Is alcohol too expensive? It may seem that way when we’re lining up at our local LCBO. Spend a Friday night in the emergency department with me, though, and the question takes on a whole new meaning.

I have been in practice for barely a year, but it takes only one patient mowed down by a drunk driver to make the answer clear. On another night, a man nearly dies after falling down a flight of stairs. His wife cries while trying to decide whether to look after him or go to a shelter because he might become violent again. And then there is the long line of frail patients with swollen abdomens waiting for their liver transplant.

Yes, alcohol is too expensive. Problems with alcohol in Ontario exhaust strained government budgets, generate societal costs and degrade the health of our community. Yet some believe that lower prices and greater access is the solution.

A recent study commissioned by the Ontario Convenience Store Association predicts lower prices for consumers and higher government revenues if alcohol sales were expanded to corner stores. At face value, this seems like a win-win, but the analysis ignores a critical economic consideration.

Increased consumption of alcohol is linked with a higher incidence of traffic accidents, liver disease, heart disease, violence, child abuse and suicide. This increased disease burden reduces our productivity. While we might save a couple of dollars picking up our favourite wine, the societal costs and personal tragedies will more than make up for it.

The Canadian Public Health Association examined this issue in a 2011 report, stating that “alcohol is the second leading risk factor for death, disease and disability.” It goes on to note that in 2002 the costs of alcohol consumption in Canada included an estimated $7.1 billion in lost productivity, $3.3 billion in health-care expenses and $3.1 billion in law enforcement spending.

Selling in convenience stores may mean lower prices for buyers but a study by the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health found that privatized alcohol sales would result in an extra $800 million to $1.6 billion in social costs: “these results clearly demonstrate that alcohol retail monopoly has a key role in preventing alcohol-related harm, and therefore should be retained.”

We don’t need to rely on abstract projections to know what will happen. Privatization of alcohol sales in Alberta since the 1980s has been linked with a substantial increase in suicides and criminal offences. Further west, a new report from the Centre for Addictions Research in British Columbia shows that a 10 per cent increase in liquor stores between 2002 and 2009 was associated with a 2 per cent rise in deaths due to alcohol.

Is it really worth losing our young people to car accidents to pay a little less for booze?

Don’t get me wrong: alcohol plays an important role in social life (and national identity). In moderate amounts it can even have some beneficial health effects. However, we should not rely on an industry lobby or political ideology to inform our decisions.

Some politicians want to make this about choice. People do not choose to become addicted to alcohol, or develop permanent liver failure, or miss work, or become victims of a drunk driver.

The paramedics, nurses, police officers and social workers I work with all understand these problems. Economists and researchers get it, too. Nevertheless, when it comes to policy-making, the real costs and the real suffering don’t get much attention.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

If we’re going to make this about dollars and cents, let’s look at the whole picture. If politicians want to treat us “like adults,” we should have an intelligent, adult discussion, not just a simple-minded “cheaper is better” philosophy. If we can handle our liquor, we can handle the facts about who should sell it.