Ban on alcohol adverts should be considered: MPs There is widespread sponsorship of sports teams and competitions by alcohol producers and many experts have already called for this to end. Stephen Dorrell, chairman of the committee, said the Loi Evin model should 'definitely be considered' and the government needed to be willing to regulate if voluntary action on advertising were not forthcoming. He said the drinks industry was doing the bare minimum in terms of corporate responsibility and should accept that advertising influences drinking patterns. He said: "I don't think the drinks industry are entitled to brownie points for having engaged in the responsibility deal. It is part of the responsibility of being in a free society and as the people who are selling the product they should be interested in the fact that over 6,500 deaths and 1.1m hospital admissions are related to the consumption of their product. The report also said the industry was paying 'lip service' to commitments to reduce the alcohol content of drinks. "If the industry does not bring forward more substantial proposals than this it risks being seen as paying only lip service to the need to reduce the health harms caused by alcohol," the report said. The government's alcohol strategy focuses too much on the social impact of binge drinking and not enough on the wider health implications of excessive alcohol consumption, the report said. The committee supported the government's plans to introduce a minimum price per unit of alcohol but said the level set should be based on good evidence. However the committee did not support the government's idea of banning multibuy packs of alcohol, saying marketers would only find a way around it and it may affect wine merchants and others from selling wine by the case, for example. Mr Dorrell said the idea 'had not been thought through.' Miles Beale, chief executive of the Wine and Spirit Trade Association, said: "We regret the Committee's readiness to support minimum unit pricing when by its own admission there is a lack of evidence about the specific effects of different price levels. Given that, it must make sense for the Government to apply a "sunset clause" to minimum pricing as the Committee suggests. It is premature to prejudge the impact of voluntary commitments made as part of the Public Health Responsibility Deal when the evidence suggests the industry is making good progress towards fulfilling the voluntary labelling initiative and significantly reducing the quantity of alcohol units sold through the UK market. Derek Lewis, chairman of alcohol education charity Drinkaware, said: "Drinkaware welcomes the Committee's call for a stronger focus on tackling "increasing risk" drinking among adults and reducing the long-term health harms of binge drinking. Increasing risk drinking among adults is a largely unrecognised trend. Despite media images of young adults sprawled on pavements in town centres, ONS statistics confirm Drinkaware's evidence that 25 to 44 year old working professionals are drinking more heavily and more regularly than young adults. Many consumers are unaware of the long-term health risks of regularly drinking above the guidelines including cancer, heart and liver disease - which has no warning signs. A statement from the Faculty of Public Health said: "We are disappointed that the committee did not find sufficient evidence to ban multibuy offers, which FPH supports. Too many people think binge drinking is our biggest health problem with alcohol, and are unaware of how it can cause health problems like diabetes and cancer. In fact, the majority of alcohol related hospital admissions are for long term problems, so it is not just the one-off binge drinking sessions that we need to address. Dr Vivienne Nathanson, the BMA's Director of Professional Activities, said: "We agree with the Health Committee that the wider health issues associated with drinking too much need more attention. The scale of alcohol consumption in England causes significant medical, psychological and social harm and places a huge burden on the NHS. This is not caused by binge drinkers alone but is a result of the high level of consumption across the population. The BMA is particularly concerned about the role the alcohol industry has in the Government's strategy. There is a clear conflict of interest here. While the alcohol industry has a role to play, this should be in implementing regulations, not having a voice in what they should be. Gail Beer, consultant director of the think tank 2020 Health, said: "Focus remains too much on binge drinking and anti-social behaviour, with not enough reference to the eight million middle-class drinkers identified by 2020 Health who risk doing serious harm to their health without even realising it. We call them the silent majority, and many have no idea that their daily drinking will result in a health crisis later in life in the form of cancer, stroke or liver disease. People drinking at twice the recommended limit, which basically means a few glasses of wine a night, increase their risk of liver disease sevenfold, mouth cancer fivefold, breast cancer double and stroke threefold.