Cross-sectional study on the characteristics of unrecorded alcohol consumption in nine newly independent states between 2013 and 2017

Abstract

ObjectivesAs unrecorded alcohol use contributes to a substantial burden of disease, this study characterises this phenomenon in newly independent states (NIS) of the former Soviet Union with regard to the sources of unrecorded alcohol, and the proportion of unrecorded of total alcohol consumption. We also investigate associated sociodemographic characteristics and drinking patterns.DesignCross-sectional data on overall and unrecorded alcohol use in the past 7 days from WHO STEPwise Approach to NCD Risk Factor Surveillance (STEPS) surveys. Descriptive statistics were calculated at the country level, hierarchical logistic and linear regression models were used to investigate sociodemographic characteristics and drinking patterns associated with using unrecorded alcohol.SettingNine NIS (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Republic of Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) in the years 2013–2017.ParticipantsNationally representative samples including a total of 36 259 participants.ResultsA total of 6251 participants (19.7%; 95% CI 7.9% to 31.5%) reported alcohol consumption in the past 7 days, 2185 of which (35.1%; 95% CI 8.2% to 62.0%) reported unrecorded alcohol consumption with pronounced differences between countries. The population-weighted average proportion of unrecorded consumption in nine NIS was 8.7% (95% CI 5.9% to 12.4%). The most common type of unrecorded alcohol was home-made spirits, followed by home-made beer and wine. Older (45–69 vs 25–44 years) and unemployed (vs employed) participants had higher odds of using unrecorded alcohol. More nuanced sociodemographic differences were observed for specific types of unrecorded alcohol.ConclusionsThis contribution is the first to highlight both, prevalence and composition of unrecorded alcohol consumption in nine NIS. The observed proportions and sources of unrecorded alcohol are discussed in light of local challenges in policy implementation, especially in regard to the newly formed Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), as some but not all NIS are in the EAEU.

What is Inside the Bottle? - Factors Influencing Pálinka Consumption

“…It is important to highlight opposing judgement of private distillation, since on the one hand it increases the popularity of the drink, but on the other hand quality issues arise. A similar situation can be seen in several countries of Europe or Asia, where various regulations (e.g., restrictions on opening hours) prioritized homemade spirits over their shop counterparts (Skorobogatov, 2014;Manthey et al, 2020;Probst et al, 2021). As in the case of home-distilled pálinka, the quantity and quality of homemade drinks also causes problems in other countries of the word and of the European Union.…”

Substances of health concern in home-distilled and commercial alcohols from Texas

“…There exists a misconception that the consumption of unrecorded alcoholic drinks is mainly prevalent in socioeconomically disadvantaged countries. A recent report revealed that an estimated 20 % of the total alcohol consumed in the WHO European region is unrecorded [ 66 ]. Such beverages account for a significant proportion of alcohol consumption in various European countries, including Germany (10.4 %), Croatia (15.7 %), and Greece (41.3 %) [ 67 ].…”

“…Unfortunately, such incidences of methanol poisoning are often underreported, particularly with emerging online sale of unrecorded alcohols such as homemade, illicit, and surrogate varieties [ 88 ]. Recently, there has been growing apprehension regarding methanol and metal contamination in unrecorded fruit spirits (unregistered alcohols) across the European Union and Asia underscoring the need for a new alcohol regulation [ 66 , 67 , [89] , [90] , [91] ]. Specifically, the methanol, 1-propanol, 1-butanol, 2-butanol, iso-butanol, and isoamyl alcohol levels were found to be notably higher in unrecorded spirits compared to their recorded equivalents across Central and Eastern European countries [ 92 ].…”