Alcohol, No Ordinary Commodity: policy implications for Canada.

Alcohol is a favorite psychoactive substance of Canadians. It is also a leading risk factor for death and disability, playing a causal role in a broad spectrum of health and social issues. Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity is a collaborative, integrative review of the scientific literature. This paper describes the epidemiology of alcohol use and current state of alcohol policy in Canada, best practices in policy identified by the third edition of Alcohol: No Ordinary Commodity, and the implications for the development of effective alcohol policy in Canada. Best practices - strongly supported by the evidence, highly effective in reducing harm, and relatively low-cost to implement - have been identified. Measures that control affordability, limit availability, and restrict marketing would reduce population levels of alcohol consumption and the burden of disease attributable to it.

An assessment of federal alcohol policies in Canada and priority recommendations: Results from the 3rd Canadian Alcohol Policy Evaluation Project.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically assess the Canadian federal government's current alcohol policies in relation to public health best practices. METHODS: The 2022 Canadian Alcohol Policy Evaluation (CAPE) Project assessed federal alcohol policies across 10 domains. Policy domains were weighted according to evidence for their relative impact, including effectiveness and scope. A detailed scoring rubric of best practices was developed and externally reviewed by international experts. Policy data were collected between June and December 2022, using official legislation, government websites, and data sources identified from previous iterations of CAPE as sources. Contacts within relevant government departments provided any additional data sources, reviewed the accuracy and completeness of the data, and provided amendments as needed. Data were scored independently by members of the research team. Final policy scores were tabulated and presented as a weighted overall average score and as unweighted domain-specific scores. RESULTS: Compared to public health best practices, the federal government of Canada scored 37% overall. The three most impactful domains-(1) pricing and taxation, (2) marketing and advertising controls, and (3) impaired driving countermeasures-received some of the lowest scores (39%, 10%, and 40%, respectively). Domain-specific scores varied considerably from 0% for minimum legal age policies to 100% for controls on physical availability of alcohol. CONCLUSION: Many evidence-informed alcohol policies have not been adopted, or been adopted only partially, by the Canadian federal government. Urgent adoption of the recommended policies is needed to prevent and reduce the enormous health, social, and economic costs of alcohol use in Canada.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Évaluer de manière systématique les politiques sur l'alcool actuelles du gouvernement fédéral canadien dans le cadre de pratiques de santé publique exemplaires. MéTHODES: Le projet de l'Évaluation des politiques canadiennes sur l'alcool 2022 a évalué les politiques fédérales sur l'alcool dans dix domaines. Ces domaines de politiques ont été pondérés en fonction de preuves sur leurs répercussions relatives, notamment leur efficacité et leur portée. Une échelle d'évaluation descriptive détaillée de pratiques exemplaires a été élaborée et examinée à l'externe. Entre juin et décembre 2022, des données sur les politiques ont été recueillies dans la législation officielle, sur des sites Web du gouvernement et au moyen de sources identifiées comme telles au cours des itérations précédentes du projet de l'Évaluation des politiques canadiennes sur l'alcool. Des personnes-ressources au sein des ministères concernés ont communiqué d'autres sources de données, examiné l'exactitude et le caractère exhaustif de ces données et apporté les modifications nécessaires. Les données ont été évaluées indépendamment par des membres de l'équipe de recherche. Les scores de politiques finaux ont été inscrits dans des tableaux et présentés sous forme d'une moyenne générale pondérée et de scores non pondérés par domaine. RéSULTATS: Comparativement aux pratiques de santé publique exemplaire, le gouvernement fédéral du Canada a obtenu un score général de 37 %. Les trois domaines susceptibles d'avoir les plus grandes répercussions, à savoir 1) la fixation des prix et la taxation, 2) le contrôle du marketing et de la publicité, et 3) les mesures contre la conduite avec facultés affaiblies, se sont vu attribuer parmi les scores les plus bas (39 %, 10 %, et 40 % respectivement). Les scores par domaine variaient considérablement, allant de 0 % pour les politiques sur l'âge minimum légal à 100 % pour le contrôle de la disponibilité physique de l'alcool. CONCLUSION: De nombreuses politiques sur l'alcool reposant sur des preuves n'ont pas été adoptées, ou l'ont été seulement partiellement, par le gouvernement fédéral canadien. Il est urgent d'appliquer les politiques recommandées pour prévenir et réduire les énormes coûts sanitaires, sociaux et économiques de la consommation d'alcool au Canada.

Relationships of State Alcohol Policy Environments With Homicides and Suicides.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol use is involved in a large proportion of homicides and suicides each year in the U.S., but there is limited evidence on how policies targeting alcohol influence violence in the U.S. CONTEXT: Extant studies generally focus on individual policies in isolation of each other. This study examines the impacts of changes in states' alcohol policy restrictions on overall homicide and suicide rates and firearm-related homicide and suicide rates using a holistic measure of states' alcohol policy environments. METHODS: Using a composite measure of state-level alcohol policies (Alcohol Policy Scale) and data from the National Vital Statistics System from 2002 to 2018, this study applied a Bayesian time series model to estimate the impacts of alcohol policy changes on overall and firearm-involved homicide and suicide rates. The analysis was performed in 2023 and 2024. RESULTS: A 1 SD change in the Alcohol Policy Scale was associated with a 6% decline in homicide rates both overall (incident rate ratio=0.94; 95% credible interval = 0.89, 1.00) and for firearm homicides specifically (incident rate ratio=0.94, 95% CI=0.88, 1.01). There was no clear association of alcohol policy with suicides. The model predicts that a nationwide increase in alcohol restrictions equivalent to a shift from the 25th to 75th percentile of the scale's distribution would result in almost 1,200 fewer homicides annually. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in the restrictiveness of state-level alcohol policies are associated with reductions in homicides. More restrictive alcohol policy environments may offer an opportunity to reduce homicides.

Reducing Alcohol Use to Prevent Cancer Deaths: Estimated Effects Among U.S. Adults.

INTRODUCTION: The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 recommends non-drinking or no more than 2 drinks for men or 1 drink for women in a day. However, even at lower levels, alcohol use increases the risk for certain cancers. This study estimated mean annual alcohol-attributable cancer deaths and the number of cancer deaths that could potentially be prevented if all U.S. adults who drank in excess of the Dietary Guidelines had instead consumed alcohol to correspond with typical consumption of those who drink within the recommended limits. METHODS: Among U.S. residents aged ≥20 years, mean annual alcohol-attributable cancer deaths during 2020-2021 that could have been prevented with hypothetical reductions in alcohol use were estimated. Mean daily alcohol consumption prevalence estimates from the 2020-2021 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, adjusted to per capita alcohol sales to address underreporting of drinking, were applied to relative risks to calculate population-attributable fractions for cancers that can occur from drinking alcohol. Analyses were conducted during February-April 2023. RESULTS: In the U.S., an estimated 20,216 cancer deaths were alcohol-attributable/year during 2020-2021 (men: 14,562 [72.0%]; women: 5,654 [28.0%]). Approximately 16,800 deaths (83% of alcohol-attributable cancer deaths, 2.8% of all cancer deaths) could have been prevented/year if adults who drank alcohol in excess of the Dietary Guidelines had instead reduced their consumption to ≤2 drinks/day for men or ≤1 drink/day for women. Approximately 650 additional deaths could have been prevented annually if men consumed 1 drink/day, instead of 2. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing evidence-based alcohol policies (e.g., increasing alcohol taxes, regulating alcohol outlet density) to decrease drinking could reduce alcohol-attributable cancers, complementing clinical interventions.

Deaths from Excessive Alcohol Use - United States, 2016-2021.

Deaths from causes fully attributable to alcohol use have increased during the past 2 decades in the United States, particularly from 2019 to 2020, concurrent with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, previous studies of trends have not assessed underlying causes of deaths that are partially attributable to alcohol use, such as injuries or certain types of cancer. CDC's Alcohol-Related Disease Impact application was used to estimate the average annual number and age-standardized rate of deaths from excessive alcohol use in the United States based on 58 alcohol-related causes of death during three periods (2016-2017, 2018-2019, and 2020-2021). Average annual number of deaths from excessive alcohol use increased 29.3%, from 137,927 during 2016-2017 to 178,307 during 2020-2021; age-standardized alcohol-related death rates increased from 38.1 to 47.6 per 100,000 population. During this time, deaths from excessive alcohol use among males increased 26.8%, from 94,362 per year to 119,606, and among females increased 34.7%, from 43,565 per year to 58,701. Implementation of evidence-based policies that reduce the availability and accessibility of alcohol and increase its price (e.g., policies that reduce the number and concentration of places selling alcohol and increase alcohol taxes) could reduce excessive alcohol use and alcohol-related deaths.

State Alcohol Policy Environments of U.S. Colleges: Predictors of Sexual Assault and Alcohol-Related Arrest and Disciplinary Action.

INTRODUCTION: Binge drinking and sexual assault are serious inter-related public health problems faced by college students. State-level alcohol policy restrictiveness has been found to decrease binge drinking among college students and, therefore, may also reduce occurrences of alcohol-related criminal offenses. It was hypothesized that more restrictive state alcohol policy environments would be associated with fewer liquor law violations and sexual assault offenses on U.S. college campuses. METHODS: Data were aggregated across 3 academic years (2016-2017, 2017-2018, and 2018-2019) and represented n=1,290 institutions. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression modeling was performed in 2022-2023 to evaluate associations of state-level young adult binge drinking and the Alcohol Policy Scale (APS) with the numbers of campus-level alcohol-related arrests, alcohol-related disciplinary actions, rape offenses, and fondling offenses reported in national Campus Safety and Security data. RESULTS: Higher APS scores had direct associations with fewer alcohol-related arrests (1.79% decrease per one-unit increase in APS, p=0.05), alcohol-related disciplinary actions (2.27% decrease per one-unit increase in APS, p=0.027), and rape offenses (0.85% decrease per one-unit increase in APS, p=0.021). The associations APS scores had with disciplinary actions and rape offenses were partially and fully mediated, respectively, by state-level young adult binge drinking. No associations were found between APS and fondling offenses. CONCLUSIONS: This cross-sectional study presents evidence that more restrictive state alcohol policies are associated with fewer alcohol-related arrests and disciplinary actions, and rape offenses on college campuses. Future research should identify the alcohol policy domains that are most protective against these outcomes.

Relationships Between Alcohol and Cannabis Policies in U.S. States, 1999-2019.

OBJECTIVE: A crucial question regarding the public health impacts of cannabis legalization is its impact on alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm. However, little is known about whether these changing cannabis policies are occurring in liberal or in restrictive alcohol policy environments, either of which likely affect public health outcomes. We constructed comprehensive state-level alcohol and cannabis policy indices and explored relationships between them. METHOD: We assessed relationships between the Alcohol Policy Scale (APS) and the Cannabis Policy Scale (CPS) from 1999 to 2019. The APS and CPS were based on 29 and 17 state-level policies, respectively, and each policy was weighted for its relative efficacy and degree of state-year implementation. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2019, average state APS scores increased modestly (became more restrictive) by 4.11 points (2019 M = 43.23, range: 24.44-66.31) and average CPS scores decreased (became less restrictive) by 15.33 points (2019 M = 76.40, range: 29.40-95.74) on a 100-point scale. In 2019, average APS scores were similar among states that prohibited (criminalized) possession of cannabis (42.00), decriminalized possession (41.33), legalized medical cannabis (44.36), and legalized recreational cannabis (43.32). Across states, there was no correlation between the restrictiveness of state-level alcohol and cannabis policies (r = .03, p = .37) in unadjusted models, although there was some variation by time, geographic region, and political party, with a weak negative correlation in state fixed-effects models. CONCLUSIONS: Although cannabis policies liberalized rapidly from 1999 to 2019, alcohol policies stayed relatively stable and did not differ by degree of cannabis policy liberalization. In general, there were weak associations between cannabis and alcohol policies among states; however, there was some temporal, regional, and political variation.

Estimating alcohol-attributable injury deaths: A comparison of epidemiological methods.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Injuries often involve alcohol, but determining the proportion caused by alcohol is difficult. Several approaches have been used to determine the causal role of alcohol, but these methods have not been compared directly with one another. Such a comparison would be useful for understanding the strengths and comparability of different approaches. This study compared estimates of average annual alcohol-attributable deaths in the United States from injuries during 2015-19 using a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) method compared with a population attributable fraction (PAF) approach. METHODS: For the BAC method, we used a direct method involving the proportion of decedents with a high blood alcohol concentration (BAC; e.g. ≥ 0.10%). For the PAF approach, we compared the use of unadjusted survey data with average consumption data adjusted using alcohol sales data to account for underreporting and also accounting for the underreporting of binge drinking. Survey data were from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and mortality data were from the National Vital Statistics System. RESULTS: The number of alcohol-attributable injury deaths using the direct method (48 516 deaths annually) was similar to that using PAF methods (47 879 deaths annually), but only when alcohol use measures were adjusted using alcohol sales data. Furthermore, estimates were similar for cause-specific categories of deaths, including non-motor vehicle unintentional injuries and motor vehicle crashes. Among PAF methods, excessive drinking accounted for 38.3% of injury deaths using unadjusted survey data, but 64.8% of injury deaths using adjusted data. CONCLUSIONS: Estimates of alcohol-attributable injury deaths from a direct method and from a population attributable fraction method that adjusts for alcohol use based on alcohol sales data appear to be comparable.

The public-private decision for alcohol retail systems: Examining the economic, health, and social impacts of alternative systems in Finland.

Background: Organising alcohol retail systems with more or less public ownership has implications for health and the economy. The aim of the present study was to estimate the economic, health, and social impacts of alcohol use in Finland in 2018 (baseline), and in two alternative scenarios in which current partial public ownership of alcohol retail sales is either increased or fully privatised. Methods: Baseline alcohol-attributable harms and costs were estimated across five categories of death, disability, and criminal justice. Two alternate alcohol retail systems were defined as privately owned stores selling: (1) only low strength alcoholic beverages (public ownership scenario, similar to Sweden); or (2) all beverages (private ownership scenario). Policy analyses were conducted to estimate changes in alcohol use per capita. Health and economic impacts were modelled using administrative data and epidemiological modelling. Results: In Finland in 2018, alcohol use was estimated to be responsible for €1.51 billion (95% Uncertainty Estimates: €1.43 billion, €1.58 billion) in social cost, 3,846 deaths, and 270,652 criminal justice events. In the public ownership scenario, it was estimated that alcohol use would decline by 15.8% (11.8%, 19.7%) and social cost by €384.3 million (€189.5 million, €559.2 million). Full privatisation was associated with an increase in alcohol use of 9.0% (6.2%, 11.8%) and an increase in social cost of €289.7 million (€140.8 million, €439.5 million). Conclusion: The outcome from applying a novel analytical approach suggests that more public ownership of the alcohol retail system may lead to significant decreases in alcohol-caused death, disability, crime, and social costs. Conversely, full privatisation of the ownership model would lead to increased harm and costs.

Nonheavy Alcohol Use Associates With Liver Fibrosis and Nonalcoholic Steatohepatitis in the Framingham Heart Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: While heavy alcohol use consistently associates with liver disease, the effects of nonheavy alcohol consumption are less understood. We aimed to investigate the relationship between nonheavy alcohol use and chronic liver disease. METHODS: This cross-sectional study included 2629 current drinkers in the Framingham Heart Study who completed alcohol use questionnaires and transient elastography. We defined fibrosis as liver stiffness measurement (LSM) ≥8.2 kPa. We defined at-risk nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) as FibroScan-aspartate aminotransferase (FAST) score >0.35 (90% sensitivity) or ≥0.67 (90% specificity). We performed logistic regression to investigate associations of alcohol use measures with fibrosis and NASH, adjusting for sociodemographic and metabolic factors. Subgroup analysis excluded heavy drinkers (>14 drinks per week for women or >21 for men). RESULTS: In this sample (mean age 54.4 ± 8.9 years, 53.3% women), mean LSM was 5.6 ± 3.4 kPa, 8.2% had fibrosis, 1.9% had NASH by FAST ≥0.67, and 12.4% had NASH by FAST >0.35. Participants drank 6.2 ± 7.4 drinks per week. Total drinks per week and frequency of drinking associated with increased odds of fibrosis (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.33; and aOR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.16, respectively). Risky weekly drinking, present in 17.4%, also associated with fibrosis (aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03-2.14). After excluding 158 heavy drinkers, total drinks per week remained associated with fibrosis (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.001-1.35). Multiple alcohol use measures positively associated with FAST >0.35. CONCLUSIONS: In this community cohort, we demonstrate that nonheavy alcohol use associates with fibrosis and NASH, after adjustment for metabolic factors. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine the benefits of moderating alcohol use to reduce liver-related morbidity and mortality.

The Cannabis Policy Scale: A New Research and Surveillance Tool for U.S. States.

OBJECTIVE: Rapid shifts toward cannabis liberalization in the United States have created immense policy variability that is challenging to measure. We developed composite measures to characterize the restrictiveness of U.S. state cannabis policy environments. METHOD: Nine panelists, consisting of four research team members and five expert policy consultants, nominated distinct cannabis policies pertaining to cannabis prohibition, medicalization, and legalization for recreational use. For each of the 17 nominated policies, panelists developed implementation ratings and rated each policy's relative efficacy for reducing excessive cannabis use by adults, youth use, and impaired driving. Cannabis Policy Scale scores were then calculated for each state-year for all 50 states from 1999 to 2019 by weighting policies by their efficacy and implementation ratings, and then summing over policies. RESULTS: Median Cannabis Policy Scale scores remained stable until 2008, when they started declining (representing policy liberalization), with steeper declines after 2012. In 2019, state Cannabis Policy Scale scores targeting excessive use among the general population ranged from 29.6 to 66.7 for recreational cannabis legalization states, and from 72.4 to 93.4 for medical cannabis legalization states. Cannabis Policy Scale scores using youth-specific and driving-specific efficacy ratings showed similar trends. CONCLUSIONS: The Cannabis Policy Scale reflects trends toward liberalization of cannabis policy in many U.S. states. Even within crude policy phenotypes (e.g., medical cannabis programs), Cannabis Policy Scale scores varied considerably between states and over time. The Cannabis Policy Scale is a new measure that can add nuance to cannabis policy research and help assess cannabis policy-outcome relationships.

Estimated Deaths Attributable to Excessive Alcohol Use Among US Adults Aged 20 to 64 Years, 2015 to 2019.

Importance: Alcohol consumption is a leading preventable cause of death in the US, and death rates from fully alcohol-attributable causes (eg, alcoholic liver disease) have increased in the past decade, including among adults aged 20 to 64 years. However, a comprehensive assessment of alcohol-attributable deaths among this population, including from partially alcohol-attributable causes, is lacking. Objective: To estimate the mean annual number of deaths from excessive alcohol use relative to total deaths among adults aged 20 to 64 years overall; by sex, age group, and state; and as a proportion of total deaths. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cross-sectional study of mean annual alcohol-attributable deaths among US residents between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, used population-attributable fractions. Data were analyzed from January 6, 2021, to May 2, 2022. Exposures: Mean daily alcohol consumption among the 2 089 287 respondents to the 2015-2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System was adjusted using national per capita alcohol sales to correct for underreporting. Adjusted mean daily alcohol consumption prevalence estimates were applied to relative risks to generate alcohol-attributable fractions for chronic partially alcohol-attributable conditions. Alcohol-attributable fractions based on blood alcohol concentrations were used to assess acute partially alcohol-attributable deaths. Main Outcomes and Measures: Alcohol-attributable deaths for 58 causes of death, as defined in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Alcohol-Related Disease Impact application. Mortality data were from the National Vital Statistics System. Results: During the 2015-2019 study period, of 694 660 mean deaths per year among adults aged 20 to 64 years (men: 432 575 [66.3%]; women: 262 085 [37.7%]), an estimated 12.9% (89 697 per year) were attributable to excessive alcohol consumption. This percentage was higher among men (15.0%) than women (9.4%). By state, alcohol-attributable deaths ranged from 9.3% of total deaths in Mississippi to 21.7% in New Mexico. Among adults aged 20 to 49 years, alcohol-attributable deaths (44 981 mean annual deaths) accounted for an estimated 20.3% of total deaths. Conclusions And Relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that an estimated 1 in 8 total deaths among US adults aged 20 to 64 years were attributable to excessive alcohol use, including 1 in 5 deaths among adults aged 20 to 49 years. The number of premature deaths could be reduced with increased implementation of evidenced-based, population-level alcohol policies, such as increasing alcohol taxes or regulating alcohol outlet density.

Gender and sexual identity and harms from others' drinking among U.S. college students: Results from a multi-campus survey.

BACKGROUND: College is a critical life stage for alcohol-related harms to others (AHTOs), gender, and sexual identity. We tested associations between inclusively-defined gender and sexual identities (separately) and AHTOs among college students. METHODS: The Healthy Minds Study (n = 8,308) provided data about three AHTOs: (1) babysitting a drunk student, (2) alcohol-related unwanted sexual advance, and (3) alcohol-related sexual assault. Independent variables included gender and sexual identity. RESULTS: One in four students (25.5%) reported babysitting, 6.2% reported unwanted advances, and 1.2% reported sexual assaults. Compared to cisgender males, cisgender females had higher odds of reporting babysitting (aOR = 1.36, p < 0.001) and unwanted advances (aOR = 2.59, p < 0.001); trans masculine students had higher odds of reporting sexual assaults (aOR = 4.49, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: AHTOs are prevalent on college campuses, and cisgender female and trans masculine students have higher odds of experiencing them. Alcohol interventions may protect cisgender female and gender minority students from the drinkers around them.

Rating the comparative efficacy of state-level cannabis policies on recreational cannabis markets in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Cannabis policy is developing faster than empirical evidence about policy effects. With a panel of experts in substance use policy development and research, we identified key cannabis policies and their provisions enacted by U.S. states; rated their theoretical efficacy in a restrictive form for reducing problematic use and impaired driving in the context of a recreational cannabis market as judged by experts; and rated the strength of evidence for each policy. METHODS: Using a modified Delphi approach, 9 panelists rated the comparative efficacy of 18 state cannabis policies for reducing youth use of cannabis, excessive cannabis use among the general population, and cannabis-impaired driving. Each outcome was rated separately using a Likert scale, and panelists also rated the strength of evidence supporting each efficacy rating. Investigators provided descriptions of each policy so that the nine panelists had similar conceptions of each policy. RESULTS: State monopoly (state owns all production, manufacturing, wholesale, and retail operations) was rated as the most effective policy for all three outcome areas. Restrictions on retail physical availability, taxes, retail price restrictions, and retail operations restrictions were also highly rated for all three outcomes. Policies regulating cannabis businesses and products were judged more effective than policies targeting consumer use and behavior. Panelists reported there was little or no direct evidence from the cannabis policy literature for most of the included policies. CONCLUSION: These ratings can facilitate research as well as policy-making decisions. A relatively small number of policies were judged to be highly effective across all three domains, indicating that for the most part adult excessive use, youth use, and impaired driving can all be reduced with the same set of policies; these policies tended to target the behaviors of businesses rather than consumers. The low levels of direct evidence available to inform policy ratings, as reported by the policy panelists, makes clear the need for ongoing and sustained cannabis policy research.

Relationships of Cannabis Policy Liberalization With Alcohol Use and Co-Use With Cannabis: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: The liberalization of cannabis policies has the potential to affect the use of other substances and the harms from using them, particularly alcohol. Although a previous review of this literature found conflicting results regarding the relationship between cannabis policy and alcohol-related outcomes, cannabis policies have continued to evolve rapidly in the years since that review. SEARCH METHODS: The authors conducted a narrative review of studies published between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, that assessed the effects of cannabis policies on the use of alcohol in the United States or Canada. SEARCH RESULTS: The initial search identified 3,446 unique monographs. Of these, 23 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review, and five captured simultaneous or concurrent use of alcohol and cannabis. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Associations between cannabis policy liberalization and alcohol use, alcohol-related outcomes, and the co-use of alcohol and cannabis were inconclusive, with studies finding positive associations, no associations, and negative associations. Although several studies found that cannabis policy liberalization was associated with decreases in alcohol use measures, these same studies showed no impact of the cannabis policy on cannabis use itself. The lack of a consistent association was robust to subject age, outcome measure (e.g., use, medical utilization, driving), and type of cannabis policy; however, this may be due to the small number of studies for each type of outcome. This paper discusses several notable limitations of the evidence base and offers suggestions for improving consistency and comparability of research going forward, including a stronger classification of cannabis policy, inclusion of measures of the alcohol policy environment, verification of the impact of cannabis policy on cannabis use, and consideration of mediation effects.

Estimating alcohol-attributable liver disease mortality: A comparison of methods.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol is a leading contributor to liver disease, however, estimating the proportion of liver disease deaths attributable to alcohol use can be methodologically challenging. METHODS: We compared three approaches for estimating alcohol-attributable liver disease deaths (AALDD), using the USA as an example. One involved summing deaths from alcoholic liver disease and a proportion from unspecified cirrhosis (direct method); two used population attributable fraction (PAF) methodology, including one that adjusted for per capita alcohol sales. For PAFs, the 2011-2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and per capita sales from the Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System were used to derive alcohol consumption prevalence estimates at various levels (excessive alcohol use was defined by medium and high consumption levels). Prevalence estimates were used with relative risks from two meta-analyses, and PAFs were applied to the 2011-2015 average annual number of deaths from alcoholic cirrhosis and unspecified cirrhosis (using National Vital Statistics System data) to estimate AALDD. RESULTS: The number of AALDD was higher using the direct method (28 345 annually) than the PAF methods, but similar when alcohol prevalence was adjusted using per capita sales and all alcohol consumption levels were considered (e.g. 25 145 AALDD). Using the PAF method, disaggregating non-drinkers into lifetime abstainers and former drinkers to incorporate relative risks for former drinkers yielded higher AALDD estimates (e.g. 27 686) than methods with all non-drinkers combined. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Using PAF methods that adjust for per capita sales and model risks for former drinkers yield more complete and possibly more valid AALDD estimates.

Improving Estimates of Alcohol-Attributable Deaths in the United States: Impact of Adjusting for the Underreporting of Alcohol Consumption.

OBJECTIVE: Self-reported alcohol consumption in U.S. public health surveys covers only 30%-60% of per capita alcohol sales, based on tax and shipment data. To estimate alcohol-attributable harms using alcohol-attributable fractions, accurate measures of total population consumption and the distribution of this drinking are needed. This study compared methodological approaches of adjusting self-reported survey data on alcohol consumption to better reflect sales and assessed the impact of these adjustments on the distribution of average daily consumption (ADC) levels and the number of alcohol-attributable deaths. METHOD: Prevalence estimates of ADC levels (i.e., low, medium, and high) among U.S. adults who responded to the 2011-2015 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS; N = 2,198,089) were estimated using six methods. BRFSS ADC estimates were adjusted using the National Alcohol Survey, per capita alcohol sales data (from the Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System), or both. Prevalence estimates for the six methods were used to estimate average annual alcohol-attributable deaths, using a population-attributable fraction approach. RESULTS: Self-reported ADC in the BRFSS accounted for 31.3% coverage of per capita alcohol sales without adjustments, 36.1% using indexed-BRFSS data, and 44.3% with National Alcohol Survey adjustments. Per capita sales adjustments decreased low ADC prevalence estimates and increased medium and high ADC prevalence estimates. Estimated alcohol-attributable deaths ranged from approximately 91,200 per year (BRFSS unadjusted; Method 1) to 125,200 per year (100% of per capita sales adjustment; Method 6). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting ADC to reflect total U.S. alcohol consumption (e.g., adjusting to 73% of per capita sales) has implications for assessing the impact of excessive drinking on health outcomes, including alcohol-attributable death estimates.