. There may be sound reasons for criticizing the methodology of the study, as many experts have done, but this might be an opportunity for Canadians to have a serious conversation about alcohol and its impact on our health. In the wake of the pandemic, when many Canadians got through their day with a drink, it’s long overdue. Canada ranks about 40th in the world in per capita consumption, just above the United States. In the past, two drinks a day—not two drinks a week—was considered the norm. And many famous people—notably Winston Churchill, Ernest Hemingway, Betty Ford, Elizabeth Taylor, and members of the Royal Family—were alcoholics. Drinking was part of the culture. When I was a teenager in the 1960s, I saw my parents and their friends drinking, sometimes to excess. It appealed to me, and so I stole their liquor and drank it before going to dances. The mix of rum, whisky, and gin was vile, but it gave me confidence. It wasn’t until I was in my 20s before I could see the dangers of drinking as “sport.” And I recognized some of my friends had a problem with alcohol. It came as a shock: I had older relatives who drank too much, but they were decades older than us. This was different. My friend Debbie was stunning, funny, and brilliant, skipping through law school without much effort. But one drink would lead to another, and the beautiful woman at the end of the table turned into a monster. A promising legal career was destroyed after her drinking made her unreliable. She died a few years ago from cancer. Others who drank to excess died from cancer, and many died in drinking and driving accidents. While no one wants to return to the days of Prohibition or the temperance movement, there has to be a way of restraining ourselves. But we live in an era where the neoliberal credo is “everyone is responsible for their own behaviour.” We have now legalized cannabis, legalized gambling, and alcohol is everywhere; anything goes. And while governments collect taxes on their sale, the annual cost of substance abuse is more than $45-billion a year, with an estimated 15,000 preventable deaths and 90,000 preventable health admissions attributed to alcohol use alone. There are many who will suggest “it’s none of your business” if they want to drink to excess. However, the instant their behaviour affects other people’s lives or the public purse, it is everyone’s business. We don’t constrain behaviour in a free society, but the least we can do is outline the dangers. While the CCSA study may have overstated its case, it has at least opened up a discussion. If warning labels or educational campaigns are introduced for alcohol products, I hope Canadians will be smart enough to act in their own best interests. Andrew Caddell is retired from Global Affairs Canada, where he was a senior policy adviser. He previously worked as an adviser to Liberal governments. He is a town councillor in Kamouraska, Que. He can be reached at pipson52@hotmail.com. The Hill Times

Everyone is talking about the two-drink limit

A recent Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction study may have overstated its case, but it has at least opened up a discussion about restraint.

Feds shouldn’t take food industry’s promise of good behaviour at face value

We need common sense steps to improve health outcomes

Alcohol guidelines offer a simple message: drinking less is better

Feds shouldn’t take food industry’s promise of good behaviour at face value

How can Ontario achieve net zero, with greater energy reliability and resilience? Roadmap to a clean energy future

Broadening access to digital services for Canadians through secure verification and authentication

Canadian news is in trouble: we can’t afford to let tech giants make its financial difficulties worse

Canada changed forever 40 years ago when Mulroney was elected party leader at Ottawa convention

This World Milk Day, thank a Canadian dairy farmer

All we have to worry about is ‘generative AI’ killing millions of white-collar jobs

Even high-wage temporary foreign workers are at risk of exploitation

Beyond dry January, supporting a culture of moderation

Evidence supports ending criminalization of people who use drugs

‘We’re at the crossroads’: MPs, experts hail timely creation of new mental health and addictions minister

Addressing mental health will require fresh resolve

Worrying statistics on men’s mental health signal it’s time for an inquiry

News

Get free news updates

Opinion

Submit a guest opinion article

resources

Advertise

subscribe

get help

Everyone is talking about the two-drink limit

A recent Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction study may have overstated its case, but it has at least opened up a discussion about restraint.

Get The Weekend Point of View Newsletter