Report on the Suppression of the Alcohol Intake and Health Study and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

This report details the suppression of a federally commissioned study on the health impacts of alcohol consumption in the United States. The non-publication of this research directly undermines progress toward key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Background: Public Health Policy and Sustainable Development Goal 3

The Mandate for Public Health Information

In early 2022, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) commissioned the Alcohol Intake and Health Study to provide a comprehensive scientific review of alcohol’s health effects. The study’s findings were intended to inform the 2025 federal dietary guidelines, a critical public health tool. Providing citizens with accurate, evidence-based health information is a fundamental responsibility of effective governance and a prerequisite for achieving public health objectives.

Alignment with SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

The dissemination of information regarding the health risks of alcohol is essential for achieving SDG 3. Specifically, it addresses the following targets:

• Target 3.4: Reduce by one-third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases (NCDs) through prevention and treatment. Alcohol is a significant risk factor for NCDs, including multiple forms of cancer.
• Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including the harmful use of alcohol. Public awareness of risks is a cornerstone of prevention strategy.

Current data indicates that less than 50 percent of Americans are aware that alcohol is a carcinogen, highlighting a critical information gap that obstructs progress on these targets.

The Alcohol Intake and Health Study: Key Findings and Implications

Methodology and Scope

The study’s authors conducted a comprehensive review of observational studies and developed a statistical model tailored to the U.S. population to estimate the mortality effects of alcohol consumption. This approach was designed to ensure the findings were directly relevant to American public health policy.

Principal Conclusions on Health Risks

The study’s conclusions, consistent with the global scientific consensus, present a clear picture of alcohol-related harm:

• The negative health effects of alcohol consumption begin at low levels and increase sharply with higher intake.
• Alcohol use is associated with increased mortality for seven types of cancer: colorectal, breast, liver, oral, pharynx, larynx, and esophagus.
• Women face a higher risk of alcohol-attributable cancer per drink than men.
• On average, individuals who die from an alcohol-attributable cause die 15 years prematurely, a direct contradiction to the goals of SDG 3.4.

Suppression of Scientific Evidence and Institutional Integrity

Timeline of Events

The process of commissioning and subsequently burying the report reveals significant institutional failures:

1. April 2022: HHS launches the Alcohol Intake and Health Study.
2. December 2022: Congress mandates a separate study from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which would later be criticized for its methodology and authors’ reported connections to the alcohol industry.
3. 2023-2024: The alcohol industry and allied lawmakers actively campaign to discredit the HHS study and its authors.
4. March 2025: The final report of the Alcohol Intake and Health Study is submitted to the Trump administration.
5. March-August 2025: The administration does not publish the report or provide an explanation for the delay.
6. August 2025: The study’s co-authors are informed that the administration does not intend to publish the study in any form.

Undermining SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The suppression of this government-commissioned report represents a failure to uphold the principles of SDG 16:

• Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels. The decision to bury a scientific report due to political and industry pressure demonstrates a lack of transparency and accountability.
• Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making. The actions suggest that decision-making has been influenced by corporate interests rather than being responsive to public health needs.

The Role of Industry and Competing Analyses

A Tale of Two Reports

The controversy is compounded by the existence of two conflicting government-mandated reports on the same topic.

• Alcohol Intake and Health Study (HHS): Concluded that health risks from alcohol begin at low consumption levels and increase exponentially. Its methodology included original modeling specific to the U.S. population and focused on mortality directly linked to alcohol.
• National Academies Report: Concluded that moderate drinking could have modest benefits and found a weak association with most cancers. This report has been criticized by unaffiliated researchers for its methodology, including the exclusion of many studies showing harmful effects.

The prioritization of the industry-favorable National Academies report over the more critical HHS study suggests a significant conflict of interest that compromises public health policy and undermines the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), which calls for effective and ethical partnerships.

Conclusion: Consequences for Public Health and Sustainable Development

The failure to publish the Alcohol Intake and Health Study is a significant setback for public health in the United States and a direct impediment to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. By withholding scientific evidence on the harms of alcohol, the government prevents citizens from making informed health decisions, thereby hindering progress on reducing premature mortality from NCDs (SDG 3.4). Furthermore, this act of suppression erodes trust in public institutions and demonstrates a failure of transparency and accountability, in direct opposition to the principles of SDG 16. Without access to independent, evidence-based information, national strategies to combat preventable disease are compromised, jeopardizing commitments made under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  This goal is central to the article, which focuses on the health consequences of alcohol consumption. The text discusses the direct link between alcohol and non-communicable diseases like cancer, as well as overall mortality. The entire purpose of the suppressed “Alcohol Intake and Health Study” was to provide scientific evidence to inform public health policies and dietary guidelines, thereby promoting the well-being of the population.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article highlights significant issues related to governance and institutional integrity. It details how the alcohol industry and political allies have allegedly influenced government processes to suppress a scientific study. This speaks directly to the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions (Target 16.6) and ensuring public access to information (Target 16.10). The decision to bury the report and potentially favor another, more industry-friendly one, undermines transparent and responsive decision-making.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.4: By 2030, reduce by one third premature mortality from non-communicable diseases through prevention and treatment and promote mental health and well-being.

     The article directly addresses this target by discussing the “Alcohol Intake and Health Study,” which found that alcohol use is associated with increased mortality for seven types of cancer. The report’s conclusion that “Men and women who die from an alcohol-attributable cause die 15 years earlier on average” is a clear reference to premature mortality from non-communicable diseases.

   • Target 3.5: Strengthen the prevention and treatment of substance abuse, including narcotic drug abuse and harmful use of alcohol.

     The article’s focus is on the “harmful use of alcohol.” The study was commissioned to inform new dietary guidelines, which are a primary tool for preventing harmful consumption patterns. By providing clear evidence of risks even at low consumption levels, the study aimed to strengthen prevention efforts, a goal that is being thwarted by its suppression.

2. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

     The article describes a failure of institutional transparency. The authors of the study submitted their final report to the Trump administration in March, but “the report never surfaced, and… they received no explanation for the radio silence.” This act of burying a government-commissioned study without explanation demonstrates a lack of accountability and transparency.

   • Target 16.10: Ensure public access to information and protect fundamental freedoms, in accordance with national legislation and international agreements.

     This target is at the core of the conflict described. The article states that what “the alcohol industry fears more than increased taxes is increased knowledge about the risks associated with drinking alcohol.” The effort to bury the study is portrayed as a direct attempt to “prevent the American people from gaining the knowledge that they need to make the best decisions for themselves,” thus impeding public access to vital health information.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for SDG 3 Targets

   • Mortality rates from non-communicable diseases (related to Target 3.4): The article provides specific data points from the study that can be used as indicators of alcohol-related mortality risk. It states, “A man drinking one drink per day has roughly a one in 1,000 chance of dying from any alcohol-related cause… Increase that to two drinks per day, and the odds increase to one in 25.” This quantifies the mortality risk associated with different consumption levels.
   • Prevalence of alcohol consumption (related to Target 3.5): The article explicitly mentions an indicator for alcohol use. It cites a Gallup poll that “recorded a historic low in the percentage of US adults who drink: 54 percent, down from 67 percent in 2022.” This statistic directly measures the level of alcohol consumption in the population.

2. Indicators for SDG 16 Targets

   • Public awareness of health risks (related to Target 16.10): The article implies an indicator for measuring the effectiveness of public access to information. It notes that “the percentage of Americans who know that alcohol is a carcinogen has been rising, it is still below 50 percent.” This percentage serves as a measurable indicator of public knowledge, which is directly affected by the availability of scientific information.
   • Publication of government-funded reports (related to Target 16.6 and 16.10): The central theme of the article—the non-publication of the “Alcohol Intake and Health Study”—serves as a qualitative indicator. Whether government-funded scientific reports intended for public guidance are released or suppressed can be used to measure institutional transparency and commitment to public access to information.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: vox.com