Reducing the Power of the Alcohol Industry in Trade and Investment Agreement Negotiations Through Improved Global Governance of Alcohol Comment on "What Generates Attention to Health in Trade Policy-Making? Lessons From Success in Tobacco Control and Access to Medicines: A Qualitative Study of Australia and the (Comprehensive and Progressive) Trans-Pacific Partnership".

The power of the alcohol industry pervades the global governance of alcohol. The influence of the industry is seen in trade and investment treaty negotiations, operating through direct and indirect means. Curbing the influence of the industry is vital to improving the treatment of health issues generally and in trade and investment policy particularly. The World Health Organization (WHO) has an opportunity to start to rein in the power of the industry with its current work on drafting an 'action plan' for 2022-2030 to implement the Global Strategy to Reduce the Harmful Use of Alcohol. The WHO working paper, however, proposes inadequate controls on alcohol industry influence. The WHO proposes 'dialogue' with the industry and allows the industry to take a role with government in public health labelling of alcohol. The public's health will suffer if the WHO does not take a firmer stand against the industry in the 'action plan.'

Cancer Warning Labels on Alcohol Containers: A Consumer's Right to Know, a Government's Responsibility to Inform, and an Industry's Power to Thwart.

OBJECTIVE: Although the World Health Organization (WHO) declared alcohol a Class 1 carcinogen 30 years ago, few governments have communicated this fact to the public. We illustrate how alcohol industry groups seek to keep their customers in the dark about alcohol-related cancer risks. In Canada, a federally funded scientific study examining the introduction of cancer warning labels on containers was shut down following industry interference. We show that the industry complaints about the study had no legal merit. Of 47 WHO member countries with alcohol warning labels, only South Korea requires cancer warnings on alcohol containers. However, industry complaints, supported by sympathetic governments, helped weaken the warning labels' implementation. Ireland has legislated for cancer warnings but faces continuing legal opposition expressed through regional and global bodies. Cancer societies and the public health community have failed to counter industry pressures to minimize consumer awareness of alcohol's cancer risks. Placing cancer warnings on alcohol containers could make a pivotal difference in motivating both drinkers to consume less and regulators to introduce more effective policies to reduce the serious harms of alcohol consumption.

Commentary on 'Communicating Messages About Drinking': Using the 'Big Legal Guns' to Block Alcohol Health Warning Labels.

Like the tobacco industry, the alcohol industry, with the support of governments in alcohol exporting nations, is looking to international trade and investment law as a means to oppose health warning labels on alcohol. The threat of such litigation, let alone its commencement, has the potential to deter all but the most resolute governments from implementing health warning labeling.

Australia's double standard on Thailand's alcohol warning labels.

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Since 2010, members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), including Australia, have opposed Thailand's proposal for graphic warnings on alcohol containers. This paper aims to provide an account of the arguments for/against Thailand and to examine the arguments' legal and political validity. DESIGN AND METHODS: This paper reviews primary WTO records in relation to Thailand's proposal to reveal the arguments for/against Thailand's proposal. The paper analyses these arguments in light of WTO cases to identify the legal strengths and weaknesses of Thailand's position. The paper then considers whether the attacks on Thailand by Australia are justified in light of the Australian Government's position on (i) alcohol warning labels in Australia and (ii) tobacco plain packaging. RESULTS: The legal arguments against Thailand are: only harmful alcohol consumption should be prevented; there is no evidence that graphic warning labels can reduce alcohol-related harm; the labels unnecessarily restrict international trade. There are some legal weaknesses in Thailand's proposal. Yet, Australia's opposition to Thailand cannot be justified whilst Australia is (i) mandating pregnancy-related alcohol warnings in Australia and (ii) defending its plain packaging law against similar WTO attacks. DISCUSSION: No WTO member is obliged to challenge another member for being non-compliant. The case tests the willingness of WTO members like Australia to respect the autonomy of other countries to pursue their public health goals and trial novel interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Australia's actions suggest it is willing to protect its alcohol industry at the expense of public health in Thailand.