Keywords
alcoholic beverages, internet sales, counterfeit, unrecorded alcohol, methanol poisoning,
alcoholic beverages, internet sales, counterfeit, unrecorded alcohol, methanol poisoning,
The Conclusion section was improved according to the reviewers' requests pointing out some further aspects of measures against counterfeiting.
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Yury Evgeny Razvodovsky
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Andrey V. Korotayev
Unrecorded alcohol is alcohol, not reflected in official statistics, but consumed as a beverage1. Since it is untaxed, it is usually much cheaper than regular alcohol2. For Russia, unrecorded consumption is estimated at about 33.4% (5.3 litres of pure alcohol per capita per year) of the consumed alcohol (3; for an overview see 4).
Previous studies in Russia have focused on the consumption of alcohol surrogates5–9 or homemade alcohol6,10,11, but comparatively little research has been done on other forms of unrecorded products, such as counterfeit alcohol12,13. In the course of an ongoing longitudinal study on unrecorded alcohol consumption in Western Siberia14, we have observed various internet sellers of counterfeit spirits, ranging from individual offers on social networks and micro-blogs to specialized online shops offering forged expensive spirits brands.
Despite the fact that internet trade of alcoholic beverages was prohibited in 2007 as part of measures to reduce counterfeit sales15, we recorded more than 25 online sellers of counterfeit alcohol, all of which appeared to be maintained and operational (unpublished report). All of the observed platforms were structured similarly, typically featuring a product catalogue, a section about the delivery process and payment, a FAQ section and a contact page; they offered a delivery service against payment, typically for bulk orders only. The prices of the offered products were considerably lower than the regular market prices for retail sale, for example the prices of international vodka brands were 6 times lower than in regular sale, and prices of international spirits such as rum and whiskey were 10–15 times lower. Qualitative interviews revealed that consumers were well aware of the fact, that the beverages offered were not originals16.
Our first attempt to order online failed. The seller kept the 100% advance payment and never answered our e-mails. The failure to deliver however, may have been the result of a common internet scam rather than a legal issue connected with the official ban on the online trade of alcohol. For the second order a seller with a 50% advance payment scheme was chosen; over 100 bottles of counterfeit spirits were delivered within the following four weeks. One of the ordered international vodkas was not delivered, but instead we received a cheaper Russian brand. Although all of the delivered bottles had Russian excise stamps attached to them, we suspected these were counterfeits because of the low price of the product, and this was later confirmed by chemical analyses. However, the appearance of the bottles was in good accordance with the original products. The accompanying documents of the delivery package indicated payment of freight costs, but not the payment for alcohol itself. Processing payments for the delivery of alcohol is legal according to Russian law and seems to be an important loophole in the existing legislation frequently used by various online sellers, regardless of whether their products are counterfeits or not17.
There are several health issues arising from this unregulated online trade of counterfeit spirits. One problem is the potential harm to health of underage drinkers, a vulnerable group, specifically as the developing brain may be affected18. Undermining of youth protection laws by internet trade because of lack of regulation or its enforcement has been observed in European Union countries as well19.
Since the manufacturing of counterfeits does not follow unified guidelines of product composition and safety, they might contain harmful and toxic ingredients besides ethanol itself. For example methanol poisonings with counterfeit branded spirits have occurred regularly in Russia over the last two years, resulting in several deaths14,20. These cases corroborate the observed lack of enforcement of food safety standards in internet trade21. However, methanol intoxications are only isolated cases in relation to the general problem of ethanol’s adverse effects. Hence, the main problem with counterfeit spirits lies with their cheap price, high availability and their high demand by certain population groups leading to heavy consumption. Studies suggest that consumption of non-deceptive counterfeits (products of which the consumers are fully aware that they are counterfeits usually because of their cheap price) is associated with consumers of lower socio-economic strata, heavy drinking and consumption of further types of unrecorded alcohol, including alcohol surrogates13,16. Cheaper alcohol products have been linked to most risky patterns of consumption associated with premature mortality22–24.
The illegal internet sale of counterfeit alcohol does not only evade tax payments and undermines youth protection policies, it also undermines various other alcohol policy measures introduced in Russia over the last years to reduce the harmful use of alcohol25, such as restrictions of sale locations and sale times and the fixed minimum price on alcoholic beverages25,26.
Research in Russia suggests that the Internet has become an important trade channel of counterfeits12–14 with the observed online sellers apparently operating as an intermediate link in the distribution chain of counterfeit alcohol in Russia, meeting the consumer’s stable demand for cheap alcohol. Therefore, measures against counterfeiting of alcohol should be part of specific policies to reduce unrecorded alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harms in Russia. These measures should include not only legislation, where increasingly higher penalties for the illegal use of trademarks over the past six years were implemented27, but also law enforcement, where the laws seemingly are not really enforced, as the many internet sources for alcohol reveal. In addition, consistent monitoring of the entire production and supply chain of alcoholic beverages as well as effective denaturing of alcohol not intended for human consumption should be considered as the two key elements to achieve this goal28.
DWL and JR conceptualized the article. MN drafted a first version of the text, DWL, SGW and JR revised the text and all authors approved of the final manuscript.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Is the topic of the opinion article discussed accurately in the context of the current literature?
Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?
Yes
Are arguments sufficiently supported by evidence from the published literature?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn balanced and justified on the basis of the presented arguments?
Yes
References
1. Ellis C: Organized crime and illicit trade in tobacco, alcohol and pharmaceutical. RUSI Whitehall Report. 2017.Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: Alcohol-related problems
Is the topic of the opinion article discussed accurately in the context of the current literature?
Yes
Are all factual statements correct and adequately supported by citations?
Yes
Are arguments sufficiently supported by evidence from the published literature?
Yes
Are the conclusions drawn balanced and justified on the basis of the presented arguments?
Yes
References
1. Khaltourina D, Korotayev A: Effects of Specific Alcohol Control Policy Measures on Alcohol-Related Mortality in Russia from 1998 to 2013.Alcohol Alcohol. 2015; 50 (5): 588-601 PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full TextCompeting Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | ||
---|---|---|
1 | 2 | |
Version 2 (revision) 27 Jun 17 |
||
Version 1 20 Apr 17 |
read | read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)