A quick rant about Dry July
I encountered no fewer than three wine professionals today who are all on the Dry July bandwagon (what is Dry July you ask? more information here, but essentially it’s a month long movement to refrain from drinking alcohol in the name of charity) all happily drinking water and abstaining in the name of the cause (the cause being that of supporting cancer victims. It’s a great cause by the way, no doubting that, I’m not quibbling with anything on the charity side).
From my seat though, I’ve got to say that I’m no fan of Dry July, purely because I’ve got a philosophical issue with the concept itself (and not just because I work in the liquor industry).
More specifically, I’m not comfortable with the associations perpetuated by this boom/bust, drink/abstain philosophy, of the belief that you either drink to excess or you don’t drink at all, of the ‘need’ for a dry month and the likely ‘wet’ month that will follow. Couple that with slogans such as ‘clear your head, make a difference’ and you’ve got to say that it paints a very dark picture of drinking all together.
Now I’m not about to deny the problems that Australia has with alcohol as I’ve seen the stats (and it’s hard not to see the ugly side of booze on any given Saturday night in a major city) but I just can’t see how a month of encouraging people not to drink does anything more than postpone the issues for a few weeks (before it returns with a bang).
As Kendall Hill basically outlines here, the answer is that we need to embrace a message of moderation, that encouraging a dry/wet culture will only continue to fuel the binge drinking problems that are such an issue, and that we instead need to examine the way we drink.
I’d like to stress that I’m not trying to take a puritanical stance here, as big nights are part of my gig (and I’m a booze peddler after all), but anyone can see that the ‘drink in moderation’ message needs more emphasis, and that it would be in everyone’s best interest to drink less but better.
As a result, I’m calling for a ‘Drink Less But Better July’ – a movement that embraces fine wine, craft beer, top spirits and fortifieds (anything decent and boozy), all of which are drunk only in moderation. Of spending more because you’re drinking less. Of making drinking a contemplative sport rather than a competitive one.
Who’s with me?
Help keep this site paywall free – donate here
You might also like
22 Comments
Andrew,
Well said. Though it (dry July) is for a good cause, and I have to agree, alcohol has many problems, I have a problem with the notion, for the reasons you have outlined, plus it is yet another manifestation of the growing reach of the nanny state mentality that seems to be gripping Australia.
Sign me up!
I absolutely agree Andrew. No Dry Month for me, not even in a pink fit (what's a pink fot anyway?). I also thought that there's a nanny state thing attached to it, as per Edward, as if not drinking is abstaining from some kind of hideous vice that's nonetheless perceived as perversely essential to the Australian way of life.
I think I've been drinking more regularly this year, but not so much at each sitting. I've been going to the gym religiously, getting up at 5 a.m. (see, no hang-overs), and have lost about 11-12 kg since the New Year (though nothing is fitting anymore!). Many have asked me if I've stopped drinking. So I've "cleared my head" and "made a difference", by lifting weights and doing some cardio, not abstaining from alcohol. I'm quite happy with this situation.
In any case, enjoying a wine I've cellared or contemplating a possible new addition to the cellar is a way to "clear your head" of all the trivial and not-important-in-the-grand-scheme-of-things rubbish that goes through it on a daily basis.
Of course, supporting cancer research is a fine thing, but demonizing alcohol is another, and doesn't make the problem go away. By demonizing alcohol you possibly make it all the more attractive in my view for the less intelligent among us.
MichaelC
Great to see this rant posted in full, out of 140 character limitations. Onya AG. x
Well said Andrew. I'm in. And as Mikerism101 said, I retweeted in agreement.
Additionally, Dry July channels funds into a variety of charities rather than into direct, tangible benefits from donation. A marketing organisiation sits above these charities to push the Dry July message, then the organisations receive dissipated monies.
Why not support charities that utilise funds through one administrative filter, not two. Likewise, the message for me isn't so much about 'boom and bust' 'wet and dry' – we have a drinking culture in Australia anyway. We celebrate anything, with drink. Drinking better and more moderately should be an ongoing message not limited to a month to counter the three (Ocsober, DryJuly, Febfast) that promote abstinence. Likewise, why aren't there months that promote abstinence from other facets of life? I suggested on twitter meat, driving to work, GM goods, junk food whatever. The point being that alcohol as a luxury item is readily removable from one's consumption vernacular – we can't blame people for taking an easy route to promote charity, what we can do is suggest that discouraging false promise charities and either channeling funds into more benefit related charity or actually volunteering ourselves is a more positive step.
Additionally, Dry July channels funds into a variety of charities rather than into direct, tangible benefits from donation. A marketing organisiation sits above these charities to push the Dry July message, then the organisations receive dissipated monies.
Why not support charities that utilise funds through one administrative filter, not two. Likewise, the message for me isn't so much about 'boom and bust' 'wet and dry' – we have a drinking culture in Australia anyway. We celebrate anything, with drink. Drinking better and more moderately should be an ongoing message not limited to a month to counter the three (Ocsober, DryJuly, Febfast) that promote abstinence. Likewise, why aren't there months that promote abstinence from other facets of life? I suggested on twitter meat, driving to work, GM goods, junk food whatever.
The point being that alcohol as a luxury item is readily removable from one's consumption vernacular – we can't blame people for taking an easy route to promote charity, what we can do is suggest that discouraging false promise charities and either channeling funds into more benefit related charity or actually volunteering ourselves is a more positive step.
Sort of support the push by Mike B. The cancer folk and a growing number of health professionals believe alcohol is indeed carcinogenic and should be taxed to at least cover its damage. My wife and I consume similar amounts of alcohol but for some reason my liver enzymes move from healthy level if I consume too often and thus I have/need many AFDs and at least a a 3 week block free of alcohol per year. She is fine having her favourite Chardy every day. Moderation is good so yes, drink less but drink better.
All well and good Andrew but I think you'd be surprised how many moderate drinkers 1-2 glasses per night actually can't go 2 days with out a drink. Seriously. That is why it is important 2 give these people a chance to realise that and take some action.
I'm with you Andrew!!
Yes Andrew I agree with your points. The erroneous idea that alcohol is bad for you is the cause of all sorts of problem behaviours.
Misuse a car and you'll cause an accident and people will get killed or hurt – misuse alcohol and you and other people get harmed…but if you use cars or alcohol sensibly then they enrich our lives.
The other point about this sort of campaign is that a silly idea is dressed up as being "for charity" not always transparent, and it doesn't make the original idea any less silly.
Really good Stuff Andrew. Following is a copy of my posted comment on Kendall's article:
"Amidst the humour of Kendall's article lies the important message:
"Australia, grow up and drink in moderation". There is a fundamental – and I would suggest unarguable – flaw with the message of all these "Abstinence" months, and that is, that like binge drinking, "binge abstinence" reinforces an attitude of all or nothing. Feast or famine, binge or abstain.. And binge – either pre or post July – is what often happens.
The unintended message a lot of these participants take away is that if you abstain for a month, somehow that atones for drinking yourself into oblivion in following months, until you drunkenly and irresponsibly lurch to the next month of abstinence/atonement.
This lack of MODERATION is utter madness, and unfortunately, reinforcing the WRONG message. Why not create a month of moderation, where those who participate pledge to reduce their drinking during the month to a (lower) healthier level and commit to remain at this level AFTER the month has ended?
So while these campaigns might raise money for worthy causes, the month of abstinence is likely to do nothing to help create continuing healthy sustainable lifetstyle habits. And of greater concern is that some might think their participation for one month legitimises the other awful eleven."
Whoever thought of Dry July clearly isn't a cycling fan. The concept of watching the Tour without a glass of fine wine in hand is ridiculous, and quite detrimental to my annual French wine education. Never going to happen in my house!
Seriously though, I totally agree that it's of limited value in genuinely tackling the dangerous drinking culture. What it is though is another 'easy' solution with a catchy name that makes it appealing for those that don't want to think about the complexity of the issue too much.
Perhaps what we need is 'Wine Watchers' modelled on the weight watchers philosophy of gradual and sustainable behavioural change.
We are all in broad agreement then. Sadly I don't think Drink Less But Better July is going to get momentum just yet, but the question then is what next?Where to from here for booze? Surely it has to be a question of education.
Interestingly enough today's Adelaide Advertiser editorial comes to the same conclusion:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/editorial-responsible-drinking-not-a-weakness/story-e6freabl-1226039362504
Where to from here? Sadly the Cancer Council saying that even drinking in moderation is carcinogenic and it wants the govt to legislate for plain packaging on booze. So all alcohol is the same? And then what? I'll start to listen to these causes when every politician and every healthcare professional gives up drinking. Meanwhile, I take comfort from my almost 101-year-old grandfather insisting on a glass of red every night, and he is a healthcare pioneer and founder of an incredible health product company.
You know Andrew, whenever I do something, it's because everyone else is doing it 😉
A slightly gonzo take on the issue here: http://orangejuiceandryvita.com/articles/31/dry-july
As a winemaker, viticulturist and a current stage four colon and liver cancer patient, I can safely say that I am a massive fan of Dry July and don't think it's a 'nanny state' issue at all.
I have been the recipent of charity from many groups and many are funded by these events.
I've got no doubt in my mind that many years of being around alcohol and winery chemicals have contributed to my cancer – I am 29 years of age.
Maybe you guys should think about it a bit more than going off on a rant about nanny states. You don't have to take part in it if you don't want to – but I'm glad for the people who are.
What a disappointing and naive post. Expect better from this site..
Mike H
Glad to see some critical comments – I'm really keen to hear opposing views on this.
Firstly, Mike H, sorry to hear that you are disappointed by this post, can I clarify exactly what it is your are disappointed by? I'd argue that it might be naive to believe that people might actually embrace the 'drink less but better' message? Otherwise intrigued to find out what you have other issues with.
Anon – Never nice to hear about such health problems in someone so young. I'm 30 myself and I can only imagine what it would be like to get an aggressive cancer now. Very sorry to hear.
One thing I will note however is that I'm not attacking the good work of the charities that benefit from the Dry July donations. This is not the point. I'm criticising the idea that we need to give up alcohol all together to motivate people to give in the first place. Moreso that the whole philosophy of abstain/binge should not be celebrated as it puts out all the wrong message.
I still thoroughly agree with the point of promoting moderation and avoiding the "boom and bust". If Dry July achieves this, then that's wonderful. But I have my doubts. I once only drank on Friday, Saturday and Sunday – and I think I drank far too much. I'd suggest that, say, drinking less over four or five nights is better than ramping it up to excess on three. I've now conditioned myself not to want to drink to anything approaching excess on any night.
As for cancer, I've always been very afraid of this, and am not ashamed to admit it. And I'm very sorry to hear of someone's misfortune in this regard, and I wish that person all the very best and cannot begin to imagine what that person is going through. But I think that a moderate amount of alcohol is probably a lot less harmful than the myriad of toxins that we expose ourselves to on a daily basis, or the stress imposed by the ever increasing complexity of daily life. I wouldn't disagree that excess alcohol consumption is carcinogenic to some degree, but from what I've read, excessive alcohol consumption also serves as a marker for other behaviours that are carcinogenic. So the links are both direct and indirect. But for every study that suggests one thing, there's another to refute it. Researchers and academics do this. And I know this from my own professional experience. As a result, I'd take any study cum grano salis until I've independently investigated the problem, where time, expertise and funding permits – which is sadly not always achievable.
David, on the taxation issue, I believe that you're referring to properly costing the (perceived) externalities caused by alcohol consumption, since the harm caused by alcohol consumption is not sufficiently relected by the cost of consumption (i.e., it's not internalized). This includes not only direct health effects, but also indirect effects, such as death and injury on the roads, foregone tax revenue as a result of such accidents, insurance costs, etc. It's more or less the same underlying economic rationale for any regulation, i.e., to correct a market failure. I've not seen any economic analysis of this issue with respect to alcohol to be sure of my ground here. Somebody has probably done one though.
MichaelC
Andrew, I have personally modelled my approach to food and wine on the wisdom of Len Evans and his theory of capacity. I love all the elements but the one that rings so true is 5.
People who say, “You can’t drink the good stuff all the time” are talking rubbish. You must drink good stuff all the time. Every time you drink a bottle of inferior wine it’s like smashing a superior bottle against the wall. The pleasure is lost forever. You can’t get the bottle back.
The other point is about the intent of Dry July – a noble cause , so whether the execution of the intent you agree with or otherwise – I call on all wine loving Australians to show heart for the cause.
Cheers
Andrew
Waiting to hear from Mike H as to why he thought the message of encouraging people to drink in moderation was a bad idea? Going to be a tough one to justify with any credence…