Deadly poisoning of Russians by “Mr. Cider” found seven reasons

Another fatal poisoning of dozens of our citizens, and this time not drunks, accustomed to surrogates, but ordinary citizens, including women and teenagers, with a low-alcohol drink called “Mr. Cider”, made us think again about the causes of such tragedies and measures to protect against them .

Among the reasons I will put in the first place the one that can be eradicated most easily and quickly. Deadly methyl alcohol, from which people died, is organoleptically, that is, in appearance, smell and taste, indistinguishable from food ethyl alcohol. So that no one confuses them, it is necessary to oblige manufacturers to add substances to methyl alcohol that change its color and smell without changing its functional characteristics. Such proposals were made recently in the Federation Council, and I remembered that I had heard them half a century ago. This was discussed at the enterprise where I then worked, when two workers died in agony after drinking methyl alcohol from a bottle with a label corresponding to the contents, on which a skull and crossbones was even drawn. The dead said that the authorities were scaring the people so that they would not drink state-owned alcohol. Why hasn’t such an obvious measure been introduced yet? I don’t see any explanation justifying those responsible for this.

The second reason is the too slow response of the authorities to the very first cases of fatal poisoning. They were recorded on June 3 and 4 in the Ulyanovsk region, and on June 5, Rosalkogolregulirovanie and Rospotrebnadzor announced the blocking of circulation and the seizure of dangerous products. However, consumption of the deadly product continued for at least a week, because information about the danger did not immediately reach both sellers and consumers. I am sure that in such situations, when the first victims appear, it is necessary to urgently notify the population about the threat on all television and radio channels, social networks, promptly send SMS and emails with warnings to all retail and catering outlets.

The third reason is the enormous profit from the production and sale of counterfeit alcohol, based on the huge difference between the excise rates on ethyl alcohol for the production of legal alcoholic beverages and alcohol intended for other purposes, including medical ones. As long as it persists, the benefits of “regrading” are so great that neither the tightening of state supervision nor its new forms, such as digital marking, will help. In the mid-1990s, the State Duma managed to pass a norm equalizing excise rates for all alcohols, but the Council of the Federation rejected it through the efforts of the governors of the “hydrolysis” regions, and since then the situation has changed little. The thousands of deaths each year from so-called “accidental” alcohol poisoning remind us that this is still necessary, and we support such proposals from the Union of Alcoholic Producers, which reasonably do not want to give up the consumer and his money to counterfeiters.

The fourth reason is the permission to produce so-called beer drinks, to which, judging by the label, the manufacturer attributed “Mr. Cider”. And although the composition of the drink indicated there, in which there is no beer or beer wort, does not confirm this, it must be admitted that the very existence of the original category “beer drinks” in Russian legislation (in other countries they will not even understand what this means) is a pass to a market for a variety of substitutes for low-alcohol products produced by diluting alcohol in tap water with a variety of flavors. Beer drinks should be removed from the protection of the law as soon as possible.

The fifth reason I consider is the possibility of misleading consumers with impunity with “fantasy” names – such as “Mr. Cider” for a product that is not related not only to “Mr.”, but also to cider, since cider is a fermentation product of natural apple juice that excludes the addition of alcohol , and this drink was a weak solution of alcohol in apple juice concentrate (the manufacturer did not even have a fermenter). This should be prohibited by technical regulations, but, alas, the signs and procedures for the unambiguous identification of goods remain their weak point, and this often makes it possible to deceive consumers without violating the law. I am sure that many of those who died would not buy this drink if they knew that it had nothing to do with cider.

The sixth reason is the administrative rules, which allowed for more than 10 years to store alcohol confiscated from someone in a secure warehouse. Such rules are absurd and criminal – both because this senseless storage was paid for by the budget, that is, taxpayers, and because it kind of stimulated those who guarded this useless alcohol to benefit from it, that is, to steal and sell. There is a need for norms that limit the period of storage of confiscated goods and determine the procedure for prompt decision-making on their destruction or transfer to someone for useful use.

Finally, the seventh reason seems to me to be the insignificance of the risk of serious criminal liability for those responsible for such tragedies. It is established by Article 238 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Production, storage, transportation or sale of goods and products, performance of work or provision of services that do not meet safety requirements.” I looked at court statistics – last year 769 people were convicted under this article, including 57 sentenced to imprisonment, 134 to conditional imprisonment, 425 to a fine, 129 to restriction of freedom or compulsory work. It is worth considering that 29 of them were convicted for actions that caused the death of two or more persons, and 125 for actions committed by prior agreement, or in relation to goods for children, or led to serious bodily harm or death of a person.

I would like to compare this data on the punishment of the perpetrators with the scale of the disaster – the number of victims of dangerous goods and services. Unfortunately, there is no complete such statistics, but Rosstat gives the number of deaths due to poisoning with chemical and biological substances – 26.2 thousand people and accidental poisoning with toxic substances – another 8.4 thousand. This does not include suicide and murder by poisoning, these are all unintentional causes, some of which are obviously related to production, but most of which are related to the consumption of dangerous goods and services. Rosstat also cites the number of deaths from “unspecified injuries and other consequences of exposure to unspecified factors” – 37.7 thousand, and it can be assumed that among them a significant part is also associated with consumption.

In general, it is clear that the number of victims of hazardous consumer products is measured in thousands, if not tens of thousands of our citizens, which is incomparable with the hundreds of convicted perpetrators, which court statistics show.

It seems that what the state has done so far and is doing now to protect the life and health of consumers from dangerous goods and services is ineffective. This means that we ourselves need to think and discuss how to protect ourselves and our children more reliably. The tragic death of dozens of victims of “Mr. Cider” can only make sense if it is a useful lesson for the living.