Is the American government trying to limit your booze intake or access? The short answer is no. But as spirits editor, I get the occasional press release about a neo-prohibition movement and I was curious about the origins of that claim. Last summer, rumors that the Biden administration wanted to limit American’s drinking began making headlines, particularly in conservative publications. At the root of the story were comments made by Dr. George Koob, the director of the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, to tabloid The Daily Mail. Koob said that when the new USDA dietary guidelines are announced in 2025, if the U.S. were to go in any direction, it may follow Canada’s lead. That statement refers to the recommendations made last January that adults cut their intake to two alcoholic drinks per week by the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. The current U.S. dietary guidelines, released every five years, recommend the same amount or less per day for men and one drink or less for women (sidenote: will the USDA also update their gender spectrum?) Those recommendations emerged around the same time that the World Health Organization issued a statement that when it comes to alcohol consumption, there is no safe amount that does not affect health. Not a great month for Brand Alcohol. The 2025 U.S. alcohol guidelines are currently undergoing a committee and review process, although through separate efforts from the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, which has caused some in the alcohol industry to raise concerns about transparency. Let’s note, however, that the USDA guidelines have come under scrutiny before, but specifically concerning the influence of big alcohol and food. No one from the Biden administration has confirmed Koob’s suggestion (and the HHS or the USDA didn’t get back to us). But the story fits among other rumblings since the pandemic of a neo-prohibitionist or neo-temperance movement. However, the rise of moderation trends and Gen Z’s sober tendencies are vastly different from temperance moments of the past that eventually pushed for legal restrictions. As one writer put it, our last prohibition took the wind out of the sails of any major temperance movement. Much of the language I’ve heard from non-alc brands has positioned products as options for moderation, not sober living. The data also shows that most non-alc customers are also alcohol consumers: in fact, just as bar-goers are switching from full-proof cocktails to zero-proof options, across the board, over 94% of non-alc buyers are also purchasing alcohol-containing beer, wine, and spirits, meaning these buyers add more value to total alcohol according to NIQ. But Dry January and Sober October, as well as the fast-growing cannabis and (albeit small) adult non-alc category have put the alcohol industry on the defensive. Erlinda Doherty, a public policy expert and BevAlc consultant, points to the influence of those industries as well as the Surgeon General’s shifting view on cancer and alcohol as pressures that are leading stakeholders in the alcohol industry to “put together a more organized way to respond.” “There are several things that are concerning the industry that's causing or can cause negative impacts on the marketplace,” she said. “But what I'm mostly concerned about here is not so much people's personal choices, but the government overreach or obscurity of these things.” DISCUS president and CEO Chris Swonger said the group is following the nutritional guidelines issue “very closely” and supports “an unbiased, transparent and scientifically rigorous process in the review.” But even if new nutritional guidelines lead to larger policy shifts, it’s hard to imagine that the unintended consequences of last century’s “noble experiment” could be forgotten by policy makers—the loss of government tax revenues, the decline of restaurants and corruption. Also, bathtub gin martini just doesn’t have a great ring to it. Ferron Salniker (fsalniker@bevnet.com) is BevNET’s Spirits Editor, based in Los Angeles. | 
