In 1964, the Surgeon General issued an advisory on smoking and cancer, which eventually led to a reduction in smoking prevalence, and smoking-related cancers and deaths. In January 2025, the Surgeon General issued an advisory on alcohol and cancer risk, highlighting the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s designation of alcohol as a Group 1 carcinogen, alongside tobacco, asbestos, and formaldehyde. New research has found that public support for strengthening warning labels and banning outdoor advertising for alcohol can differ by political ideology. These findings will be shared at the 49th annual scientific meeting of the Research Society on Alcohol (RSA) in San Antonio, Texas.
“Alcohol use is common in the U.S.,” said Sanjay Shete, professor of biostatistics and epidemiology at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, “given that 72 percent of Americans report consumption of one or more drinks per week. Yet alcohol use [also] increases the risk of seven types of cancer: breast, colorectal, esophagus, liver, mouth, throat, and voice box, and contributes to nearly 100,000 cancer cases and 20,000 deaths each year.” Shete added that a Group 1 carcinogen classification is only given when “there is enough evidence to conclude that it can cause cancer in humans.”
Shete’s research was designed to assess public support for two major alcohol-control policies: one, banning outdoor advertising of alcohol, such as on billboards and bus stops, and two, requiring specific warnings about cancer on alcohol-containing beverages. The study was based on data from the 2024 Health Information National Trends Survey, conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute.
“We had two primary predictors of interest,” explained Shete. “One, political ideology, as understanding political ideologies is important, as it can influence government decision-making, and two, beliefs about alcohol’s association with cancer risk, because individuals’ beliefs play a key role in the adoption of healthy behavioral changes, as well as support or opposition to control policies.”
Shete and his colleagues found that, compared to liberals, conservatives had higher odds of being opposed to the two alcohol control policies examined. They also found that individuals who believed alcohol has no effect on cancer risk had higher odds of opposition to these policies
“It is important to note that about 42.8 percent of liberals, 49 percent of moderates, and 43.6 percent of conservatives neither support nor oppose the banning of outdoor advertising of alcohol,” said Shete. “This neutrality could be due to a lack of awareness that there is a causal link between alcohol consumption and increased cancer risk. Thus, I believe the first step towards gathering bipartisan support is to increase the awareness that data showing the causal link between alcohol consumption and cancer risk is based on rigorous and reproducible scientific methods. Also, cancer does not discriminate based on ideology. We need to move away from political ideology to pursue our common goal of eliminating cancer.”
Shete recommended several measures to address knowledge gaps. “Revised drinking guidelines, banning alcohol advertisements, adding warning labels to alcohol beverages, targeted messaging for high-risk groups, national awareness campaigns, promoting events such as “Dry January,” implementing recent Surgeon General recommendations and, most importantly, assessing alcohol consumption status at every clinical encounter,” he said. “All of these helped us in the past to reduce tobacco use and would provide a roadmap to reduce alcohol use.”