OBJECTIVE: Moderate alcohol consumption is associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes. This reduced risk might be explained by improved insulin sensitivity or improved glycemic status, but results of intervention studies on this relation are inconsistent. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of intervention studies investigating the effect of alcohol consumption on insulin sensitivity and glycemic status.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched up to August 2014. Intervention studies on the effect of alcohol consumption on biological markers of insulin sensitivity or glycemic status of at least 2 weeks' duration were included. Investigators extracted data on study characteristics, outcome measures, and methodological quality.
RESULTS: Fourteen intervention studies were included in a meta-analysis of six glycemic end points. Alcohol consumption did not influence estimated insulin sensitivity (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.08 [-0.09 to 0.24]) or fasting glucose (SMD 0.07 [-0.11 to 0.24]) but reduced HbA1c (SMD -0.62 [-1.01 to -0.23]) and fasting insulin concentrations (SMD -0.19 [-0.35 to -0.02]) compared with the control condition. Alcohol consumption among women reduced fasting insulin (SMD -0.23 [-0.41 to -0.04]) and tended to improve insulin sensitivity (SMD 0.16 [-0.04 to 0.37]) but not among men. Results were similar after excluding studies with high alcohol dosages (>40 g/day) and were not influenced by dosage and duration of the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Although the studies had small sample sizes and were of short duration, the current evidence suggests that moderate alcohol consumption may decrease fasting insulin and HbA1c concentrations among nondiabetic subjects. Alcohol consumption might improve insulin sensitivity among women but did not do so overall.
PURPOSE: The Dutch national policy regarding alcohol and youth relies on retailers' willingness to refuse to sell alcohol to underage customers. This study examined unobtrusively whether supermarkets and liquor stores do indeed comply with the legal age restrictions for alcohol sales.
METHODS: A research protocol was developed based on the methodology of mystery shopping. Using the protocol, 150 supermarkets and 75 liquor stores were visited by 15-year-old adolescents who tried to buy soft alcoholic beverages (legal age, 16 years), and 75 liquor stores were visited by 17-year-old adolescents who tried to buy strong alcoholic beverages (legal age, 18).
RESULTS: Of all 300 buying attempts, 86% were successful. In supermarkets, 88% of all attempts succeeded. In liquor stores, a difference was found between the purchase of strong alcohol by 17-year-olds (89%) and the purchase of soft alcoholic beverages by 15-year-olds (77%). In only 71 of all visits, mystery shoppers were asked for an ID. In 39% of these cases, they were still able to buy alcohol. Female adolescents were more successful in buying alcohol than male adolescents.
CONCLUSIONS: The results show that supermarkets and liquor stores generally fail to see the need for extra care when young customers try to buy alcohol. Legal age restrictions without enforcement and facilitation clearly do not suffice to protect adolescents from early exposure to alcohol.
BACKGROUND: The serious negative health consequences of heavy drinking among adolescents is cause for concern, especially among adolescents aged 15 to 20 years with a low educational background. In the Netherlands, there is a lack of alcohol prevention programs directed to the drinking patterns of this specific target group. The study described in this protocol will test the effectiveness of a web-based brief alcohol intervention that aims to reduce alcohol use among heavy drinking adolescents aged 15 to 20 years with a low educational background.
METHODS/DESIGN: The effectiveness of the What Do You Drink (WDYD) web-based brief alcohol intervention will be tested among 750 low-educated, heavy drinking adolescents. It will use a two-arm parallel group cluster randomized controlled trial. Classes of adolescents from educational institutions will be randomly assigned to either the experimental (n = 375: web-based brief alcohol intervention) or control condition (n = 375: no intervention). Primary outcomes measures will be: 1) the percentage of participants who drink within the normative limits of the Dutch National Health Council for low-risk drinking, 2) reductions in mean weekly alcohol consumption, and 3) frequency of binge drinking. The secondary outcome measures include the alcohol-related cognitions, attitudes, self-efficacy, and subjective norms, which will be measured at baseline and at one and six months after the intervention.
DISCUSSION: This study protocol presents the study design of a two-arm parallel-group randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of the WDYD web-based brief alcohol intervention. We hypothesized a reduction in mean weekly alcohol consumption and in the frequency of binge drinking in the experimental condition, resulting from the web-based brief alcohol intervention, compared to the control condition.
During the last decade, approaches to evidence-based medicine, with its heavy reliance on the randomized clinical trial (RCT), have been adapted to nutrition science and policy. However, there are distinct differences between the evidence that can be obtained for the testing of drugs using RCTs and those needed for the development of nutrient requirements or dietary guidelines. Although RCTs present one approach toward understanding the efficacy of nutrient interventions, the innate complexities of nutrient actions and interactions cannot always be adequately addressed through any single research design. Because of the limitations inherent in RCTs, particularly of nutrients, it is suggested that nutrient policy decisions will have to be made using the totality of the available evidence. This may mean action at a level of certainty that is different from what would be needed in the evaluation of drug efficacy. Similarly, it is judged that the level of confidence needed in defining nutrient requirements or dietary recommendations to prevent disease can be different from that needed to make recommendations to treat disease. In brief, advancing evidence-based nutrition will depend upon research approaches that include RCTs but go beyond them. Also necessary to this advance is the assessing, in future human studies, of covariates such as biomarkers of exposure and response, and the archiving of samples for future evaluation by emerging technologies.