Last Monday the European Commission reported that cosmetics manufacturers selling their products within the EU have agreed that they will provide consumers with more information about potential side effects of the products, as well as more detailed descriptions of what the products contain.

Here is the catch. The cosmetics industry agreed to provide customers with on-request information about their products, which means that concerned customers have to actively seek out the information. There is of course nothing wrong with this. However the cosmetics industry agreed to this move because it was better than the alternative, which was to print costly leaflets similar to those included with pharmaceutical products. So basically the European Commission had given the cosmetics industry an offer they could not refuse. This seems to have become the norm in the European Union.

EU industry commissioner Gunter Verheugen said in his statement: “This guidance on information makes life easier for consumers and industry. Consumers can have access to full information on composition and on undesirable effects of cosmetics.”

Also in the cards, but avoided by the industry, was a potential compromise of the manufacturers intellectual property rights. It was agreed that the value of substances may be indicated approximately or as situated between certain amounts so as not to compromise commercial secrecy or intellectual property rights. No wonder that the industry agreed to the European Commission’s offer, it was much cheaper than the alternative and did not include an undermining of the producers’ property rights.

It is truly amazing how the European Commission can continue to spin its otherwise destructive policies into voluntary agreements with the industry.

Later this month the European Commission’s DG SANCO (Directorate General for Health and Consumer Affairs) is expected to publish a new proposal on Europe’s policy towards the consumption of alcoholic drinks. Unfortunately there are indications that the DG SANCO will move further towards a ‘one size fits all’ policy, which would confuse the use of alcoholic beverages with abuse of alcoholic beverages.

This move is not surprising. It is a general policy drift that the European Union, European Governments and indeed the US government have undertaken throughout the past decades. It is a drift where consumers are seen as more and more irresponsible. They are seen as children who should be guided by the parents (in this case the government).

This moralization created by the European policy makers will have a harmful effect in the context of alcoholic beverages, just like what we have seen with regard to many other products. A moralization policy process rather than an evidence-based policy process will ultimately alienate the public from the politicians.

A recent report published by the Weinberg Group underlines the need for evidence-based policies to tackle alcohol-related problems in society. While the report, which was reviewed by an independent scientific panel, is focused on alcohol it seems safe to draw parallels to many other areas of the DG SANCO’s work.

According to a press release by the Brewers of Europe the independent scientific panel concluded that “any EU policies on alcohol-related harm should be formulated and implemented taking into account regional, national and local differences in the consumption and misuse of alcohol.”

In the press release the Secretary-General of The Brewers of Europe, Mr. Rodolphe de Looz-Corswarem, commenting on the report, stated that “Europe’s brewers recognise that problems related to the misuse of alcohol – both in terms of health issues and anti-social behaviour – exist in some parts of Europe. However, the conclusions of the independent panel demonstrate that there is no scientific justification for pan-European regulation to reduce alcohol consumption.

Mr de Looz-Corswarem correctly argues that some confuse alcohol consumption in general with the abuse of alcoholic drinks. The same can be said of many other substances – as we all know, too much of anything is potentially harmful.

Mr de Looz-Corswarem continues: “Policies that are not evidence-based, and that do not consider cultural and regional differences, will fail to deal with the social problems, while at the same time generating a rising level of political objections”.

The DG SANCO, however, has a tradition of not using sound science – but instead just following its own morality, as is the case with for instance smokeless tobacco, an issue that The Brussels Journal has covered before.

One can only hope that the DG SANCO will come to its senses and start making sound policy – rather than moralize!