Here to stay? Policy changes in alcohol home delivery and "to-go" sales during and after COVID-19 in the United States.
Here to stay? Policy changes in alcohol home delivery and "to-go" sales during and after COVID-19 in the United States.
复制标题
在这里停留？
DOI：
10.1111/dar.13789
复制
发表时间：
2024
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Probst,Charlotte
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Lemp,JuliaM;Kilian,Carolin;Probst,Charlotte
于2019冠状病毒病疫情初期，美国各地推出立法改革，扩大送酒上门服务及“外带”酒类销售选择，为企业及零售商提供经济援助。利用酒精政策信息系统的数据，我们研究了这些变化是否在2019冠状病毒病紧急情况的高峰阶段之后持续存在，并探讨了对公共卫生的影响。州一级政策数据的说明显示，酒类配送和“外带”酒类销售的自由化在整个两年期间（2020年和2021年）持续，有迹象表明，这些变化中有许多在疫情后已经或将成为永久性的。这引起了人们对监管不足的关注，特别是在防止未成年人获得酒精方面，以及随之而来的饮酒习惯的变化。在这篇评论中，我们强调需要对这一不断变化的政策格局的公共卫生影响进行严格的实证评估，并强调与酒精供应增加相关的潜在风险，包括酒精相关死亡率和其他酒精相关伤害的相应增加，如家庭暴力。政策制定者应仔细考虑公共卫生后果，其成本可能会超过长期的短期经济利益。
During the early phase of the COVID‐19 pandemic, legislative changes that expanded alcohol home delivery and options for “to‐go” alcohol sales were introduced across the United States to provide economic relief to establishments and retailers. Using data from the Alcohol Policy Information System, we examined whether these changes have persisted beyond the peak phase of the COVID‐19 emergency and explored the implications for public health. Illustration of state‐level policy data reveals that the liberalisation of alcohol delivery and “to‐go” alcohol sales has continued throughout a 2‐year period (2020 and 2021), with indications that many of these changes have or will become permanent after the pandemic. This raises concerns about inadequate regulation, particularly in preventing underage access to alcohol, and ensuing changes in drinking practices. In this commentary, we highlight the need for rigorous empirical evaluation of the public health impact of this changing policy landscape and underscore the potential risks associated with increased alcohol availability, including a corresponding increase in alcohol‐attributable mortality and other alcohol‐related harm, such as domestic violence. Policy makers should carefully consider public health consequences, whose costs may surpass short‐term economic interests in the long term.