Yet another pseudo-academic study attempting to conclude what the sponsors of the research want. This is all too common across all subjects. Academia sold its soul to the devil many years ago - I can trace it back at least 30 - but now its pervasive. They lose their reputation but get the money, just like whores.
I agree with all your comments on this study, it is a terrible one with terrible conclusions. And let me qualify before I say the next bit - I think MPU is a terrible policy that has no evidence of working.
However, what these studies and your conclusions don't consider is the alcohol duty changes over these periods. Your graph of Scotland age-standardised death rates is almost a mirror of the change in beer alcohol duties over that time. Duties were being increased slightly (but not significantly) between 2003 and 2006 and then quite aggressively between 2006 to 2012 and then plateau again and some what declining after that (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/alcohol-bulletin/alcohol-bulletin-historic-duty-rates#alcohol-duty-on-beer). These studies would be better minded to use that as an indication that duty price increases may have been having the effect they are attributing to MPU announcement. That might be a stronger argument for ideas like MPU.
Of course, the problem with what I have just said is... that correlation is not found in the England/Wales/etc death data.
And the elasticity of demand? Particularly for the heavy drinking class? I'd guess it is close to zero so proportionately hardly any impact where it matters. Only huge price increases would affect the consumption habits of these people.
I’m sure that the huge new cohort of on the ball, clued up, Labour MPs will be all over this and disband this clearly useless quango.
Yet another pseudo-academic study attempting to conclude what the sponsors of the research want. This is all too common across all subjects. Academia sold its soul to the devil many years ago - I can trace it back at least 30 - but now its pervasive. They lose their reputation but get the money, just like whores.
I agree with all your comments on this study, it is a terrible one with terrible conclusions. And let me qualify before I say the next bit - I think MPU is a terrible policy that has no evidence of working.
However, what these studies and your conclusions don't consider is the alcohol duty changes over these periods. Your graph of Scotland age-standardised death rates is almost a mirror of the change in beer alcohol duties over that time. Duties were being increased slightly (but not significantly) between 2003 and 2006 and then quite aggressively between 2006 to 2012 and then plateau again and some what declining after that (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/alcohol-bulletin/alcohol-bulletin-historic-duty-rates#alcohol-duty-on-beer). These studies would be better minded to use that as an indication that duty price increases may have been having the effect they are attributing to MPU announcement. That might be a stronger argument for ideas like MPU.
Of course, the problem with what I have just said is... that correlation is not found in the England/Wales/etc death data.
And the elasticity of demand? Particularly for the heavy drinking class? I'd guess it is close to zero so proportionately hardly any impact where it matters. Only huge price increases would affect the consumption habits of these people.
It's so obvious who's pulling your strings. Alcohol is a poison. Alcohol can also be very enjoyable.
Indeed, Christopher J(oyous) Snowden is in the pocket of big joie de vivre.