.gif)
In a recent survey carried out in a meeting of business people in Shrewsbury, 94% were unaware of how to work out the number of units in an alcoholic drink.
Jo Baugh, director of TTC Automotive, said: “It is important to know the amount of alcohol in a drink in order to be aware of the limits for your health and the dangers of excessive consumption.
“We conducted the survey to examine how much people know about alcohol and units and the results were quite shocking. Only a small minority of those canvassed knew how to work out units of alcohol in a given bottle with 94% totally unaware.”
Click here for more information or contact TTC Automotive on 0333 8000 222.
Understanding units is a minor part of the issue, more importantly how a unit affects each individual is rather more complicated, gender, size, medication etc etc. How long after drinking a driver is breathalysed, has the alcohol in the body been fully absorbed? is it now increasing or decreasing etc. Having worked with many people who were just one or two points over the legal blood limit Dave from Leeds is 100% right…..if you are driving – don’t drink. However knowing the units consumed may help for those driving morning after a drink!
Liz, Lewisham
0
No-one knows how units consumed relates to blood alcohol level on an individual level. This seems to suggest that drivers can calculate the ‘safe’ amount to drink which is absurd. This really only further hightlights the idea that if you’re driving don’t drink anything…
Dave, Leeds
0
Surely, very few people know how to work out the number of Units in an alcoholic drink. (Not the ones shop bought) Mathematical equations are not usually general knowledge for the public so I don’t see why this an issue or anybody needs to panic over this revelation?
Santa’s little helper, Rochdale
0
Surely the number of units is on the label. The problem comes when pouring drinks for friends at home so perhaps spirit bottles could be marked like measuring jugs to either show how many units are poured or how generous we are being.
Peter Wilson, Westminster
0