The Commercial Determinants of Nonalcoholic Beer: Redemption, Revenue, or Men’s Harm Reduction?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public awareness about the connections between men's alcohol use and poor health outcomes, including increased male suicide risk, has led to reduced consumption and increased use of nonalcoholic beverages-most prominently nonalcoholic beer (NAB). Marketed as a healthy substitution option (i.e., periodically switching to an NAB rather than abstaining from alcoholic beer), the rapidly growing NAB sector might be somewhat redemptive, wherein the alcoholic beer industry (as the predominant producers of NAB) is selling harm reduction to men, albeit for profit. The commercial determinants of NAB are, however, complex and have significant implications for legislation and policy. For example, in Canada, NAB is exempt from alcoholic beer excise duty but considered beer for the goods and services and harmonized sales taxes. Coupled with industry production costs and profit margins, these taxes contribute to NAB and alcoholic beer retail price parity. From a public health perspective, there are also concerns about increasing alcoholic beer brand recognition and sales revenue by extending NAB visibility in more places (e.g., supermarkets), contexts (e.g., taking medication), and activities (e.g., driving). The current article highlights (1) the connections between men's alcohol use and health risks, ahead of discussing, (2) the rise of NAB, and mapping (3) NAB legislation and policy implications. We conclude with a discussion about the redemption, revenue, and men's harm reduction potentials, pragmatically arguing the need to both regulate and incentivize NAB. Proposed are promising directions for future research with the goal of reducing men's alcohol use and associated harms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".