Globe

Swiss campaign for new 0.5 alcohol level may leave public confused

None for the road ?

David Winch, UN

On January 1, 2005, Swiss highway regulations changed, making it illegal for any driver to have more than a 0.5 gram/litre blood-alcohol level. This was a sharp decline from the previous 0.8 level, and reflects the changing attitudes and tightening standards around the industrial world, including neighbouring France, where less tolerance for drinking and driving has been quickly accepted.
Some roadside publicity reflects the Swiss government’s view: “0,5… Un verre, un seul’’ , or roughly, one glass, that’s it. That may be excellent advice, but it is not a clear interpretation of what the 0.5 level means. It misses the mark, and people will figure this out.
To repeat the obvious: the dangers of drinking and driving come from a combination of lowered inhibition and a sense of exhilaration, combined with diminished skills and perceptual accuracy. In short, you may think you can drive just fine, but you can’t. Result: frequent road disasters.
No matter how much one may deplore the death and injury involved in drunken driving accidents, the fact remains that people, especially in southern Europe, drink in a variety of contexts, social and family, and these realities mean that, on some occasions, some drinking before driving is practically inevitable.
The question remains: Does this campaign best address issues about alcohol? And, Does it reflect local culture? As public health campaigners have always recognized, when government information is not explicit enough, or does not exactly match the facts, bar-stool philosophers rush in with their folk wisdom and contrived remedies, ranging in this case from hot coffee to spoonfuls of olive oil — which have no effect on blood-alcohol levels — to fanciful safe-drinking levels and tips for driving.

The big question

Sure enough, as the New Year dawned, the popular press rushed to fill this information vacuum, including the widely circulated Le Matin and L’Illustré. The former breathlessly headlined a report on alcohol research first published in the Austrian newspaper Blick, suggesting that, in fact, up to three glasses of beer (1 litre) would not immediately put a drinker over the 0.5 mark, nor would four to five glasses (1.5 litres) of light beer (3 per cent alcohol). The implication seemed to be: the government is misleading you, see what you can actually drink!
Meanwhile, in a more sophisticated approach, the glossy weekly L’Illustré featured a cover article with local celebrities invited to a restaurant meal on the eve of the 0.5 law, where they would try a breathalyzer test after imbibing four glasses of wine each, or more than half a bottle.
The celebrity diners started with a white wine apéritif, followed by a classic Swiss Romand lakeside meal of tossed salad, filet de perche meuniere, then dessert.
An officer of the Vaud police then tested the seven individuals, starting 20 minutes after their last drink. Result: no one legitimately broke the 0.5 level (one participant had quietly sipped some grappa on the side). Some diners said they would not feel comfortable driving, a few felt drowsy and one felt like going to sleep — yet all were at that moment legal to take the wheel in Switzerland.
In parallel, one drinker with a stocky frame (88 kilos) consumed the same amount of wine — while eating no meal. He was also tested, and found to be far over the 0.5 limit, approaching the heavily sanctioned 0.8 level: quite a difference. This shows the effect that food has, drastically slowing the rate at which alcohol reaches the bloodstream.
One might say: Quite a cultural difference, drinking with food, or not.

Rules or culture ?

The point is: rules invite rule-bending. Culture can be more effective in changing behaviour and punishing violators. The changing cultural context is hard not to see elsewhere. Drunk drivers like Dean Martin were an object of mirth in old films, but now are as taboo as cigarette smoking on TV news. Laughing at drunk driving has flipped to become a dead-serious PC issue.
The message is out: less alcohol will be tolerated by police and society generally. For example, Geneva restaurants have responded by linking up to taxi services more often, sometimes in the form of a taxi coupon included with the meal, and by offering more low-alcohol beers, 3 per cent rather than the stiffer 6 per cent served in both France and Switzerland.
In France, the typical drunk-driving fatality is a lone driver on a weekend night, on a nonurban stretch of road, which results in one death – the driver’s. This suggests a non-social or even anti-social context that has to be better addressed. – Again, how?

The wine culture

Public health warnings, however, have to work around the local culture, and in southern Europe, where wine accompanies every element of social life, prohibition is unthinkable and even U.S.-style “sensible shoes” one-drink advice may not be accepted. Southern Europe does not match northern or eastern Europe in this area, and wine and food go together to a far great degree here. Can visits to country chalets and evening meals out with friends be reconciled with “designated drivers”, a good but imperfect solution, and counter-intuitive for many?
Further, science and culture cannot be allowed to collide. State policy should be clear and detailed and encourage informal helpers like the designated driver and taxi coupons, but cannot be seen as a neo-Prohibition. Especially at a time when science is so affirmative about the health benefits of red wine, in particular.

One drink, that’s it? Not so simple, but certainly worth talking about. Cheers!

The author is an editor at UN Geneva.
(dwinch@unog.ch)