Stop Drinking Podcast by Soberclear
The Stop Drinking Podcast by Soberclear is here to help you stop drinking alcohol and achieve the life of your dreams. We want to support people getting sober so they can get on with their life without feeling miserable. If you want to learn more about stop drinking coaching, head over to https://www.soberclear.com/
Stop Drinking Podcast by Soberclear
I'm finally exposing the alcohol industry...
In today's podcast, I will be revealing the dark truth about the alcohol industry... We'll be breaking down how they weaponize language to make you drink more, how they cover up cancer statistics, how they target our kids to start drinking early, and how they legally hide ingredients lists.
🔥 100% FREE SHORT MOVIE: How To Make Controlling Alcohol 🍺 Feel Like A Flick Of A Switch In Your Brain: https://www.soberclear.com/dark-control-now/
🎥 Want to learn how to control alcohol quickly? Watch a short explainer video that explains how our new, FIRST PRINCIPLES THINKING method has worked for 400+ clients 👉🏼: https://www.soberclear.com/new-2/
✅ 👉🏻 Ready to use our new method to control alcohol? Apply to work with our team by booking a free Roadmap Call (spaces are limited) - click the link here: https://www.soberclear.com/bookcall-ytd/
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm almost afraid to make this video, but you absolutely need to know the truth. In 2017, the alcohol industry didn't just fight against cancer warning labels. They shut down an entire scientific study trying to research them. Why? Because they're terrified of one statistic Only 13% of people know that alcohol causes cancer. Today, I'm exposing internal documents, marketing tactics and the science that they've been hiding. Once we pull back the curtain and you see what's going on behind the scenes, you will never look at alcohol the same again. But before we expose their tactics, let's start with their most powerful weapon, and here's where it starts to get really dark. While they're pushing these empty responsible drinking messages, they're actively hiding something far more sinister.
Speaker 1:So drink-responsibly messages are ubiquitous in booze commercials and marketing campaigns. It's actually very difficult to find an advertisement that doesn't have it. A 2014 study found that these messages were present in 87% of alcohol ads placed in a sample of US magazines between 2008 and 2010. What's fascinating is that these messages are not federally mandated. They are completely voluntary, the result of the industry's own internal code of conduct. What's the catch? Why does the industry bother with spending money on a campaign which, at face value, could hurt their bottom line? Well, this same 2014 study gives us the glaringly obvious answer.
Speaker 1:Campaign is a sham designed to fail. For starters, the drink responsibly messaging is always in finer print than the main part of the advertisement, often so small as to be barely visible to the naked eye. It's also always at the bottom of the page or somewhere else on the margins, so the reader isn't likely to even notice it in the first place. But the message is so vague and ambiguous that it's basically useless. The study looked at over 1500 of these ads and none of them really explained or defined what responsible means. It's so ambiguous that it can mean anything to anybody. It's completely devoid of practical, actionable information. Nor was there any mention of how many drinks count as responsible 1, two, three, four, anybody's guess.
Speaker 1:A handful of messages that elaborated on the basic drink responsible message mentioned drunk driving. This is the industry's favourite red herring. Even though drunk driving deaths account for well under 10% of alcohol-related mortality, none of this is an accident. The basic intention of all of this is to promote an image of corporate responsibility, improve the public's perception of an industry that is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths annually and an untold level of societal pain. The second main task of this message is to increase sales. They say drink responsibly, but the keyword really is drink. This is the only part of the message that is unambiguous and actionable. Be that as it may, the slogan has been so successful that it has permeated all aspects of public life.
Speaker 1:Even if you go to your family doctor and you tell them that you have a drinking problem, the first thing they'll probably do is give you the received wisdom Put down drinking moderation. Drink the recommended daily allowance, drink responsibly. It's no wonder so many millions of people can't free themselves from this evil addiction. And speaking of evil, what they're hiding about cancer is going to shock you.
Speaker 1:Alcohol has been internationally recognised as a carcinogen since the late 1980s. The World Health Organisation, centres for Disease Control, the International Agency for Research on Cancer and every other health organization unambiguously and without reservation state that it causes cancer. Drinking increases the risk of cancer in a dose-dependent fashion. The more you drink, the higher your risk, and for some types of cancer, like in the breast, the risk goes up from the very first drink. In other words, there is no safe limit. According to the National Cancer Institute, heavy drinkers have a 5-fold higher risk of oral cavity, pharynx and osvagal cancers and a 2.6-fold higher risk of larynx cancer. They also have a roughly 2-fold increase in liver cancer risk and 50% increase in colorectal. Women who drink heavily also have a 60% higher risk of developing breast cancer.
Speaker 1:What's really shocking, though, is how completely ignorant the public is of this. For example, a 2018 survey in the UK asked participants to lift the health risks of drinking. Amazingly, only 13% of respondents mentioned cancer. A similar study out of Canada found that only 24.5% of respondents answered yes when they flat out asked if they believe alcohol causes cancer. Similar low awareness rates are almost universal around the world. This is obviously no accident, but the result of a systematic and multifaceted campaign by Big Alcohol to suppress this knowledge.
Speaker 1:Their efforts are twofold Firstly, block any regulation that aims to put warning labels or any other information on drinks. This is why there are generally no warning labels at all on alcohol packaging other maybe than our favourite drink responsibly garbage. Just compare this to a cigarette pack that's basically covered in warnings and graphic images of tumours and whatever. For example, in 2017, the alcohol industry blocked a regional Canadian government's attempt to study the effects of placing a label on bottles warning about cancer. Note the industry didn't block actual legislation mandating a cancer label. They blocked an experiment that would test if adding a cancer label modified consumers' behaviour. This is how terrified they are of this dirty little secret getting out. After the experiment ran for one month, the regional government caved into pressure and threats from the industry and scrapped it. The second aspect of the industry's campaign is informational.
Speaker 1:In their social responsibility campaigns and programmes they generally just ignore this cancer risk. They just don't mention it at all. But on the really rare instances where they do, they intentionally create as much confusion as possible. Sometimes they will outright lie and say that there is no cancer risk. A variation of this is to say that there is no cancer risk for light or moderate drinking, when the data clearly shows this is not true. Other times they obfuscate the risk by acknowledging that there is a link at high consumption but suggesting that a low-dose alcohol might actually protect against some types of cancer. It's absolute nonsense and they know it. Other times they just paint cancer as this really complicated disease where everything basically interacts with everything else, almost trying to remove the attention from booze. Consider this statement from a non-profit funded by the industry Alcohol has been identified as a known human carcinogen by the International Agency of Research on Cancer, along with over 1,000 others, including solvents and chemical compounds, certain drugs, viral infection, solar radiation from exposure to sunlight and processed meat. Can you not see how they've spun it to deflect attention from the fact that every single drink increases the risk of cancer? It's insanity.
Speaker 1:Now a very quick interruption. If you want to learn how to control your drinking quickly without AA willpower, rehabs or anything like that, then what you want to do is click the link in the description to access a totally free video training. Once you've clicked the link, a new page will pop up. You'll put your name and email address in and then a new video will immediately start playing that shows you how to control your drinking in as little as 48 hours. It'll be like nothing you've ever seen before. So definitely go ahead and click the link down below to access it, but it's going to show you how to control your drinking quickly. See, hiding cancer risks was just the beginning. You want to know their next target your kids.
Speaker 1:So up until a few decades ago, the only drinks that you could get were basically wine, beer and distilled spirits like whiskey or vodka. The problem with these is that they're all pretty disgusting, especially to a first-time drinker. People are like teenagers. I remember my first drink I spat it out and their natural reaction would be to spit it out in disgust as well, maybe even throw up. And it makes sense, given that ethanol is a toxic industrial chemical.
Speaker 1:As an answer to this problem, in the 1980s and 90s, a new class of low-cost alcoholic beverages hit the market, starting with wine coolers in the US and drinks like Bacardi Breeze of another Alcopops in the UK. These products ticked all the boxes for first-time drinkers. They had low alcohol content, often 3-5%. They were loaded with sugars and artificial flavours to not only sweeten up the drink but also mask the foul taste of alcohol. The bottles and cans also resembled that of a soda pop, and they were often sold right next to non-alcoholic drinks on the same shelf. They were intended to make the transition from a soda pop to alcohol as smooth and effortless as possible. And last but not least, these so-called flavoured alcoholic beverages were intended to remove the stigma of drinking amongst younger people, in particular the underage.
Speaker 1:According to one recent report, quote predatory marketing practices and targeted ad campaigns by large alcohol conglomerates, as well as product placement, packaging like energy drinks and pricing at local liquor stores contribute to youth acceptability of Alcopop sales. The goal of marketing is not only to expose the user to the product, but to engage the user to incorporate Alcopops into their lives. On average, youth are exposed to a minimum of three alcohol ads daily. The results have surpassed the wildest expectations of the alcohol industry. The successors started with the very first wine coolers back in the 1980s, up to 35% of which were consumed by school kids. In the US today, 13% of 8-graders and over 40% of 12-graders report having drank during the past month, and it's predominantly flavoured alcohol beverages. The average age of the person's first drink fell from 17.6 in 1965 to 15.9 by the turn of the century a whopping reduction of nearly two years. Researchers report similar findings whenever in the world these drinks are sold, all while the industry continues to pretend that they're doing their best to prevent underage drinking.
Speaker 1:Now, do you really know what's in your drink? Well, speaking of these new drinks, they're pushing on teenagers. There's something even more disturbing that you need to know about, and that's what's actually in them. You see, back in the days of wine, beer and spirits, you basically knew what you were drinking. Sure, wine and beer manufacturers maybe weren't always 100% transparent about some of the additives, but that's always been the case with most of what you buy from a supermarket. Nowadays, the industry has evolved things to the point where you literally have no idea what you are drinking. Next time you're at a supermarket, take a random look at some Alka-Pops or hard seltzers. Often, the can doesn't even make an attempt to describe itself, not even something as vague as hard seltzer or hard lemonade. If you look at the fine print, you'll just find something like a flavoured alcoholic drink or flavoured malt beverage.
Speaker 1:Now, believe it or not, these drinks are legally sold as beer beverages. This is what allows them to be widely advertised and sold in places like gas stations, which you couldn't do for distilled spirits. To do this, the manufacturers start with a beer base, which is treated to remove the taste and aroma of beer. Then, on top of the beer base, they then add the various flavours to give the product its distinctive taste. That's the legal theory at least, but the reality is much different, as the industry consistently breaks the rules. A federal investigation a few years back found that quote over 75% of the alcohol in most of the flavoured malt beverages is derived from alcohol-flavouring materials and that in some cases, the figure rose to more than 99%. In other words, rather than the alcohol coming from the beer bases, it comes from opaque sources in the added alcohol flavourings which are usually distilled. Nobody, including the regulators, has any idea where this alcohol comes from, and things are even worse when it comes to the rest of the flavourings.
Speaker 1:Unlike foods, which are regulated by the FDA, alcoholic drinks are regulated by the Alcohol and Tobacco Bureau, formerly known as ATF. Now, the ATF doesn't even require alcohol manufacturers to list their full ingredients on the bottle. For most beverages, all that's required is the location where the bottling took place and the alcohol by volume or ABV. So you have the bizarre situation where a can of soda pop has this long list of ingredients on the label, but a can of alcohol sold right next to it with even more chemicals in it lists basically nothing. This is a total victory of big alcohol over the health interests of the public.
Speaker 1:Now you might be wondering how do they get away with all of this? Well, the answer lies in who is funding the science. Do you know how there's always talk in the media about oil companies funding research to disprove climate change? Or maybe you've read about the older scandal with the massive health research program that was set up and funded by the tobacco industry. Well, whilst you might know all of this, you've probably never heard that the alcohol industry does the exact same thing, and it's on a truly massive scale.
Speaker 1:A recent independent report searched the major scientific databases for research papers written by affiliates of the alcohol industry or funded directly by it. The search turned up over 13,000 results. This is a massive understatement of the actual number, because up until 2008, the main scientific database, web of Science, did not capture funding data. The three main areas of research were biology, chemistry and human health. This last category accounted for nearly 4,000 research papers. Again, this is a massive underestimate. The real number is, without a doubt, several times higher.
Speaker 1:Now, how does this massive injection of funds into research on human health serve the industry's goals?
Speaker 1:Do they, for example, flat out falsify study data to turn results on their head? I have little doubt that things like this sometimes happen, but they're the expectation rather than the rule. It's actually far simpler than that. All researchers are dependent on funding for their research. It's basically their oxygen, and it's sad to say. But who controls the funding controls the research. A good example, involves the so-called cardio-protective benefits of alcohol, the idea that low quantities of alcohol somewhat protect against future heart disease. A recent commentary by a team of doctors in New Zealand noted something very interesting those reviews and meta-analysis on the topic that gave more enthusiastic results in support of this idea tended to be funded by the alcohol industry. The opposite was true for the studies who did not receive this funding. At the end of the day, it's not possible for the alcohol industry, even with all their unlimited money, to really win a debate like this. The data is simply not on their side. But they know that they don't have to do this. All they have to do is put doubt into people's minds.
.png)