Dry January could ‘do more harm than good’
The Dry January campaign could “do more harm than good” since it sends an all-or-nothing “binary message”, a leading health lecturer has argued.
There is a “lack of evidence” Dry January campaigns work, one medical academic has arguedAccording to Ian Hamilton, lecturer in the Department of Health Sciences at York University, abstaining from alcohol throughout January could encourage excessive consumption once the month is over.
Writing in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) as part of a debate with fellow academic Ian Gilmore, Hamilton argued there is a “lack of evidence that such campaigns work”.
He said that since participants voluntarily choose to take part in Dry January, they are often at the “lowest risk from health problems related to alcohol”.
Dry January also risks sending out a binary, all or nothing, message about alcohol – that is, either participate by abstaining or carry on as you are,” said Hamilton.
“Dry January could be adding to the confusion we know exists in communicating messages about alcohol – for example, in public health advice about safe levels of alcohol consumption using recommended maximum daily or weekly units of alcohol.”
He continued: “Although not the intention, people may view their 31 days of abstinence as permission to return to hazardous levels of consumption till next New Year’s day.”
Hamilton also said that if heavy drinkers take part in Dry January, they could experience “serious” health symptoms, such as seizures, and instead need “expert help”. Furthermore, Dry January risk “setting dependent drinkers up to fail”.
Arguing in favour of Dry January, Ian Gilmore said the campaign can lead to “remarkable” health changes and enable “greater wellbeing and sleep”.
Dry January is promoted by alcohol awareness charity Alcohol Concern and is supported by Public Health England.
New alcohol guidelines produced by the UK’s chief medical officers claimed that there is “no level of regular drinking that can be considered as completely safe”.
