Is Dry July worth taking the pledge?
There’s mixed evidence whether one month’s abstinence can change a habit
Annual Dry July campaigns in New Zealand and Australia have begun and thousands have pledged to abstain for the month.
Dry July and similar campaigns — FebFast, Ocsober, Dry January and On The Dry — say they raise awareness about alcohol and aim to positively influence our drinking culture, while raising money for charity.
Such campaigns started when concern about binge drinking was peaking around 2008 and are sometimes referred to as exercises in binge sobriety.
However, do these campaigns change an individual’s drinking habit or a society’s drinking culture? Or are they just novel fundraisers?
The evidence is mixed. While these campaigns can provide some health benefits to you and the people around you, they don’t target binge drinking. And no-one has looked at their long-term benefits.
Temporary sobriety initiatives are aimed at the majority of the population (roughly 80 per cent) who drink, including those who drink at very risky levels (18 per cent), but are not dependent on alcohol.
Their emphasis on health and philanthropy attracts participants who see themselves as somewhat health conscious, and are often middle to upper-middle class people in their mid-30s to late 40s.
Although people have been giving up alcohol for set periods of time formally and informally for many years and in many locations, Australia’s FebFast began the modern trend of philanthropic 30-day campaigns in 2008.
The month-long format and philanthropic link are common, as are 24-hour passes to authorise drinking, for instance for a special occasion.
Campaigns vary in their focus, some prioritising philanthropy, others health promotion and these differences affect how the organisations measure success: dollars raised, numbers of participants or behaviour change.
Taking a month-long break from alcohol can in the short term improve your liver function, help you lose weight and improve your sleep. It also reduces your likelihood of drinking as much over the next six months.
However, campaigns don’t strictly measure success in these terms. Some aim to change drinking cultures, with various success.
They do not influence the kind of problem drinkers, such as young (and potentially violent) binge drinkers and older daily drinkers, who make the headlines.
But they make it easier for people to choose not to drink because they have normalised the option of not drinking. And the more popular these campaigns become, the more socially acceptable it is to abstain.
Such campaigns also allow people who usually drink without too much thought to consciously observe the effects of alcohol on their health, productivity, mood and relationships.
The Australian model for binge sobriety has been replicated faithfully in different countries. This suggests there are certain factors key to success, including a campaign:
Well-known enough to provide a legitimate excuse to not drink (during the month and even afterward)
With accountability measures (pledges contingent upon sobriety, a supportive network of participants)
Timed for periods of relative restraint (like after the holidays) or not typically associated with events involving alcohol (summer vacations, sport grand finals) with the flexibility to opt out for a special occasion.
Including communication strategies like text messages and even suggestive participant feedback surveys that encourage participants to see sobriety as positive.
Population level studies have yet to be done to determine if a monthlong campaign of not drinking influences people’s drinking levels beyond a year.
But significant numbers of repeat participants suggest a month of sobriety does not lead to radical behaviour change.
Research that looks not just at the long-term outcomes of a month of sobriety, but also the factors that make these campaigns successful, will be the key to understanding how related campaigns can tackle other health behaviours, like sugar and caffeine consumption or smoking.