Catherine in Santa Fe. Just a quick question:

A) Man drinks too much, swerves out of his lane and into an on coming car killing a father of three.

B) Man drinks too much, drunkenly loses his temper and bashes a father of three to death with a bar stool.

Alcohol causes both these situations. Which of the two represent a responsibility to others? Also, try telling the family of the guy from B about the killer taking their own responsibility.

Damien, Adelaide, Australia

ok, I understand the health implications BUT it is NOT for the government to be babysitting the people. Everyone has to take thier own responsibility. Now getting into a car and driving....whole different story.

catherine, santa fe nm, usa

It just gets worse every day with this regime .We have diktats from government spokesmen/women,never identified.Why do they not get on with their lives and govern the country and the big issues and forget the trivia.
We will all go the same way up,lets be gay and hearty,you can all come to My Party.
Im sorry I cant be serious on this but then I have just consumed two units of red wine.

Alex OBrien, Bearsden,nr Glasgow, UK

"Professor Gilmore, a liver specialist, also called on the Chancellor to raise drink taxes."
Hmmn, economic solutions from a liver specialist? Beggars belief.

Faith Donohoe, London,

The rules will only apply, to the "little" people of course!
Those in power will not lead by example!

"For the greater good of all?"

Says who?

Craig, Burnaby, Canada

How farcical!
Never mind the binge drinking/drug taking of the ASBO set, go after the easy targets again.

It seems to be the government's standard responce to a social problem be it gang shootings, crime and disorder whatever. "We are doing SOMETHING, we are raising penalties". When was the last time anyone was actually prosecuted for selling alcohol (tobacco, solvents etc) to children?

What use is an increase in penalties for any crime or social problem if the likelyhood of being caught (and punished) is virtually zero.

The only deterrent to crime is the certainty of being detected.

Brian Vallance, LEFKIMMI, Greece

It's quite useful to know how many units are in the drink in your glass but I've no idea why the government are trying to stop people killing themselves. Less people = less traffic congestion, less pensions to pay out for less time, less housing needed, less competition for good schools, less carbon emmissions etc etc..... and they can't kill me with alcohol fumes... Cheers!

Sue E, Swansea,

Instead of endlessly treating people as little children and telling them that they are too stupid to decide their own lives, the government should stop perpetrating the myth that everyone has some innate 'right' to effective treatment , free of charge, for every illness, real or imagined (and to me, many of todays 'illnesses' are more imagined than real) that afflicts them. If people wish to drink themselves into ill health, that's their concern. Just let them bear the consequences themselves rather than have government try to play Florence Nightingale..

Bob Finbow, Haverhill, England

This government seems determined to curb our civil liberties at almost any cost. What right have they to decide how much as adults is the correct ammount to drink? A ban on smoking in public is one thing but telling people how much alcohol they should consume in their own home is another.
Medical professionals need also get on with the job of treating the public rather than become involved in the politics of this authoritarian government.

matt , newcastle,

Why are we English so pathetic? Why do we need the government to tell us when we've had too much to drink?

I work in Bristol and it's made me realise how much multiculturism has saved this country. Without London and it's rich diversity, England would be dominated by the anal retentive, apologetic, submissive, mediocre, boring.

England, where is your spirit?

Jite, london,

So, the Vicar of St Albion is on the temperance bandwaggon. Hallelujah! Bang the tambourine! Yet more command and control. It will only get worse under Brown.

If you don't like it, there is only one thing to do: get rid of this appalling government. And if you won't contemplate that, then stop moaning. Liberalism (and I mean the political philosophy, not any particular political party) is a lost cause so long as Blair/Brown & Co are in office. How much more evidence of that can one need? Civil liberties mean absolutely nothing to them, whether in this context or the much more important context of detention of suspects.

As for the fact that alcohol harms some, it is undoubtedly true. And it does not harm many, many more. Yes, freedom does necessarily involve the capacity to make mistakes - sometimes even serious ones. Either error has rights, or else moral autonomy (and responsibility) is meaningless. Did the Enlightenment not happen for Tony/Gordon & Co? I fear not.

Richard, Cambridge, England

What a surprise - another half-cocked Government plan which will merely alienate the law abiding and ignore the actual problem. People like me who enjoy a few beers, wine by the bottle and the odd snifter do not drink in the street, start fights and vomit down back alleys. We drink quietly at home, in restaurants and at the local. Since when do people like us cause the problems? It's the boozed-up Bacardi Breezer under-18 crowd and the under-25 post-nightclub crowd who hang around the shops who are the problem here. How dare the government tell me how much alcohol they deem "responsible" while all the time our streets are awash with puke and drunken and abusive kids?

Steve Lee, Gillingham, England

So we have increased taxes on cigarettes to combat the smoking related diseases; now we are looking at increased taxes on wine to deal with liver disease.

If this is the case, can I suggest that there should also be a significant increase in the cost of items that cause obesity (another national crisis)? Chocolate (£5 for a bar of Dairy Milk?), crisps (should be at least £3), chips (£6 for a chip shop portion realistic?), all animal fats...... the list could continue forever.

Maybe more should be done to prevent teenage pregnancies and drug abuse, both of which have a financial impact on the NHS (and in the case of teenage pregnancies, many other areas of tax payers contributions)?

It would appear to me that with rising gun and knife crime, ASBOs, truancy, illegal immigrants and a war that is costing us millions on a daily basis that this Government is looking for an easy way to hit targets, raise taxes and flex their puny muscles.

Liz, Mayfield, East Sussex

Splendid !!!! Another example of this Government's incompetence and double standards.

They object to the "middle classes" having a glass or two of wine at home. At the same time they conspire with the brewers to allow our uneducated youths 24 hour drinking, thus turning our cities into puke filled hell-holes every weekend.

And the bars in the house of commons ? aren't they full every night with sozzled MPs ?

Marcus Bancroft, Sheffield, UK

Yet more restraints on civil liberties. This government won't be happy until they ban every pleasurable activity, because in their eyes we are not here to enjoy ourselves

Mark my words it'll be a tax on sex soon

Paul Ritchie, Southampton,

britain does have a cultural issue around drinking...however this does not reside around the Middle/Upper-middle/Upper classes drinking wine at home - it resides around over-consumption in pubs and bars largely of spirit based drinks...what people do in their own homes is their own business I hope this orwellian Government can be removed before it succeeds in suffocating the entire population with mollycodling...

DJR, Westminster , London

mike, herne bay, Not sure I completely understand why drinking on your own sofa should now be deemed socially unacceptable.

And who in the government do you propose to plug our 'moral vacuum'?

Behavioural guidelines? Legistlation to govern our morality? These seem to be more futile than our 'war on terror'.

Jite, london,

Thats decided then. Next weekend, a trip to Calais to load the car up with wine. (No tax for you 'Grabber Gordon'.)
Then raise a glass and two fingers to this nanny state.

Steve, Chichester, UK

Ladies And Gentlemen Do You Like This Nefarious Nanny State,I,m Waiting For Local Council To Put Camera In My Council Flat,What With Blairs $1 Million Glory Trip Around Africa,I Notice He Has Not Made One Here,Now We Are Being Told Not To Have A Glass Or Two Of Your Favourite Wine.
Please Think Very Carefully Where You Put Your Mark In The Next Election Do It Wrong You Get The Same Medicine
I Certainly Know where My Vote Goes Do You?

Thomas Denny, Surbiton,Surrey, England

No Smoking in pubs, no smoking in cars, you shouldn’t smoke, don't drink, don't drink too much, don’t drink at home, no eating anything with fat in, no eating anything with salt in, don't drink soft drinks, eat 5 pieces of fruit a day, don't drink coffee, don't put sugar in your coffee, don't have any sugar, don’t go out without sun tan lotion on, don’t go out when the sun is out....do I have to be warned about everything....if there isn't anything that I can consume that is bad for me I wouldn't bother being involved in sport!



Stop telling everyone that life is bad for them and get real jobs!!

Chris, Harrogate,

One of the arguments put forward by the health lobby in preaching to “older, middle class wine drinkers” is to save the cost of treating people with liver disease caused by long term drinking. Has the government genuinely undertaken a cost/benefit analysis on this? The excise duty and VAT paid by such drinkers over their lifetimes is, on average, far in excess of the cost of treatment for the small proportion of those who succumb to such illness. In any case those who die early from alcohol induced illness will not take money from the state later in life by way of old age pension, residential care costs and non-drink related health care. The numbers just don’t stack up.
I’m sure the government know this, but I suspect this is all about social control by patronising & sanctimonious ministers, and a cynical excuse for more alcohol taxes by a rapacious Treasury.
Of course some will say the government has our best interests at heart and is only trying to save us from ourselves. Really?

Jim, Sussex, UK

The drinking culture in UK has been driven by the drinks industry over hundreds of years. We have been conned into the great myth of "Social Drinking" that is now so set in stone that it is almost a human right. Alcohol is a drug, and is bad for you. British people don´t know how to use it properly - put a bottle of wine in front of a Briton, and he´ll polish it off in no time and become boorish. Our southern European neighbours are far more likely to take a glass or two (if in company) and leave the rest because they´ve HAD ENOUGH. I stopped drinking five months ago. I feel much fitter and healthier, and much holier than thou. OK, I haven´t got any friends left, but I don´t miss them much and I have a great collection of lead soldiers that needs painting. Well done the British Government for grasping the nettle.

Fat Banker, Madrid, Spain

I think it's about time the Government stopped worrying about the rest of us and started getting its own house in order.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that drinking to excess is bad for you, whether that be an 18-year old partying on a weekend or my Mum and Dad enjoying a bottle of red or two after a long day.
As far as bad habits go, smoking and drinking are completely different - no-one could possibly argue that making smoking taboo is a bad thing because of the health risks it poses to other non-smokers. I do not agree that drinking can be tarred with the same 'socially unacceptable' brush.
Its a common enough view these days that the NHS is a dinosaur buckling under the weight of increased morbidity rates and its own inefficiency. The time and money the Government is devoting to worrying about the general populace on matters such as this would be better spent devising a way in which the many billions of pounds paid to the NHS each year is used more effectively.

Ellen, Douglas, Isle of Man

"under 25s who are also more likely to be drinking to get drunk "for fun""

So?

Julian, Wincombe, uk

i think it doesn't matter.everyone can drink if you can.

zhu , chongqing , china

By medical definitions, virtually everyone I know is a 'problem drinker'. And yet they seem to be healthy, happy, law-abiding, personally and professionally successful – indeed, many of them are all of these things whilst also having reached advanced ages.

Could it be that these - apparently arbitrary – definitions of what is too much to drink are nonsense? The fact is that, until the definitions of what it is 'acceptable' to drink reflect peoples' lives more realistically, people will continue to ignore them. This, of course, is lost on the government and the medical profession, who enjoy wagging their fingers at us too much ever to take such things into account.

Oh, and can we please stop having the French thrust at us as an example of how to drink responsibly? They have higher rates of alcohol-related liver disease and drink driving than we do.

Paul Fanning, Orpington,

and then they came for me

Jim, Nizwa, Oman

In 1984 Maggie stood up on TV and said "George Orwell was wrong. It is 1984 and it hasn't happened". Then she went back to the Cabinet Room and said "Oi you lot ,why hasn't it happened! Get on with it!".

Paul Law, swanley, U.K

Why is it always the middle class that take the blame for drunkeness Has the upper class got a special deal that there youngsters do not get drunk?. As it stands at the moment with the average salary at what £15ooo per year when in truth most retail workers earn much less, soon they will not be able to drink

terry eden, lancaster, england

I'm having fun seeing the "middle-class" posters up in arms. This is all about advising drinkers on the consequences of being drunk. It's not about forcing them to stop drinking or anything. In fact you can still drink as many bottles as you want. Nobody wil take away that right.
Plus I don't want my hard-earned money to be spent on treating those who got liver disease because of getting drunk.

Daniel Fernandes, Northampton,

Everything in Moderation...perhaps a lesson the Government should heed, but then again the opportunity to raise even more tax should not be overlooked....

Hudswell, Bath, BANES

AIDS and Hepatitis are transmitted through unprotected sex (mostly). Must these people pay as you go? Get real

John, Newcastle, UK

It would be very interesting to know how widespread this problem is in France.
We buy most of our's there at under half UK prices, that's the local stuff in 10 litre
boxes, and its very quaffable. Many French admit to drinking quite a bit at home;
year's ago I heard the drivers of water-ski boats were suffering liver and kidney problems, but were atributing it to daily riding the bumpy old sea. I wonder??
Day-tripper, Channel-hopper.

Guy Hudspith, Gosport, Hants

"The awnswer is simple. Make people pay for their treatment if it is caused by being drunk, smoking or illegal drugs. "

-Luke Nicolaides, London, UK

And where does this end? Making people pay who exceed the speed limit, run rather than walk for a train. How about people who fail to eat five portions of fruit/veg per day?

It's the start of the slippery slope my friend....

Darren H, Manchester,

At least when Mandelson was in charge the Labour MPs had recordings going 'Breathe in Breathe out', p'rhaps we could withdraw the recordings ................

Rory Cowan, Storrington , WSX

The Governme screws the country up in every way imaginable and then tries to make us feel guilty about it.

The import zillions of unwanted immigrants into the country who are a drain on the NHS and then want to charge us who have paid for it all our lives.

Its time we fought back. We need a Society which takes the Government to court every time they break the law - which is often. We need to turn the tables on them to behave with our money in a noncorrupt and efficient fashion. Is there someone out there who will set this up?

Peter, London, ENGLAND

This from the government headed by Gordonlocks and the three chins. Just how much per year does obesity cost the taxpayer? Another case of a percieved easy target and nothing more.

Dan, Hampton, UK

Surely eating buttery goods will soon be socially unacceptable all that heart disease and obesity, thousands of pounds on the NHS. ban lurpak, ban trex, ban croissants, get saussage rolls off our streets i can here the cries now.

emma, london, uk

I think it's excellent. Putting health aside (if you want to kill yourself by binge drinking, be my guest), I think it SHOULD be socially unacceptable to be drunk. Drinking 14 pints in one afternoon is not clever, it's sad. It says "I have no life, I need drugs to enjoy myself, because I'm too lazy to find something that's -really- fun."

starling, Lancaster,

With our goverment it is do as we say not as we do! They are mostlly whisky & brandy lovers with the odd cigar thrown in. I love a bottle of wine a night at home, it relaxes me, & as i have Dystonia it really helps.

Denise Wilde, rotherham, South Yorkshire

Will the loss of revenue from Cigarettes and Wine mean that the road Tax will go up?

I Smith, Milton Keynes, Bucks

It seems that people have read the headlines but not the content of this strategy.

The groups targeted are young adults (chronic alcohol-related problems are increasing in under 25s who are also more likely to be drinking to get drunk "for fun"), children (drinking is rising in teenagers, at an age when the body's development is more likely to be impaired) and people who engage in criminal behaviour because of their drinking (when drunk or in order to fund their addiction).
One small mention of older people who drink too much at home seems to have been expanded to "middle-aged, middle-class" - which quite a few people commenting here seem to have focussed on. Many people who should be enjoying their retirement (with or without the occasional drinking session) have serious health problems because they did not know about the effects of their drinking.
These people need to be informed, not those of you who claim that you drink moderately. They are costing YOU money.

Adrian, London,

Of course they are going after the middle classes, they are the ones with money. There is absolutely nothing new about this approach.

SM, London,

I am not surprised the government are going down this route. Not only have they chased car owners for speeding fines and congestion charging wherever they can, they continued their stealth taxes by increasing cigerette and petrol taxes. they then decided that no household would be safe by charging people to get rid of bulk waste or fining those who didn't recycle properly.
Now that England is about to go smoke free they need to find another source of revenue. What better way to tax the middle classes again by adding a booze tax. What will all the major supermarkets do now as they advertise Buy 6 and get 5-10% off wine

John, Newcastle upon tyne, Tyne and wear

All your comments have validity in one form or another, either in favour for or against the proposals.
However at the age of fiftyish and having belonged to the worlds largest drinking club ie. the Royal Navy for 23yrs.
Now I'm a civvie and considered a grown up, I would consider myself very capable of deciding whether or not I would like to drink or not!!
So I say to all you folks who voted for this shower of interferring whatnots, thanks. (The so called opposition party or Blair Mk 2 arn't any better. So cheers everyone.

chris king, portsmouth, uk

What do you expect? It's not like you're living in a free country.

MS, Washington, DC, USA

All a "sensitising" process before the introduction of swingeing increases in duty. That will only lead to more smuggling so lots of extra civil servants will need to be recruited - so taxes will have to be raised to pay for them.

James Smith, peterborough,

You see, there are more 'bads' rather than 'goods' in alcoholic drinks.

I agree with Ben Hoff from New Jersey, as saying "the government have given the obligation to pay for health, and we should limit its liability".

The government have spent lots of taxpayer's money for the health, but of course, drinkers, should not burden further their government, by drinking less.

Drinking is not feasible if be drunk frequently. I do not drink, but to someone who just can't resist it may have to control themselves, to avoid any jeopardy to their health, and burdening more to the hospitals, that is funded by taxpayers.

I am sure guzzlers know on the consequences of alcoholism.

Understanding it further, that's why Islam forbids alcoholic drinks.

Abdul Mutalib Saifuddin, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia

What happened to the fairly recent article which said that it is difficult, after the age of 50, to drink so much that you will die of cirrosis of the liver and not of some other disease
enjoy

peter, singapore,

This is questionable behaviour by the authorities. The audit will be followed by a campaign and then by legislation. Either citizens can excercise judgement or they cannot. If not the law is rightly there to punish delinquent behaviour. The problem occurs when the law is used to prevent actions that could lead to the law being broken and in doing so impinge upon basic freedoms.

As the middle class become disenfrachised (as the lower middle classed are being via rampant credit expansion and asset price inflation), the authorities have and will continue to ramp up initiatives and legistlation such as this to distract and control the populus. However let it be said that people get the goverment they deserve.

I'm glad that I emigrated a while ago. The erosion of basic freedoms in Englandis a crying shame and one wonders why we sacrificed so many lives over the last 100 years of war to arrive at this point.

Steve Ballmer, Sydney, Australia

The main impetus for change of habits is in the under 30 age group with binge drinking the norm. Cases of liver failure in this group is going through the roof. Tackling middle class drinkers may produce good results (as they're more likely to take advice) but the biggest need for change is in the under 30 binge drinking club.

Allowing things to continue will reduce our pensions deficit but require more immmigration to replace lost workers (to alcoholic liver disease).

ian , Durham,

Why can't this Government keep its nose out of our lives and concentrate on the more important issues in hand.

I do not cost the rate payers anything and have never been in trouble with the law, but it seems that people like me are an easy target, whether it be drinking or motoring.

I like a glass of wine of an evening and shall continue to do so.

It would be interesting to look deeply into the habits of so called do gooders.

Ann Mace, London,

" Think that I'll join a Nunnery!

Sally Childress, Liskeard, Cornwall"

Make sure it's not a Blue Nunnery then!

J Harris, London,

Surely eating buttery goods will soon be socially unacceptable all that heart disease and obesity, thousands of pounds on the NHS. ban lurpak, ban trex, ban croissants, get sausage rolls off our streets i can here the cries now.

emma, london, uk

i think this goverment needs to go
i live in a democratic country not a
comunist one.
every year we get closer to a big brother state
do they want to put cameras in our homes
aswell.

stephen mchugh, carrickfergus, northern ireland

please can we have public viewing galleries at the house of commons bar,where rumour has it they can drink what they want,when they want,and at far lower prices,i understand they can smoke there to after the 1st july,they can have affairs with those in public office as well.LEAVE US ALONE LABOUR!!!!

JAMES, london, uk

Nobody stood by the hunters or the smokers as their freedoms were taken from them. What should anyone stand by the drinkers? Drivers next....

Paul Raymond, Bath Spa, UK

I am amazed at all the whining about 'nanny state' interference. If you have national health care, then what is wrong with the govt. trying to reduce costs? Try living in the US - the government doesn't try to educate anybody about drinking, but, then again, they don't pay if you get sick. Medical insurance costs at least $350 per month/family, and millions of people don't have any. You can't have it both ways, if you want the comfort of an NHS, then you have to live with some of this clumsy govt. 'interference' .

Rachel, Miami , US

The discovery of 8 million new patients is just what the doctor ordered for Hewitt & Co to explain away their NHS failures.

Ed, London,

I don't want the government to tell me that drinking is bad for my health. But if I get cancer I want the latest drugs, regardless of cost.

Andrew, Bourmemouth, UK

I work in an off-licence in an affluent suburb and a lot of our customers - successful professionals for the most part - are daily regulars. The do not brawl in the streets, but do seem to ignore the realities of excessive alcohol consumption. Indeed, the arena in which alcohol is consumed - be it at a dinner party in a private home or in the local McPub on a Friday night - makes no difference to the severity of possible adverse health effects. Clearly, a bottle at home has as many units as a bottle in a bar.

Cordelia, London,

Whilst it's good to know that the Government is trying to show care for the community, one does have to wonder if they will ever allow people to make a free choice about what they do in the privacy of their own homes. It's a shame they feel they have to treat people as if they have no minds of their own.

Caroline McDermott, Saint Nazaire, France

How can people take this incompetant advice from the BMA as being the truth?

The 'safe' levels of consumption were worked out on flawed data.

Can you imagine what the medical profession would say if you asked what was a safe level of consumption of cigarettes?

Mankind has consumed alcohol without problem for thousands of years.

How did Thatcher and Churchill live to such ripe old ages when their booze consumption would make Oliver Reed look like a wimp?

Why is it a problem now?

alan bond, lancaster, england

Maybe we drink wine to forget the poor state of the health system. and maybe the medical profession should concentrate on washing their hands to avoid spreading infections in our institutions. Then they could do their part in reducing waiting lists for service. And then maybe we'd be more receptive to their suggestions about health care.
We have the same problems as you do in Canada

Ken Shaw, Magog, Quebec/Canada

I've met some of the economists from the civil service.

Strange bunch, they live by their numbers.

Economic value of pleasure derived from drinking wine:
= £0.00

Cost of alcohol-related hospital bills:
> £0.00

Therefore wine has a gross negative impact on the economy, and should be phased out.

Value of not being as cold as a civil service economist:
= Priceless

Mark, Woking, UK

If they're worried about drink-related injuries, why not just advise people to drink in bed? That's safe enough.

yank, Rochester,

How long will it be before the people who collect your bottles for re-cycling are ordered to inform the health police if there are too many wine bottles in the box?

John Gresham, Liverpool, UK

I think these Docters would be far better trying to run the health service instead of telling us how we should drink at home. We realy are in a big brother state when we are told each day how we should run another aspect of our lives.
If they have all this time on their hands why dont they try and clean up their hospitals.

Johnny Norfolk, Mileham , Norfolk

Who are these people who poke their noses Into our private lives? Did we vote for them? What or who gives them the right to target any charge in our behaviour. It really is time the British people took back control of their lives. Why don't we hear Dave and supporters opposing such nonsense - one more threat to our civil liberties.

Ian, Bristol,

Just another excuse for the greedy british government to raise taxes . boy am i glad i left that tax ridden place 41 yrs ago.

Brian Lee, medina, ohio

Enough of this tinkering with labels, leaflets and advertising campaigns. Results have shown that these simply do not work.

Why don't they just bring back rationing? Then they can be sure that we have only our 4 units of alcohol a day (sorry, ladies, 3), our 6 mg of salt, a controlled amount of dietary fibre and some oily fish, perhaps with a special treat of a portion of lean red meat on Bank Holidays or one of the Queen's birthdays. Cigarettes would, of course, be purely obtained from the black market, as would petrol (that way they could control our carbon footprints too).

Yours hopefully,

Kevin Browne, Reading, Berkshire, England

Another smoke and mirrors exercise by a Government who cannot fix the NHS, Has banned Foxhunting, while our farming ability is the worst since pre 1935. Banned hanguns, yet more are more readily available and more frequently used. Introdued 500 new criminal offences, yet failed to see the consequences, ie prison overcrowding.
I can only presume this latest exercise is to hide another increase in their salaries or pension rights. We worry about an Orwellian "1984", this government is already half way to a bureaucratic "Animal Farm".

D. Edwards, Burnham on Sea,

It's a shame this has been described as a 'cracking down' which it is not. In reality it is about informing about a potentially very dangerous but freely available drug. Wine marketing has become very sophisticated and advice that moderate drinking makes you live longer has muddied the water and is probably a misinterpretation of the data. Wine and beer are much stronger, young people are turning up to hospital with no liver left and were unaware that they were doing this to themselves. Everyone will still be at liberty to drink themselves to death, but some may choose not to unwittingly.

P S Simon, London,

Think that I'll join a Nunnery!

Sally Childress, Liskeard, Cornwall

Why not just privatise the NHS and make health insurance compulsory? That way we are forced to take responsibility for our own health instead of relying on an over zealous government to spoil freedom for the masses.. Its of no concern to the government what people do in their own homes..

strayduck, London, Uk

I'm middle-aged and my wife's a doc. We try to keep our drinking down to 2-3 glasses of wine / night, and spirits only at week-ends. She can quote several cases of home-based 'social drinkers' presenting with terminal liver disease with no prior warning signs, and this is a bigger problem than most correspondents appreciate. Don't be fooled by a medical 'all clear'. A check-up doesn't really reveal that much of what is going on inside.
This has been presented in a ham-fisted manner by the government. They have such a bad track record, that now nobody believes a word they say - especially the long suffering middle classes - and the medics are coming across as government stooges. The posts here reveal a deep resentment amongst what is, the backbone of society. Ministers would do well to note it.

ken gray, omagh, UK

So let's get this straight. Some people are buying lots and lots of wine, so they think that the best method to deal with this is make EVERYONE pay more for wine - no matter how much they actually drink.

It seems to me that those who drink lots of wine are probably quite happy to stock up in a visit to Calais, whereas those who simply want the odd bottle will be the ones most badly hit since their local stores will charge them even more than ever.

Not only is this a ridiculous nannying law, but it is completely counter-productive too!

Andrew Clarke, Nottingham,

Tanweer this has got nothing to do with your religion. If you want to convert come out with it.

M Hunt, KL, Malaysia

we're all going to die.

m, midlands, uk

Oh dear, here we go again. The government, faced with a problem it can't solve, invents one it can. So it can be 'seen to be doing something'. Which inevitably means victimising the middle classes since they seem to be the only ones sufficiently law-abiding to pay attention. More deckchair-rearrangements on the Titanic's deck. Oh, for a government with the honesty and courage to tackle the real problems rather than dissemble and divert attention to trivia. The BMA have always been willing and earnest stooges; I left them years ago and have never regretted the decision. I will now pour myself a glass of wine to register my protest.

Dr Roddy Campbell, Christchurch,

To Luke Nicolaides:

I agree with you. I have been to several countries with very relaxed opening hours and it was all very civilised. What you forget is we're talking about the British here and, much as I love my fellow beleaguered countryfolk, there is an element who are incapable of moderation in behaviour or drinking. Unfortunately, when pub hours became crazy here, those problems just got worse.

C. Wilson, Burnley,

Could we just go back to the freedoms we had under Magna Carter? When will this government stop poking its nose into the private lives of people. Are we to have a camera in our sitting room?

Roger Parkes, Tunbridge Wells, England

The Nanny State strikes again! Why don't they just mind their own business?

Peter Dewar-Finch, York, England

It's about time that the true cost of damage to health from alcohol received the same attention as smoking. Presumably the government will start to tax alcohol in the same proportion that they tax tobacco.............or will they bow to the lobbying power of the industry??

Nick, Southampton, Hampshire

We need to take our lives back from our governments, here in the US, as well. Several years ago, I became suspicious when all the doctors here were stressing "No Alcohol!" So, I began to note which people seemed to be suffering from the most health problems. After several years, I found that the healthiest people are the ones who consume alcohol regularly. This makes sense, because we have been consuming alcohol since day one, because fermentation is a naturally occurring process. People taking all sorts of medications are the ones suffering from the worst health problems.

Mary Sparrowdancer, Tallahassee, Florida, USA

This Government has gone completely bonkers, why cant they for once concentrate on the real issues. This country has gone to the dogs and it is little wonder that decent working class and the so called middle classes are slowly being driven out of their own country in despair, by the ridiculous ideas and policies of this Government. There are surely far more important issues for these highly paid politicians , consultants etc. to be focusing upon on. Its enough to drive us all to drink any how. Once the wine has gone there is not much left - Is there?

Rob, Cardiff, Not Sure Any More!!

There is a pill coming out to stop smoking,why can't they produce one to make alcohol harmless? It's so stupid to try to stop something that helps people get through their over-stressed week. Nobody will give that up easily. Why not put in some money/ research, into making drink harmless rather than try to add more guilt to something people enjoy (not everyone abuses it). What next, not being able to do your weekly shop unless you use shopping coupons that only allow you to purchase government vetted food and drink? This country is becoming ruled be health nazi's who just turn people off. There are more ways to solve a problem than just preaching at people. The British character has never taken to being told what to do to this extent. We pay our taxes for health treatment for whatever reason we need it. We shoudn't be bullied into thinking we can only use the Health Service if we have lived totally pure and clean lives (in the eyes of the health nazi's).

jay, dorset,

Of course the next stage will be to send inspectors in to our homes to snoop around and check our cupboards. Then we'll be required to complete an 80-page return to some faceless government department detailing everything we've ever consumed - with massive fines for even trivial omissions.

And then someone will realise the cost to the NHS of treating motoring related injuries. And we'll all be banned from using the roads...

Phil, London,

Of course binge drinking and violent youths are uncultured and unwanted, but they drink alcopops, strong lager, cider and various concoctions - this govt is easily able to control this type of drinking through enforcing current laws and increasing taxes on such drinks (those aimed at the yoof matket!) - but choose not to. No, this is aimed squarely at the adult population who like to drink a bottle of wine at home - exactly like the French and Italians

B Peacock, London,

First of al more choices shoud be in pubs like coffee. There should be more alternative drinks that are low alcoholic. Most drivers end up drinking coke all evening or orange. There shoud be fruit wines.Pub landlords should be made responsible for the amount they sell to youngsters in exactly the same way as shop keepers..Weekend travel and late trains available so that people don't drink and drive. I don't think fines really do the trick. I believe community service would be better to the community and the people. A fine does not always deter or name and shame them in a newspaper.

simone, kent, uk

I am constantly amazed at a government that thinks it should run our lives when it is incompetent to run our country.
If they didn't squander billions of pounds on computer systems that don't work and consultants to point out the obvious, then we would be able to afford to treat people under the NHS.
Remember though, if you save the cost of somebody dying of alcohol abuse you simply transfer their death to some other cause - and very few causes are cost-free to the state.

Mike Poulsen, Reading, Berkshire

So the UK is heading towards prohibition with its social engineering puritans who want to live for a hundred years (at least, it will seem like that). For Pete's sake life is varied and a uniquie experience. I do not want to be locked up in a cocoon. If you do not want to drink then don't. If you do then expect some retribution from others if you misbehave or become obnoxious. But other than that , leave adults to kill themselves slowly as they choose. Tell the government to stop the pollution killing us all - that would be effective but also be economically unsound. Why is it that those who feel superior and want to help the masses have the ear of government. If my drinking does not effect you DIRECTLY as smoking does, then keep out of my way. What right has any government to interfere? Better they tackled the bigger problems like the lethal pollution from traffic. If it is health costs you are worried about then tackle road injuries and dare I say it, those injuries from sport.

Bill, Perth, Australia

There's two ways to look at this issue. You can agree that alcohol abuse can be very damaging, and understand that alcohol is seen to be very much an 'acceptable' drug, as opposed to more notorious chemicals like cocaine, ketamine etc.

Or, you can advance the claim that it's a matter of personal choice, and that, unlike smoking, the only way drink will harm OTHER people is if the fool gets behind the wheel after a heavy session.

Both have valid points. But, always wanting to go against the grain of the 'nanny' state, I'd opt for the latter. Long-term alcohol abuse can be deadly and socially poisonous when abused. But we can, surely, attempt to get that message across without compromising our freedom of choice?

S. Gore, Liverpool, UK

"The awnswer is simple. Make people pay for their treatment if it is caused by being drunk, smoking or illegal drugs. People will soon get the message once they've had to fork out a few hundred pounds for calling out an ambulance just because they drank too much on a Saturday night." wrote Luke Nicolaides, London, UK.

Should the people suffering sporting injuries that clog up A&E departments earlier on Saturday evenings have to fork out as well?

John Savage, Bromley, Kent

The wine glasses have certainly got larger.This is a change in design not measure.

jennifer, edinburgh, scotland

A close member of my family is only allowed £40 per week housekeeping by her husband to provide for all the domestic needs of their family of 4. He then spends an equal amount on wine and beer for himself. This does not include the sum spent on cigarettes. I certainly think he does need educating and the sooner the better.

Angela, London, UK

First they came for the upper class champagne drinkers - and I said nothing. Then they came for the working class beer drinkers, and again I said nothing....

Mikey, Bromley, Kent

Right that's it...The only thing that makes life about bearable in this country is being able to knock back a couple of bottles of wine a night. It just about keeps me from being sectioned or running amok in the shopping centre stripped down to my y-fronts and brandishing a copy of Gordon Brown's homily, sharpened to a point. Why can't this government bloody well stop interfering and mind its own business?

Big Mike, London,

I don't mind an occasional reminder on labels of safe drinking levels, what really gets up my nose is when overpaid ministers say that drink is cheap. Whether something is cheap or not relates to how much you earn. To increase tax on drink significantly, disproportionately effects poorer, often older people, who have little in life left to enjoy. Educate the young by all means, but leave adults to make their own choices.

Michael, Wolverhampton,

I think it's important to note here, in response to the backlash, that the article is not talking about people enjoying 'a glass or two', it's people enjoying 'a bottle or two', which I find, sadly, to be a common occurrence amongst the middle classes. Excessive drinking brings no social benefit to anyone, including an NHS that is already in a poor way. Agreed, I think that instead of wasting money and time on going anywhere near Iraq, improvements should have been made on the NHS. And yes, the NHS is there to cure us when we're sick, but it's the government's job to try and raise public awareness of dangers to our health. If anything, this is an appeal for moderate and responsible drinking. A family friend of ours (a doctor) dropped dead with a heart-attack at forty-two after enjoying a bottle of wine with dinner every night. In my opinion, the effect on the wife and three young children left behind is more important i.e. the social consequences of drinking too much.

Jemima, Madrid, Spain

Let's ban drinking in pubs too - problem solved !!

I am amazed that I have managed to live for the first 45 years of my life without smoking bans, drink restrictions, speed restrictions and all the other restrictions that this government has imposed

Smokin' Joe, Bracknell,

I am not middle class and I drink plenty of red wine, so am I excluded?

Rob, Brum, UK

Yey! Let's stop everybody doing everything!

Peter, Cambridge, Cambridge,

So smoking is supposed to be "socially unacceptable". To whom, I wonder. Not to me. I am a smoker, and I smoke with confidence and pride. I shall not be bullied into submission by these yahoos who pass themselves off as democratic politicians, people who have engaged in many an illegal substance somewhere down the line. At least I stick to tobacco, spirits and wine. I wonder what their vices are?

I have been against this witch-hunt against smokers since the start. I said when it started that they would target drinking next; and they have, and will continue to do so. And when they've beaten the drinkers into submission, it will be something else. These people are social engineers, not democratic politicians.

Moreover, I wish the medical profession would keep its nose out of how people lead their lives. They are employed to cure people when they are sick, not tell us, the people, how to live our lives.

Richard Lewis, Swansea, UK

Most wine labels, in my experience, already give an indication how strong the contents are. Far more ominous is Prof Gilmore's call for the Chancellor to raise taxes on drink. In that case I trust he'll also call for the abolition of the absurdly generous allowance people are allowed to bring into the country "for their personal use" without paying tax. Or is it, as usual, just the ordinary person living an ordinary life who's to be clobbered, with the authorities turning a blind eye to those who manipulate the system? And the BMA deny it's the nanny state!

What we should be doing, as other postings have said, is trying to learn lessons from those countries with less of a drunkenness problem than we have.

Barry, Wallington, UK

We are in the ludicrous position of having allowed Alcohol to be bought 24 hours in Supermarkets and Pubs and then lamenting over indulgence.

If it is seen as a form of drug abuse then treat it as such. Put it on a level playing field with other categories of drugs: similarly with cigarettes. But remember: every society needs some form of release from daily pressures and it cannot be stamped out completely and neither should we wish to do so.

Pubs are a vital part of our social set-up and perhapsn t they alone should be the outlets for alcohol and off-licences controlled through them.

John Charlesworth, Sleaford , UK

I don't know why anybody in the UK should be surprised or offended by this action on the government's part. After all, it is a natural consequence of your nationalized health system. Now you have given the government the obligation to pay for health care, wouldn't you expect it to try to limit its liability (for the economic benefit of the taxpayer, of course) by attempting to modify behavior of those it insures?

Ben Hoff, NJ, USA

All right Guys, chill out. If my liver gets damaged I'll get in the queue for a new one, better say an used one.

André Araujo de Oliveira, Vitoria, Brazil / ES

Will the duty on whisky be raised too?

Get them out next General Election....

Martin , Rotherham , England

I think it has been said before, but living healthily may not make you live longer, but it will certainly seem like it! Everyone is going to die - it is how you use the days you have that make all the difference. Let's learn to live happily, and ditch all the Puritan angst about anything that makes someone happy. Those who are made unhappy by alcohol are in the minority - support them, and let the rest of us get on with enjoying life. At the rate we are going, Cromwell banning Christmas will seem trivial by comparison ...

Jeremy Wickins MA, LLB, Sheffield, UK

I have read maybe 30 or so comments so far and must confess that although touching on the periphery few seem to point at the real culprit behind the creation of the supposed "middle-class winos". I personally place the blame firmly at the door of the Stress UK department - Created by Government both national and local, justified by highly paid spin doctors, documented and deployed by its ever growing army of government employed minions and finally thrust upon the many average, hard working and sick to death "middle-class winos"

I admit that I consume far too much Rioja for my own good but it would appear from speaking with friends that I do not appear to be alone when turning to my daily stress buster!

Perhaps if you are red drinker like I you can take comfort in the fact that the tannins contained within the wine have a beneficial effect on vascular health. I'm sure given enough time and tax payers money however a government funded spin campaign will refute this fact I'm sure.

Paul Syers, Maidstone, United Kingdom

I actually don't think this is a bad idea to put the number of units on bottles etc. as it's just informative. I've always presumed that half a bottle of Spanish red wine with my evening meal was fine, I assume it's about four to five units, and at medical check ups I've never been told to cut down. Please though don't start putting pictures of diseased livers or skull and cross bones on bottles as it would be stupid, misguided and highly unpleasant.

Cirep G Nol, London,

so don`t drink - risk of alcoholic liver disease
so don`t smoke -risk of lung cancer
so don`t do drugs- risks of psychological dependancy
so don`t have multiple sexual partners-risk of HIV & STD`S
so don`t be to fat -increased surgical risk


they all cost the NHS.

so what kind of society are we heading towards?

all the above are compatible with islamic morality.
hmmmmmmmmmm!!

tanweerhussain, liverpool,

I haven't noticed a lot of middle-class wine drinkers reeling out of clubs and fighting each other in the streets. However, if you are out there, could you identify yourselves, so that I will know who to blame for massive increase in the duty on wine, which will be announced at the next budget (as a health tax).

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

It seems pretty clear this policy is aimed at people who drink one or two BOTTLES a night as opposed to one or two glasses. Even to someone who likes his drink, that's a lot of alcohol. It's also not surprising the NHS is trying to change habits. Private insurers here are forever pushing Americans to alter their habits, be it smoking or drinking or eating junk food. Whenever a government agency or massive private entity is paying the bills, someone is going to try to make you change what you're doing. Sometimes it may even be for a good reason.

Ray , Washington, DC/USA

Is there no part of our lives that the Government will not interfere with?

What next, the knock at the door in the dead of night for a swift breathalyser and bin inspection? Heaven help the poor middle-class house wife who has fallen behind with her recycling and accidentally put an extra wine bottle or two out.

What has theGoverment got against the poor,beleagured middle classes. Why do they constantly try to find ways to criminalise the actions of the one sector of society that actually (in the main) behaves itself and also contributes hugely to the revenue ?

Big Brother strikes again. I am off to hide in my wine cellar....

Emma, Gloucestershire,

I live in a town in France frequented by English visitors. Last night, a Brit, drunk out of his mind, drove his rental car up onto the pavement and into the tables of a cafe. Luckily, they were empty. The night before, he would have killed people. Personally, I resent the notion that because I drink one or two glasses of wine with my dinner several nights a week, I would be the target of government 'health measures'. Let them first expend their energy on curbing what is truly socially irresponsible drinking. I speculate that this change of course in policy is happening because the government has made absolutely no inroads on binge drinking, so have chosen the softer target of the educated middle class, who will indeed try to emend their behaviour at the behest of authority figures. I'm glad I left England, frankly, and I'm horrified and depressed to have to say that.

Kirsty , La Rochelle, France

Prevention is better than a cure, and i am glad the goverment is finally investing money into the widespread education needed to make prevention possible.

naomi, Glasgow,

Honestly, the base ingratitude of government!
All my life I have steadfastly chipped in extra revenue in the form of tobacco and alcohol duties to help fund its elite cost index- linked pension schemes etc. and now, when I have found the relaxation of a bottle of wine(red, of course - self-help, to keep the old ticker onside) and a decent book, I am going to be targetted?
I am so worked up that I may try to get an appointment with my GP, but already I sense it unlikely since he has probably retired within the 20 or so years since I last saw him - or was it her, I forget, must be the wine.

MikeM, St. Albans, England

Expect more of this once Gordy's running the show. I'm no Tory but this mob need to go

Duncan Carter, Leyland, UK

beware all non marathon running health freaks your next

john , nottingham,

One of the benefits of living in the United Kingdom is the freedom to drink as much as you like without having to be concerned as to appearing drunk, loud or offensive in public. Having the freedom to brawl and vomit (within reason) in a public arena without fear from prosecution from the police or discust from most people is something we should celebrate.

Patrick, London, UK

There is no point whatsoever in raising tax on alcohol - the very middle class people that are being targetted are already the kind of people who like to have a jaunt across to France once or twice a year on the tunnel or ferry, fill the car up with wine and have a nice lunch. I know because I'm one of them.

It should also be noted that most middle class people have health insurance so won't be a burden on the system if their livers pack in. Many of them also went to private schools which do far more to encourage an active lifestyle than their comprehensive equivalents. And most of them accompany the wine they are drinking with a proper home-cooked meal with lots of healthy vegetables.

All in all the government really should mind it's own business and stop wasting our money telling us how to live our lives.

Simon Carter, London,

So, how much are drinks in the strangers bar then?

Jon Barker, Glasgow, UK

I have read all the replies and agree with so many of them, but it was Alec in Kendal who nailed it for me. Of course it's OK for all 'visitors' to the UK (please note I am being politically correct so as not to offend anyone - human rights and all that!) to receive free NHS treatment, but if you are 'middle-aged', worked hard all your life and paid your tax and NHS contributions without fortunately ever having had to claim a penny, then woe betide if you want to start winding down, enjoying life and having the odd glass of wine or two at home! Soon it won't be safe to go out anyway.

VA, Walton-on-Thames/Surrey, UK

So smoking is supposed to be "socially unacceptable". To whom, I wonder. Not to me. I am a smoker, and I smoke with confidence and pride. I shall not be bullied into submission by these yahoos, who pass themselves off as democratic politicians, people who have engaged in many an illegal substance somewhere down the line. At least I stick to tobacco, spirits and wine. I wonder what their vices are?

I have been against this witch-hunt against smokers since the start. I said when it started that they would target drinking next; and they have, and will continue to do so. And when they've beaten the drinkers into submission, it will be something else. These people are social engineers, not democratic politicians.

Moreover, I wish the medical profession would keep its nose out of how people lead their lives. They are employed to cure people when they are sick, not tell us, the people, how to live our lives.

Richard Lewis, Swansea, UK

When I were a 'lad', booze was so much more expensive relative to today. Often I chose my under-age purchase based on calculating the cheapest way of getting 'pished'. I cannot imagine the mind-set of todays's lads (& lasses) is much different. More emphasis on declaring the 'unit' content will thus NOT necessarily be a good move in controlling alcohol intake. If you have, say just £5 to spend, you will just want to maximise the 'hit'.

But back in my day, a bottle of Cyprus Sherry and a flagon (2 pints) of Brains Bitter was the most effective way of spending 10 shillings ..... - which was a day's wage selling fish & chips when i was 13 years' old ....

Sidney Gee, Edinburgh,

Ministry Of Fun to create new alcohol diktat.

Paul Mahalo, Hull,

Oh for God's sake, why can't we be left to take responsability for our own health and lifestyles instead of some busy-body public servant/politician/doctor telling us how to live.

Robert Steele, Camberley, UK

Why not outlaw all behaviors that shorten the lifespan and increases medical expenses?

Like skiing with all those broken bones? Or divorce which lowers the lifespan in men and homosexual behavior which can lower a man lifespan by 20 years.

Just get rid of all vices instead of picking on people who smoking and drink wine. Just joking, sort of.

Silly, NY, NY,

Interesting that although I do sometimes get through a bottle of wine in an evening, many of my friends do so regularly. They are not usually better friends or partners because of it and I totally support a government who wants to reduce alchohol dependency. Am I the only one?

Clive, Bath, uk

Hands up all of you on this page who support the smoking ban but are 'flabbergasted' that they are coming after your drinking habits now.

Edwin Thornber, Bucharest, Romania

Nanny State? Now there's an understatement. This goverment cannot help themselves interfering in every aspect of day-to-day life. I respectfully suggest that it has nothing to do with anyone else how much wine one chooses to consume at home. It does highlight the problem of the NHS system though, where to reduce costs the government attacks any form of behaviour likely to result in the use of NHS resources. Next it will be dangerous sports or any so-called unnecessary risk-taking activity in any aspect of life which comes under scrutiny. Move to a private insurance based health care system and market forces will shape the way we live. Not goverment meddlers.

Mark H, lausanne , Switzerland

just another way for governments to cash in on socities need for relief from the everyday grind....at least they cant cash in on my ganja and i'll be a little bit better off then the boozers..water

Matt, Malvern, US/PA

By any measure you care to use: Harm to body; cost to society; addictiveness, harm to others... Alcohol is one of the worst drugs there is.

Just because it is the one that survived the early 20th century as 'legal' doesn't mean it is safe or right that it should be abused. I'm sure many of the right wing posters here waxing lyrical about their handling of drink or bemoaning the interference of the 'nanny state' would be equally appaled if the government was condoning the legalisation of cocaine.

Things should not always persist just because they have been like that in the past. We should like at the wider issues of drug abuse (yes, that is what drinking is) and try to come up with a pragmatic and realistic approach going forward. Something as harmful as alcohol needs to have much tighter regulations.

With alcohol related deaths doubling in the last 15 years (moreso in younger age groups) this seems like common sense.

Yes, I drink.

Barry, Newbury, Berks

As one of said middle class wine drinkers who quite often consumes a whole bottle of fine wine in a night I feel qualified to announce that my doctor has just pronounced me to be in a perfectly good state of health.

I am the correct weight for my height, have never smoked, eat a healthy diet and take plenty of exercise.

My neighbour on the left is five stone overweight, smokes like a trooper, and suffers from diabetes, but never drinks. My neighbour on the right is also teetotal, but frequents every fast food joint in town Same weight problem, same state of health.

Surely it is the overall livestyle that counts - not just a single factor to be vilified, 'cracked down on' and policed.

A vintage Rioja for me tonight I think.

Thomson, Canterbury, GB

Is there nothing that this Government won't consider taxing?
People buy wine in large quantities because it is cheaper to do so - and they buy it because taxation has made drinking in the pub too expensive.

If drinking and smoking really are such anti-social habits and an unacceptable burden on the NHS why don't theu go the whole hog and make smoking and drinking alcohol illegal?
We all know why - it brings in too much money for them to lose the tax revenue!

keith, London, UK

Of course making people more aware of their drinking and the damage it causes can only be a good thing, but I think Professor Gilmore is right - the only solution is to raise taxes. It is naive to consider measures like making people pay for for their excesses as the cause of a particular illness can rarely be pinpointed with accuracy, and such a measure would only lead to endless litigation as to whether smoking, drinking or merely genes were to blame.

Raising the tax on alcohol (and tobacco) gives the government more money to publicise the dangers to the users and to fund the NHS to treat them should they persist.

Surely it has always been the function of government to adopt a policy with respect to any behaviour, and then to encourage or discourage that behaviour by the use of taxes.

The most difficult contemporary problem to tackle is probably that of obesity where it is clear that taxation cannot be the solution.

David E Jones, Maidenhead,

If alcohol is so harmful, how come the Queen-Mother lived to 101 and Churchill lived to 91 ??

Pete, Swindon,

Thats decided then. Next weekend, a trip to Calais to load the car up with wine. (No tax for you 'Grabber Gordon'.)
Then raise a glass and two fingers to this nanny state.

Steve, Chichester, UK

Stop them smoking!
Stop them drinking!
Stop them eating too much!
Work them longer!
With all those savings they will need less pension less health care and I will have done such a good job I should be rewarded with higher pay and better pension arrangements?
WAITING FOR GORDO?

Jim Golightly, Prudhoe, England

I agree that people who get into the habit of drinking alone or in a single social group can lose a sense of proportion about how much is 'normal' to drink- I know I do. I'm also slightly concerned about my dad's drinking habits (good wine at home, but rather a lot of it - though there is sample bias because he breaks out the bottles when I visit).

I support a move to make sure people like my dad (who is incredibly smart, but like everyone else inclined to believe the medical ideas that best suit him) are aware that it's not healthy to drink a bottle of wine every night, even if they hang around with people who do.

I lost a grandmother in her early 60s to lung cancer because when she was young, nobody told her smoking was really quite bad for her. If the much-maligned 'nanny state' had started its mandate for warnings about smoking 40 years earlier, she might have seen me graduate.

Pav, London,

Over the last 20 years, my social drinking became a couple of glasses of wine with my supper and so it built up to around a bottle of wine a night and a litre bottle of vodka a week in the form of vodka and tonic. At 56, I reckoned I was consuming some 90-100 units a week.

I was warned by a medic that my gamma GT level was a bit high, but my GP poo-pooed this as nothing to worry about. When I started to get dull aches from my back immediately on the onset of drinking, it was obvious I should do something.

I've now been some 3 months without any booze at all, and to be honest, I don't miss it and my wist size has reduced by 2 notches on my belt. It's very pleasant never to wake up feeling a bit under the weather, as I used to a couple of days a week.

The only side effect of this withdrawal is that I get so very drowsy. I saw my GP (a different one) about this, and his comment was that that was almost certainly the booze - it's a much more pwerful drug than people perceive.

Ottorino, Wiltshire,

I do worry that this has nothing to do with health and everything to do with softening us up for higher taxes. The article tries to perpetuate the myth that drink has become less expensive - this may be true for whisky (the only tax that Gordon Brown has ever cut - I wonder why?) but for the English national drink, the much les harmful beer, the opposite is the case. When I graduated in 1968 a pint in the pub typically cost 10p which represents 0.01% of a lowish starting salary of £1,000. Today with beer at £2.50 or more a pint you would need a salary of £25,000 to achieve the same ratio - and that doesn't take account of the increase percentage of income taken in direct taxes since then. Also the parallel drawn with smoking is disingenuous. Smoking releases toxins into the air that harms the health of other people, who deserve some protection. In most cases drinking only harms the health of the drinker - and if taken in moderation does not even do that.

Richard Walton, Worcestershire,

Sirs, Frankly the British 'Shadow' Government is enough to drive you to drink !

David Smith, Cannes, France

We should not drive, smoke, drink, eat the "wrong" foods, fly on holiday, live in houses that are not energy efficient. This government is good at telling the British population what we do wrong, but is chronically incompetent at managing the government's own responsibilities - NHS, transport infrastructure, immigration, crime prevention etc.

And where are the warnings about illegal drug consumption that has increased so dramatically in the last ten years?

Tony G, UK,

There is a lot of false logic (and predictable English whining) in these comments. I think you all might be exaggerating the prospect of an Orwellian state. The difference between French wine drinkers, for example, and English wine drinkers is that the latter will always finish the bottle of wine, such is the deep love affair with alcohol in this country. As a former doctor, I have seen a number people from all walks of life with serious liver damage of which the predominant cause has been alcohol. Many of these people, who are in later life, will complain that it is not fair because "it's not like I'm an alcoholic". As long as people in this country fail to recognise that prevention (and moderation) is the best form of treatment, the situation will continue to sound in higher taxes for you whingers.

renton, London,

... And then they came for the drinkers, but I did not speak out, because I was drunk.

Captain Sensible, Newcastle,

Its clear that many of the HYS posters haven't actually read the article and just looked at the headline. The Government aren't aiming this at those that drink the odd glass of wine :

“ 'We want to target older drinkers, those that are maybe drinking one or two bottles of wine at home each evening,' a Whitehall source said"

Anyone thats ever known a person suffer the pain associated with Liver disease, or indeed had to wait (in pain) in an A&E queue while hoards of young drinkers get treated by the doctors will know that drink is a big and wide-ranging problem for some people and is something that should have been addressed long before now. Far be it for me to agree with anything that comes out of this Government but this is one thing I'm all for.

Rod Munch, Northampton, UK

You are missing the point. They are not talking about drunks in the street, they are talking about PEOPLE LIKE US!

Be honest for once - so many of us are having well over our alloted 14/21 units per week. We blame the supermarkets for low prices, we blame the industry for poor labeling information. But let's face it if you're having a G&T and 1/2 a bottle of wine per night, then you are drinking about 38 units per week. if you're drinking a bottle of wine per night, you have a problem. If you feel angry at potential restrictions, consider whethter you really can "take it or leave it" or whether your anger stems from a dependence problem.

Think about how much more it takes to give you that happy tipsy feeling and consider the level of enzymes in your liver, and how hard they are working to keep you functioning.

I know. This described what I did. I was as righteously indignant as you. I could marshall erudite arguments. Reality - I was 2 stone overweight and my liver was damaged.

Jane, Edinburgh,

The Government really are in a muddle aren't they. There has been a concerted effort at Government and Local Council level to develop the 'night-time economy' in our towns and cities in recent years. Taken in isolation,the message of this policy is clear.

Given the cultural attitude to drink in this country this has led to an increase in lawlessness etc. and many other social ills caused by excess. One only has to observe Blackpool town centre at the weekend and see the Police prepared as if for a riot.

So now we have another arm of Government hand-wringing about the social costs of excessive drinking. The young binge drinkers of today become the at-home wine drinkers of tomorrow.

The revenue generated by the night -time economy is huge. So is this not an example of the Governement paying lip service to a problem which they have in part caused and that they have no intention of actually solving because ' it's the Economy stupid'.

Paul Williams, Blackpool, UK

Ok they're trying to get everyone to stop smoking - so where is the short fall in governement income going to come from - of course tax the wine drinkers - tax middle England they won't say anyhting.

I am fed up with the way this country is becming a nanny state.

Apprently you shouldn't smoke or drink due to the health issues that surround it (like we didn't know this already) but you can eat junk food to you heart gives out but that's not taxed - why not.

DN NOT tell me what I can and can't do in my own home

Sarah, London, ENgland

So I cannot Smoke, I cannot drink, to reduce my carbon footprint I cannot drive my car ..... God does that mean I have to stay at home and watch Big Brother!!! Next this government will teach me how to brush my teeth, five times bottom left, five times top left etc. No wonder I moved to Germany

Do you ever get the feeling that if the Queen Mum was still around we would not have this subject in the paper - just a picture of her with a G&T on Derby Day!!

Philip, Hamburg , Germany

Luke Nicolaides, where does this stop? No dental treatment if you eaten sweets, no help if you crash your own car (as opposed to being in the car you crashed into)? Being drunk, in itself, is not illegal, although being drunk and disorderly is and only smoking in public is banned. The proposal is not aimed at drunken chain smokers, but at people (like me and I'm far from being middle class) who drink wine at home.

David Leslie, Perth, Scotland

After drinks, it will be monitoring how many cream slices or cakes you eat - they'll be bar-coded and linked to your ID which will one day have to be produced for any purchase you make. You can actually envisage civil war on these kind of issues eventually. I'll keep my powder dry.....

Phil, Preston,

This has to stop. Don't people realise that the government is becoming far too intrusive?

Don't drink. Don't smoke. Don't eat junk food. Don't drive, take the public transport. Don't throw away rubbish.' We need to monitor you at all times'. What kind of society do we want to live in? Britain is fast becoming one of the most banal places to live on earth.

It's getting rather tiresome

Jite, london,

It's a pity they didn't think of something like this before Fiona Jones drank herself to death.


Guilty Conscience maybe?

chris, Belfast,

I have taken the time to read all 36 comments. The overwhelming body of opinion is deeply distrustful of this initiative and the motives of the government. At every turn they seem to seek out more tax revenue. This would not be so bad if the money was spent wisely but there is not a single successful initiative I can find. They are all a gross wase of our money and an absolute indictment of big government.

Newton, Liverpool,

Does this mean that all French are middle calass?

Trevor D. Evans, Drulingen, France

Why are there so many cultures all over Europe and the World where alcohol is accepted. Even young teenagers are offered a small amount of wine at a meal. They don't all end up drunk and on hospital beds.
The government should stop telling us why things are bad. Maybe they could try looking at other cultures and analyzing how to make things better.

Gil, London,

The government's constant attempts to micro manage our lives is enough to drive anyone to drink. The one consolation in the news that they want to tell me how much to drink in my own home ("The People's Pint"?) is that they are so technically incompetent at everything they do that they are bound to fail. And if the government should threaten to make NHS patients pay for what it deems to be a drink related condition? Well, they make my father pay in full for his, very beneficial, anti dementia drugs so I am resigned to having to pay for everything until I am down to my last £21,500.

howard, London, England

Mmmm, Prohibition really worked in 1920/30's US, didn't it?

Anne, Isle of Wight, UK

Let's all stick our heads in the sand and believe the problem of drink-related poor health and over-indulgence, affects someone else. I admit that I and many of my friends probably drink more wine than is good for us, on a regular basis.

I see no reason to complain when the Government reminds us of safe drinking llimits. It's too easy to become, smug and complacent, in the belief that "I always know best.

Philip , Wimborne, Dorset, England

The problem of home drinking is a tendency to be too generous - I am in my late 50's and tought nothing of having 2 glasses of wine and 3 large whiskeys - but when I counted that I was having 90 - 100 units a week (having had DVT sleepnessness and memory problems) I had to reduce this to 4units daily i.e. 28 units a week and feel much better for it

Tony Marchant-Stubbs, Chester, UK

What excellent research, which highlights the problems that our society faces. Hopefully this draws attention to the problems of alcohol, not that it is necessarily bad for you but when misused can cause irreversible damage.

Jason Williams, London,

The comments so far are predictable. However, what people don't seem to get is that the need for such interference stems directly from a spreading culture that says its OK to decide which behavioural rules to break as long as someone has money or influence. Hence we get the view that its OK to break the speeding laws at will but not to drive without insurance; its OK to get objectionally drunk on champagne & cocktails in an exclusive nightclub but not for some teenage kids in a local neighbourhood and so on. Until we all realise that personal responsibility matters then the government is left with little option but to fill the moral vacuum we create by introducing more legislation and more behavioural guidelines. Its time we stopped blaming government and started behaving as acceptable members of a civilised society.

mike, herne bay,

I agree with the comments about the government meddling in our private lives but would support any initiative to make public drunkeness (why has it just underline that in red?) socially unacceptable.

Tony Jones, Grantham, UK

So how are they going to police this? Midnight knocks on the door to check our wine bottles? Or enforced breathilysers whilst sitting on our sofas? But if you were having a joint you'd be ok...

Peter Martin, Newcastle,

MP's should begin looking closer to home, in their own bars in the Commons before attacking the public's drinking habbits.

Jane, Eastbourne, East Sussex

"Crackdown on middle class wine drinkers". If they are doing themselves harm then they are already 'cracking down' on themselves.
The real problem is that most politicians have no scientific background and very little knowledge, so they rely on the present band of researchers whose conclusions from their study are often poorly deducted. I blame that on the fact that the professors these days are far too young.

Alan , Llanerchymedd, Wales

The more I read the news these days the more our present State resembles a totalitarian nightmare. These meddling self-righteous neo-puritans and their contempt for individual liberty have got to go.

Alex, Edinburgh, UK

One thing after another!, Blair's Nanny state telling us how to live our lives again.
We are adults, intelligent people, please stop controlling our lives and spend more of your time thinking of an acceptable reason why you sent our brave servicemen to die in Iraq.

Mark, Bolton,

This goverment as usual is turning everything into a "control" issue.
Whilst excessive drinking needs to be curbed, cost increases will affect the lower paid more than anyone else. The cost of living in the UK is much higher than most places and therefore singling out one part of the economy is symptomatic of the myopic and idiotic ideas that this govement comes up with . AND it will get much worse under the Rev Brown's leadership.

CG Roberts, Keswick, Cumbria

I'll just have to become upper-middle class, pass the Montrachet darling!

david, Richmond,

In response to Tim Saunders in New Zealand, I am heartily sick of this Government trying to "educate" us. You don't have to be Einstein to figure out that too much alcohol is bad. I don't need Blair, Brown and cronies telling me. If I have one piece of advice for this tired old Government, it's "butt out". I don't want your advice. Just go away and try to run the country. Anyway...is there a similar program in New Zealand?

Colin, Woklingham, UK

Just how will 'drunkenness' be measured? Yet another army of 'jobsworths' thrusting breathalysers into the faces of anyone seemingly having a good time?

John Savage, Bromley, Kent

Looking another way, you can see a possible rise in drinking related hospital admissions if wine is pushed into an exorbitant price band (because no doubt, that is how the government likes to operate). In Scandinavian countries, prohibitive pricing of alcohol has seen many people 'home brewing' and alcoholism & poisoning is on the rise. The same underlying reasons cause more smokers to buy self roll cigarettes, which are certainly the worse option. Tax the people who deserve it, where they deserve it and stop punishing middle England for the government's shortfalls.

GW, Swadlincote,

The intrusion of the government, busy bodies and social puritans and prudes is getting beyond belief and acceptability and is now oppressive. There are hundreds of other and higher priorities for government and society to tackle, but having failed that they go for the SOFT targets. I am tired of some person, official, bureaucrat or elitist deciding what is good for me. Enough Enough Enough. Where are the Libertarians?

JJ, Surrey, England

Perhaps they should concentrate on catching the real criminals as opposed to targeting the MIddle/Working classes with what they see as 'irresponsible' drinking. It would also be quite interesting to see how many glasses/bottles MPs drink a night.

Joe, Norwich, UK

If there was less stress involved in living in the UK, I am sure drinking wouldn't be such a problem. When I lived in the UK I did a very stressful job, which was compounded by travelling on Britain's overcrowded and underfunded road and rail system. The first thing I did each evening was reach for the wine bottle. I know most of my colleagues did the same. I now live in France where wine is less that half the UK price, yet I drink only a modest amount with my evening meal as do most of our French friends. It is not about cost, professional people can afford it. It is about lifestyle and the ridiculous expectations placed upon young professionals in the UK.

BARBARA, Vidouze, FRANCE

how come the French aren't suffering such health problems??!!!

Emma, Cambridge,

I would have thought with people now living to well in their nineties and the subsequent pension and healthcare crises, it would be in the governments, and indeed the nations, interest for everyone to drop dead at 65. To this end i propose that it should be government policy to force us to smoke and drink until our lungs and livers can take no more.

Jamie Lear, City, UK

The spurious justification for this is that apparently drink-related illnesses cost the NHS 'between 1.3 and 1.6 billion'. Even if we accept those figures clamping down on home wine drinking is not going to 'save' the NHS this much money as rather annoyingly (both for us and the BMA) we will simply develop other diseases and die from them instead. So yes, Ms Nathanson it IS about choice and the Nanny State.

Is there some party we can vote for that will sweep away the likes of Gilmore and Nathanson so they no longer stare down their pinched noses at us?

Tim Vince, Brighton,

What will they go after next? Coffee? Then nobody will have any fun.

Showing how many units there are on a bottle of alcohol is not going to discourage people who drink to get drunk (and I bet these are the people who have the most health problems and cause the most disruption), much like the warning labels on cigarettes were more of a joke than anything else. It's an inherent part of the culture, drinking to get drunk. Change that, and the problem will go away.

Lisa, London,

C Wilson: Most of the rest of the world has more relaxed pub opening hours than the UK used to but hasn't got the same drinking problem. I can quite happily stay out till 01:00 and not be blind drunk.

Luke Nicolaides, London, UK

Dear goodness, Can't they leave us alone to ENJOY life! They say that the most fun things we do in life are illegal, immoral or fattening and it worries me that we have a government that tries to restrict us from doing anything unless they approve. I'm not a political person, but the erosion of our freedoms over the last few years has convinced me that the current government needs to be removed before we live in a state that has any element of natural fun (rather that watching government approved entertainment behind a barrier) removed. And just for fun, trip up any health and safety officers you know while you're at it!! ;o)

Mike Heckman, Leeds,

This is rich coming from politicians, a group notable for excessive boozing, usually at the public's expense! How many (subsidised) bars are there in the Palace of Westminster again?

Q.McCutcheon, Aberdeen,

Is it not the depressing state of the country that turns honest, hardworking, cowed and overtaxed British people to seek solace in alcohol? The blame lies firmly at the door of Government and their idiotic policies! It comes as no surprise that hundreds of thousands leave the country every year. We are a nation in terminal decline and the public are increasingly voting with their feet. Would the last person leaving the country please turn off the lights!

R.B., Leicester, Leicestershire

Privatise the health system, so that people would have to pay for their own misadventures through lifesyle (lack of exercise, poor diet, smoking or drinking). it seems to me that in fhe future punishing bad behaviour through taxes or legal limits on consumption will be too draconian without financial incentives to the individual to choose a 'healthier' life. By privatising the health service not only would 'good' people not have to subsidise the treatment costs of reckless people but their own costs would be low leaving money available for other things while they would have the additional benefits of being healthy.

Rebecca Hathaway, tehran,

Ah Yes, Socialism at its finest.

Tom, Portland, Oregon USA

Are there a lot of middle-aged drinkers who knock back a couple of bottles each evening? That’s incredible if it’s true! I'll have maybe a bottle a week, if that and I disturb nobody else in doing so. I would’ve thought a higher priority group to target would be the twelve year olds staggering about on the streets, so inebriated that they can barely stand up, but manage to do so just long enough to trash your car and urinate up your garden wall before wandering off and collapsing; they definitely exist, I've seen them.

Sam, Newbury, UK

It's clear that one of the gravest problems facing the country is the middle-class drinking wine at home in the evening. The government should take strong action. Let's have CCTV and speakers in every home. When citizens finish one bottle, or open a second, a warning can be broadcast threatening them with liver disease, high blood pressure - they probably don't know there are risks associated with drinking alcohol - and a fine. It's a modest proposal - others will have thought of it too - but it's quite in line with the society currently well under construction.

c boylan, guildford, uk

Obviously this is the beginning of another tax scheme. When you have 41% GDP in the public sector, you need pots of cash to pay for it. The generally law abiding and prudent middle class, whose stereotype is wine drinking at home must be the best source.

Next it'll be a 'crack down' on eating the associated cheese. It'll be bad for your health, bad for the planet etc.. Is Mandy back by any chance?

Ray, Dartmouth,

Exactly right just what the hell are you doing living there. It used to be such a wonderful place to live but I find it difficult now to go back even for a holiday despite having children and grandchildren there, far better to meet somewhere more people friendly, without the cameras and the drink/smoke gestapo and if you thought Blair was bad wait till you see what Stailn has in store for you all.

mike sanders, hong Kong, hong kong

Quick! Fill up your cellars before the government impose a 100% tax on wine!

The government have entirely missed the boat on this one. I bet it's down to some miserly little civil servant who never gets invited to 'middle class' dinner parties....

Lindsay, Bristol,

Doubtless local councils will be given powers to count wine bottles in recycling bins,. This information could then be used to cut health funding to areas of the country, where illness will have deemed to have been self inflicted.
More sanctimonious claptrap from the chattering classes, when all is said and done, they don't really want people to live longer, because they can't afford to pay the pensions.

John , Grimsby,

Pathetic this Government is pure jokes, It has failed us all... to accuse middle class wine drinkers, (No mention of any problems in France?), also bearing in mind that us 'middle class' wine drinkers have paid so much tax into the NHS that has been allocated with some what ignominy.. we are now costing the NHS??? Raise the price of drinking again!? That will not solve anything.. with the raising the cost of legal drugs, people will then look towards the lowering cost of illegal drugs.. this government seriously has no idea...

Adam Webb, MK, UK

Those drinking at home very often underestimate the quantity they consume. There are certainly many in this category who are doing their health no good at all and unfortunately they are often the same people who overeat and don't take enough exercise.

Judi Martin, aberdeenshire, united kingdom

R. Ince, Istanbul, Turkey - Disaffect Muslim youths became suicide bombers here and blew up tube trains killing many. Maybe getting drunk would have been safer for Londoners.

Generally this government wants to control every aspect of our lives. I hope they start with their own MPs and supporters first.

Peggy W, Blyth, Northumberland

We are all going to die period. Doctor's do not "save" lives they postpone death. It is a question of qualiy of life. If the government really wants to carry out a cost study they need to take into account the cost of us living longer - care homes, dementia and other ailments of the elderly plus of course the cost of pensions.
I guess the optimal age, from a cost benefit perspective, would be for all of us to drop dead when the children have left home.

Barry, Bromley, UK

Dear A.N.,
That's rediculous, since when was it only those on benefits who drank? I doubt most families on benefits sit down to a couple of bottles of wine with they're evening meal.
Think alcohol taxes should definitely be raised. Bring on prohibition.

Becky, Oxford, England

Why not start by decreasing the cost of soft drinks in pubs? If it cost £2 for a pint of coke, and £2 for a special offer spirit and mixer or bottle of Alco pop, many people will see the alcohol option as better value for money.

E, Bristol,

They should start in the parliamentary bars clubs and restaurants and keep their nose out of peoples lives. There are too many quangos and societies feeding all this cr*p up to MPs who are too stupid and ignorant to handle it properly. people have the right to drink themselves to death in their own home , it's the yobs in the street that need sorting out also the ones in government.

Dave Madley, Alicante, Spain

This government and its stooges wants to micro-manage our lives, and will soon be led by a man who is convinced that he knows better than anybody else on every matter and isn't interested in listening to anybody who disagrees with him. These are very troubling times. The sooner this crowd is replaced by anybody else, the better.

Jacques, Westcott,

To the Government:

GET OUT OF MY HOME

From the People of Britain.

Matt C, London,

The awnswer is simple. Make people pay for their treatment if it is caused by being drunk, smoking or illegal drugs. People will soon get the message once they've had to fork out a few hundred pounds for calling out an ambulance just because they drank too much on a Saturday night.

Luke Nicolaides, London, UK

It is claimed there is a clear link between cost and consumption. But alcohol is far, far cheaper in France and Spain than the UK, and they're not all reeling round drunk.

Keith, Alicante, Spain

i coukd not stop laughing. the government is dictatorship in disguise

P mulay, Wadebridge Cornwall,

This 'government' (for want of a better word) can start a serious assault on problem drinking by rolling back the ridiculous pub opening hours. If you create a culture where it's okay to drink anywhere at any time you can hardly complain about the health bill several years down the line.

And what, the increased revenue from all the extra alcoholic drink that has been sold since the 'relaxation' of pub opening hours and the introduction of fizzy alcoholic pop marketed at teenagers hasn't been enough to pay that mounting health bill?

C. Wilson, Burnley,

At last the government is going to approach this spiralling alcohol problem. People who give France/italy as examples of wine drinking countries should know that drunken/violent youths/people are very rarely encountered. Drunkeness is thought to be uncultured.
Additionally, in moderate muslim countries where drink is actually legal few people drink because it is socially/morally/religiously ill thought of. Perhaps uncultured. Again here there are rarely drunken/violent youths encountered.
The BMA /government should aim at driving home the message that binge drinking is uncultured and that the nation is paying heavily for their excesses.

R. Ince, Istanbul, Turkey

If this report is correct, the Government is not proposing to legislate to remove people's choices, but to educate people to make them on a more informed basis. What on earth could be wrong with that?

Tim Saunders, Auckland, New Zealand

First they came for the smokers. But I didn't speak out because I wasn't a smoker ...

Kevin, Bushey, UK

Is any of this really any of the government's business?

Dru Brooke-Taylor, Bristol,

We continually hear about the cost of treating alcohol and smoking related diseases, but the amount of tax collected from these sources. Smokers and drinkers more than pay for any treatment they may need so the government should stop the constant quest to raise yet more taxes on the dubious pretext of protecting our health and the environment.

Jim Norbury, Rossendale, UK

This Government will not be happy as long as they suspect there's a single person out there who isn't an apparatchik and is still having fun. And if you think it's bad now, wait till Brown takes over.

So we middle-aged members of the middle-class are costing the NHS money, are we? Who do they think is paying for it?

John Lynch, Whittington, UK

I tell you what....I have an excellent wheeze...let's raise the 'wine' tax. It should give the 'booze cruisers' a good laugh.

Victor Cowen , Malaga, Spain

There are more piss-artists MPs to be seen in the House of Commons boozer than in the majority of decent middle-class homes.

Brian, Newmarket,

People will react with resentment at this nannying, but the government should not be discouraged by that. It is the fate of responsible governments to be for the people, whether they like it or not. Eventually people will learn the difference between campaigns and compulsion, and will tolerate campaigns whose aims are obviously worthy.

Mike Evans, Midsomer Norton, UK

The Nanny state is well and truly alive ... expect more interference in your personal lives be it from 10 Tony Street or 10 Gordon Street. The tenant may change in Downing Street but the nanny behaviour won’t.

Simon, Hobart, Tasmania

Next the government will be banning sports such as football and Rugby due to the potential cost to the NHS of dealing with sports injuries. Surely that's what the NHS is there to do - make us better when we are ill. The government fails to realise that it is the right of people who have paid extortionate levels of tax and national insurance to receive treatment, even if they have had the odd bottle of wine over the years. What is depressing is that the NHS is happy to treat eastern Europeans with TB and illegal African immigrants with AIDS, at the expense of British People who have paid in to the system all their lives.

Alec, Kendal,

When we want doctors to tell us how we live we will tell them. The BMA or whoever have no right to tell the general population what to do. We ARE NOT responsible to them. They should do the job they've been trained to do (at the tax payers expense) i.e., cure/treat sick people. Health promotion? - more like health fascism.

Ian, Bristol,

I suspect this problem will be fixed when the idiotic welfare state stops giving people money so that they (a) don't need to go to work, and (b) can spend their additional time and money on drinking.

A.N, London, London

All you people who wanted to control smoking will really regret it before long. When you cant have a glass of wine without feeeling guilty, when you are paying a couple of hundred pounds to use the car for a longish journey - think back on how you started all this

Mike, Northampton, UK

Ha ha. Is this another ruse to cut back on the medical spending? I was impressed by a spin doctor who says that angina pectroris could strengthen heart muscles and there fore feels you can spend half an hour exercising on a couch and be healed forever. Bluntly put, "forget the operations, they cost too much. Anyway the queues are too long so you can die while you wait, so why bother trying to look for cures"
In France there are far more wine drinkers than the middle class Britons. No-one has complained and I believe the French sytem is far better than it is here. I've been through the mills here and there.
When they have shut down the pubs and wine stores, reduced the sales of cigarettes to nothing because of the restrictions, they probably would say that abstinance or oral sex is the solution to over-population and every other problem the world has to face.
The money spent on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could have been used on the NHS?

Peter Casie Chetty, Bootle, Liverpool, United Kingdom

They've got the smokers, now they're going for the drinkers. Who's next? I was reading that someone has come out with the statistic that the power used by computers is responsible for 4% of carbon emissions, of this 1% may be caused by people playing games, an unhealthy and polluting pastime. CO2, obesity, poor eyesight. They must be taxed immediately for their own good.

Simon, Chatham, Kent

This is ridiculous and dangerous behaviour.We will all be put into categories shortly;our behaviour will be monitored from the cradle to the grave.If we don't kick this gang of control freaks out,they will destroy ALL our freedoms.

Michael J Rigby, Chorley, England

I have reached the age of 61 without the government's help and I don't need it now. I enjoy a glass or two of wine during an evening and have tests every year which show no ill effects. Don't tell me about what I am costing the NHS, rather calculate the tax contribution I have made over the last forty successful years. I wish the government would leave me alone and stop telling me how to live my life.

Mike , New York, USA

The world has gone totally mad...! How having a quite bottle of wine, at home, with a few friends can be compared with the scenes total drunkenness, urinating in the street and general rioting that can be experienced on the streets of Britain on a Friday and Saturday night I have no idea.

The government should be focusing on the issues that really affect the middle-classes, paying an extortionate amount of tax (direct and indirect), having their cars crashed into by uninsured and un-taxed eastern European migrants and generally thinking what the hell am I doing still living in this country!

Seb, Derby, UK