I'm finally exposing the alcohol industry...

Today , I'm exposing internal documents , marketing tactics and the science that they've been hiding . Once we pull back the curtain and you see what's going on behind the scenes , you will never look at alcohol the same again . But before we expose their tactics , let's start with their most powerful weapon , and here's where it starts to get really dark .

While they're pushing these empty responsible drinking messages , they're actively hiding something far more sinister . So drink-responsibly messages are ubiquitous in booze commercials and marketing campaigns . It's actually very difficult to find an advertisement that doesn't have it .

A 2014 study found that these messages were present in 87% of alcohol ads placed in a sample of US magazines between 2008 and 2010 . What's fascinating is that these messages are not federally mandated . They are completely voluntary , the result of the industry's own internal code of conduct . What's the catch ?

Why does the industry bother with spending money on a campaign which , at face value , could hurt their bottom line ? Well , this same 2014 study gives us the glaringly obvious answer . Campaign is a sham designed to fail .

For starters , the drink responsibly messaging is always in finer print than the main part of the advertisement , often so small as to be barely visible to the naked eye . It's also always at the bottom of the page or somewhere else on the margins , so the reader isn't likely to even notice it in the first place .

But the message is so vague and ambiguous that it's basically useless . The study looked at over 1500 of these ads and none of them really explained or defined what responsible means . It's so ambiguous that it can mean anything to anybody . It's completely devoid of practical , actionable information .

Nor was there any mention of how many drinks count as responsible 1 , two , three , four , anybody's guess . A handful of messages that elaborated on the basic drink responsible message mentioned drunk driving . This is the industry's favourite red herring . Even though drunk driving deaths account for well under 10% of alcohol-related mortality , none of this is an accident .

The basic intention of all of this is to promote an image of corporate responsibility , improve the public's perception of an industry that is responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths annually and an untold level of societal pain . The second main task of this message is to increase sales . They say drink responsibly , but the keyword really is drink .

This is the only part of the message that is unambiguous and actionable . Be that as it may , the slogan has been so successful that it has permeated all aspects of public life .

Even if you go to your family doctor and you tell them that you have a drinking problem , the first thing they'll probably do is give you the received wisdom Put down drinking moderation . Drink the recommended daily allowance , drink responsibly . It's no wonder so many millions of people can't free themselves from this evil addiction .

And speaking of evil , what they're hiding about cancer is going to shock you . Alcohol has been internationally recognised as a carcinogen since the late 1980s . The World Health Organisation , centres for Disease Control , the International Agency for Research on Cancer and every other health organization unambiguously and without reservation state that it causes cancer .

Drinking increases the risk of cancer in a dose-dependent fashion . The more you drink , the higher your risk , and for some types of cancer , like in the breast , the risk goes up from the very first drink . In other words , there is no safe limit .

According to the National Cancer Institute , heavy drinkers have a 5-fold higher risk of oral cavity , pharynx and osvagal cancers and a 2.6-fold higher risk of larynx cancer . They also have a roughly 2-fold increase in liver cancer risk and 50% increase in colorectal . Women who drink heavily also have a 60% higher risk of developing breast cancer .

What's really shocking , though , is how completely ignorant the public is of this . For example , a 2018 survey in the UK asked participants to lift the health risks of drinking . Amazingly , only 13% of respondents mentioned cancer .

A similar study out of Canada found that only 24.5% of respondents answered yes when they flat out asked if they believe alcohol causes cancer . Similar low awareness rates are almost universal around the world . This is obviously no accident , but the result of a systematic and multifaceted campaign by Big Alcohol to suppress this knowledge .

Their efforts are twofold Firstly , block any regulation that aims to put warning labels or any other information on drinks . This is why there are generally no warning labels at all on alcohol packaging other maybe than our favourite drink responsibly garbage .

Just compare this to a cigarette pack that's basically covered in warnings and graphic images of tumours and whatever . For example , in 2017 , the alcohol industry blocked a regional Canadian government's attempt to study the effects of placing a label on bottles warning about cancer . Note the industry didn't block actual legislation mandating a cancer label .

They blocked an experiment that would test if adding a cancer label modified consumers' behaviour . This is how terrified they are of this dirty little secret getting out . After the experiment ran for one month , the regional government caved into pressure and threats from the industry and scrapped it . The second aspect of the industry's campaign is informational .

In their social responsibility campaigns and programmes they generally just ignore this cancer risk . They just don't mention it at all . But on the really rare instances where they do , they intentionally create as much confusion as possible . Sometimes they will outright lie and say that there is no cancer risk .

A variation of this is to say that there is no cancer risk for light or moderate drinking , when the data clearly shows this is not true . Other times they obfuscate the risk by acknowledging that there is a link at high consumption but suggesting that a low-dose alcohol might actually protect against some types of cancer . It's absolute nonsense and they know it .

Other times they just paint cancer as this really complicated disease where everything basically interacts with everything else , almost trying to remove the attention from booze .

Consider this statement from a non-profit funded by the industry Alcohol has been identified as a known human carcinogen by the International Agency of Research on Cancer , along with over 1,000 others , including solvents and chemical compounds , certain drugs , viral infection , solar radiation from exposure to sunlight and processed meat .

Can you not see how they've spun it to deflect attention from the fact that every single drink increases the risk of cancer ? It's insanity . Now a very quick interruption .

If you want to learn how to control your drinking quickly without AA willpower , rehabs or anything like that , then what you want to do is click the link in the description to access a totally free video training . Once you've clicked the link , a new page will pop up .

You'll put your name and email address in and then a new video will immediately start playing that shows you how to control your drinking in as little as 48 hours . It'll be like nothing you've ever seen before . So definitely go ahead and click the link down below to access it , but it's going to show you how to control your drinking quickly .

See , hiding cancer risks was just the beginning . You want to know their next target your kids . So up until a few decades ago , the only drinks that you could get were basically wine , beer and distilled spirits like whiskey or vodka . The problem with these is that they're all pretty disgusting , especially to a first-time drinker . People are like teenagers .

I remember my first drink I spat it out and their natural reaction would be to spit it out in disgust as well , maybe even throw up . And it makes sense , given that ethanol is a toxic industrial chemical .

As an answer to this problem , in the 1980s and 90s , a new class of low-cost alcoholic beverages hit the market , starting with wine coolers in the US and drinks like Bacardi Breeze of another Alcopops in the UK . These products ticked all the boxes for first-time drinkers . They had low alcohol content , often 3-5% .

They were loaded with sugars and artificial flavours to not only sweeten up the drink but also mask the foul taste of alcohol . The bottles and cans also resembled that of a soda pop , and they were often sold right next to non-alcoholic drinks on the same shelf .

They were intended to make the transition from a soda pop to alcohol as smooth and effortless as possible . And last but not least , these so-called flavoured alcoholic beverages were intended to remove the stigma of drinking amongst younger people , in particular the underage .

According to one recent report , quote predatory marketing practices and targeted ad campaigns by large alcohol conglomerates , as well as product placement , packaging like energy drinks and pricing at local liquor stores contribute to youth acceptability of Alcopop sales .

The goal of marketing is not only to expose the user to the product , but to engage the user to incorporate Alcopops into their lives . On average , youth are exposed to a minimum of three alcohol ads daily . The results have surpassed the wildest expectations of the alcohol industry .

The successors started with the very first wine coolers back in the 1980s , up to 35% of which were consumed by school kids . In the US today , 13% of 8-graders and over 40% of 12-graders report having drank during the past month , and it's predominantly flavoured alcohol beverages .

The average age of the person's first drink fell from 17.6 in 1965 to 15.9 by the turn of the century a whopping reduction of nearly two years . Researchers report similar findings whenever in the world these drinks are sold , all while the industry continues to pretend that they're doing their best to prevent underage drinking .

Now , do you really know what's in your drink ? Well , speaking of these new drinks , they're pushing on teenagers . There's something even more disturbing that you need to know about , and that's what's actually in them . You see , back in the days of wine , beer and spirits , you basically knew what you were drinking .

Sure , wine and beer manufacturers maybe weren't always 100% transparent about some of the additives , but that's always been the case with most of what you buy from a supermarket . Nowadays , the industry has evolved things to the point where you literally have no idea what you are drinking .

Next time you're at a supermarket , take a random look at some Alka-Pops or hard seltzers . Often , the can doesn't even make an attempt to describe itself , not even something as vague as hard seltzer or hard lemonade . If you look at the fine print , you'll just find something like a flavoured alcoholic drink or flavoured malt beverage .

Now , believe it or not , these drinks are legally sold as beer beverages . This is what allows them to be widely advertised and sold in places like gas stations , which you couldn't do for distilled spirits . To do this , the manufacturers start with a beer base , which is treated to remove the taste and aroma of beer .

Then , on top of the beer base , they then add the various flavours to give the product its distinctive taste . That's the legal theory at least , but the reality is much different , as the industry consistently breaks the rules .

A federal investigation a few years back found that quote over 75% of the alcohol in most of the flavoured malt beverages is derived from alcohol-flavouring materials and that in some cases , the figure rose to more than 99% .

In other words , rather than the alcohol coming from the beer bases , it comes from opaque sources in the added alcohol flavourings which are usually distilled . Nobody , including the regulators , has any idea where this alcohol comes from , and things are even worse when it comes to the rest of the flavourings .

Unlike foods , which are regulated by the FDA , alcoholic drinks are regulated by the Alcohol and Tobacco Bureau , formerly known as ATF . Now , the ATF doesn't even require alcohol manufacturers to list their full ingredients on the bottle . For most beverages , all that's required is the location where the bottling took place and the alcohol by volume or ABV .

So you have the bizarre situation where a can of soda pop has this long list of ingredients on the label , but a can of alcohol sold right next to it with even more chemicals in it lists basically nothing . This is a total victory of big alcohol over the health interests of the public . Now you might be wondering how do they get away with all of this ?

Well , the answer lies in who is funding the science . Do you know how there's always talk in the media about oil companies funding research to disprove climate change ? Or maybe you've read about the older scandal with the massive health research program that was set up and funded by the tobacco industry .

Well , whilst you might know all of this , you've probably never heard that the alcohol industry does the exact same thing , and it's on a truly massive scale .

A recent independent report searched the major scientific databases for research papers written by affiliates of the alcohol industry or funded directly by it . The search turned up over 13,000 results . This is a massive understatement of the actual number , because up until 2008 , the main scientific database , web of Science , did not capture funding data .

The three main areas of research were biology , chemistry and human health . This last category accounted for nearly 4,000 research papers . Again , this is a massive underestimate . The real number is , without a doubt , several times higher . Now , how does this massive injection of funds into research on human health serve the industry's goals ?

Do they , for example , flat out falsify study data to turn results on their head ? I have little doubt that things like this sometimes happen , but they're the expectation rather than the rule . It's actually far simpler than that . All researchers are dependent on funding for their research . It's basically their oxygen , and it's sad to say .

But who controls the funding controls the research . A good example , involves the so-called cardio-protective benefits of alcohol , the idea that low quantities of alcohol somewhat protect against future heart disease .

A recent commentary by a team of doctors in New Zealand noted something very interesting those reviews and meta-analysis on the topic that gave more enthusiastic results in support of this idea tended to be funded by the alcohol industry . The opposite was true for the studies who did not receive this funding .

At the end of the day , it's not possible for the alcohol industry , even with all their unlimited money , to really win a debate like this . The data is simply not on their side . But they know that they don't have to do this . All they have to do is put doubt into people's minds .