What else will suffer tobacco sponsorship's fate?

Rightly or wrongly cigarettes played a major role in the history of Formula 1, funding the late-80s McLaren-Honda war machine for example.

Tobacco money enabled drivers such as Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, Michael Schumacher and Fernando Alonso to become mega-stars, and more than one country owed its grand prix in part to the hundreds of millions the industry pumped into motorsport in general, and F1 in particular.

Would Lotus have survived for as long as it did without Gold Leaf - contrary to popular lore, the brand was not the first in F1, as can be learned here - and JPS; would Williams still be around but for the Camel millions that funded Nigel Mansell's title campaign? Or Ferrari without Marlboro's dollars?

However, throughout tobacco's tenure there were dark clouds on the horizon, for the substance indisputably damages health, and, with youthful fans being most susceptible to the industry's messages, health campaigners fought long and hard to ban tobacco advertising.

Their efforts left the industry with a single global platform willing to convey its messages - F1 - and, after a long, arduous battle with many twists and turns, the legislators managed to ban sponsorship of F1 by a stigmatised product that could be legally traded, yet not be openly marketed in any shape or form.

In early 2005, ahead of a wholesale ban on tobacco sponsorship in Formula 1 by the EU Commission - which threatened draconian penalties for breaches by teams and brands - Atlas F1 published a comprehensive two-part feature authored by this writer on the history of the substance's four decade-long commercial association with the sport.

There are, of course, exceptions to every law, and, in F1, that is generally Ferrari, which continues to race in what is best termed "Marlboro red" in deference to its continuing arrangement with Philip Morris, Marlboro's parent, that is believed to expire at the end of 2018. However, cars and kit are devoid of the brand's red/white triangles, with activation aimed at wholesale partners in the hotel/restaurant/catering trade.

Whether the deal is further extended depends upon its cost-effectiveness, but it hardly harms Ferrari that team principal Maurizio Arrivabene was previously Mr Marlboro marketing man, moving to Maranello at the instigation of Ferrari president/CEO Sergio Marchionne, who just happens to sit on the board of Altria, the holding company of Philip Morris.

From more than 20 cigarette brands in F1 across the four decades it is now down to one that is becoming increasingly invisible as seasons go by. But a law of physics is that vacuums are quickly filled, and what activity better combines money and science than grand prix motor racing?

The second part of the 2005 feature predicted that the next product group to fall under the World Health Organisation's spotlight - and also the next big thing in F1 sponsorship - would be alcohol brands, brought about by increasing pressures on traditional advertising of the substances, at the time stating:

Another certainty is that governmental nannies will not stop with tobacco. In 1997, [the World Health Organisation] published its "hit-list" of product categories it was targeting the marketing of. First, and rapidly banned, was the marketing of breast milk substitutes, but this banning came and went without fanfare, for how many sports marketed the products?

Then came tobacco - and, as has been illustrated, it is only a (short term) matter before that comes to pass. Next up will come alcohol (as McLaren, phasing out West in favour of Johnnie Walker, is already discovering) then fast 'junk' foods, followed by sweets and confectionary.

Clearly, then, alcohol brands would embrace F1 - and, the voraciously cash-hungry pastime - for in terms of cost-effective global television coverage, the glitzy sport then had few peers. Note the use of "then had", for a subsequent move to (predominantly) pay TV has caused audiences to plummet by around 30% to approximately 400million viewers globally, but still F1 offers exceedingly good value for money.

Although alcohol partnership uptake was initially slow at the time of bans on tobacco advertising, due in no small part to the plethora of motor manufacturers in F1 who saw little need for sponsorship revenues from such contentious sources, over the past five years the number of alcohol labels in F1 has increased in leaps and bounds to currently stand at seven - with an eighth about to take a bow.

As with tobacco sponsorship, alcohol brands have come and gone, with beer brands such as Warsteiner, Veltins, Bitburger and Pilsener Urquell, plus a plethora of Mexican tequila logos and various wine labels, all being linked to teams at some stage.

In a further parallel with fag sponsorship, the alcohol industry's equivalent of nicotine patches - low (or no) alcohol products have also graded race cars, with Estella's "0.0%" beverage logos on the Toro Rossos and Bitburger's Drive 0% campaign immediately springing to mind.

Equally, just as Marlboro and other tobacco logos graced bridges and boards, so Johnnie Walker whisky has bought into trackside packages offered by commercial rights holder Formula One Management, and, if rumours are to be believed, a major green beer brand will be joining the fray sometime (very) soon.

Currently in F1, then, are:

Singa - The Thai beer is a current Ferrari sponsor, having this year switched from Red Bull Racing, which seemed a more natural 'fit' given RBR's strong Thai links via the eponymous energy drink. In the past Ferrari sported a minor deal with Martini.

Martini - A perennial motorsport sponsor since 1968 (who can forget the glorious silver Porsche 917, or Bernie Ecclestone's flaming red Brabham BT46 'fancar'?), the vermouth brand sponsors Williams. Martini is unique in leveraging its sponsorship outside the paddock by staging 'Terrazzas' parties near F1 venues. Martini piggy-backs on grands prix, albeit without being subjected to FOM's restrictive policies.

Johnnie Walker - A McLaren sponsor since 2005 to larger or lesser degree, the brand is also a FOM 'bridge and board' partner. The Diageo-owned drink labels itself as "the official whisky of F1" - implying F1 itself is capable of imbibing, in which case its 'drunken' lurches from crisis to crisis are understandable.

Chandon - New to McLaren, the sparkling wine displaces watch company TAG Heuer's logos on the black cars following a deal struck with luxury goods purveyor LMVH, which owns both brands.

Moet Chandon - Another LMVH brand, the champagne replaced Mumm as supplier of podium bubbly from this year, with the latter switching to Formula E.

Smirnoff - Allegedly the "best-selling distilled spirit brand in the world", the brand partners Force India following a complex deal with team owner Vijay Mallya, whose United Spirits company sold a variety to alcohol brands to Diageo.

Kingfisher - Mallya's beer brand brewed by United Breweries, a large portion of which was recently off-loaded to Heineken Group, which may explain why the Indian liquor baron hosted a group of senior Heineken executives during last year's Mexican Grand Prix.

Daffys - Best described as a Scottish-distilled 'boutique' gin, the brand partners Irish-owned Manor.

The European Alcohol Policy Alliance, also known as Eurocare, has been particularly active in this regard, suggesting that F1's global TV audience was exposed to an alcohol logo around 12 times per minute, or more than 1000 times per 90-minute grand prix. Add in practice and qualifying broadcasts, and the number rapidly spirals to 1500 per race weekend.

Countries such as South Africa have already banned TV advertising of liquor brands, while the UK places a curfew on timing. Various Scandinavian countries ban billboard advertising of such substances - although, strangely, not at sporting events. As with tobacco, alcohol industry lobbyists maintain advertising does not increase alcohol intake, merely encourages drinkers to switch brands.

The flipside is that ardent smokers are unlikely to be influenced by the sight of logos to light up again during a race, while beer brands advertised on racecars on hot Sunday afternoons could conceivably cause viewers to repeatedly stroll to their fridges.

Whatever, the number of global alcohol brands in F1 is expected to increase over the next five years as campaigns by WHO and various anti-liquor pressure groups such as Eurocare gain traction (and F1 opens its welcoming arms), and all this poses a dilemma for the FIA, F1's governing body, given the obvious drink-driving connotations and alcohol-linked road fatalities.

Statistics vary, but the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that one third of the country's 35,000-odd annual road deaths are alcohol-related, while the UK's quoted figure is 15%. Whatever the true number, the fact is that few smokers died through lighting a fag while driving, while the link between alcohol and traffic accidents cannot be denied - even where victims are drunken pedestrians.

True, the FIA is not party to any alcohol deals whatsoever. Nor, for that matter, is it permitted to involve itself in commercial matters in terms of an EU Commission decree that F1's sporting and commercial powers be separated, but the fact is that FIA logos are as visible on Sunday afternoons as are, for example, those of J Walker Esq.

True, Johnnie Walker instituted its 'Drink Responsibly' campaigns, complete with double F1 champion Mika Hakkinen as ambassador, but the fact remains that alcohol is a major contributor to global road deaths, while former F1 stalwart Fosters (an Australian beer brand) used the strapline "Don't Drink and Drive" in campaigns. That said, are such programmes effective, or about as (in)effective as "Smoking Kills" messages on fag packs?

"The use of advertising for alcohol is not linked to the FIA," FIA president Jean Todt, also the United Nations Special Envoy for Road Safety, clarified said last year. "It's linked to each singular country. I'm completely against and advocating against drinking and driving, but each country needs to make his own job.

"You cannot ban alcohol, it is not possible, but you can educate people not to drink and drive," added the man who has dedicated both his terms of office to road safety; often, according to his critics, to the detriment of motorsport. "So we are working very closely on that because we know it is an essential topic to be addressed."

The FIA presents, of course, soft targets to lobby groups and faces regular criticism, but whatever else activists hurl at Todt and Co, an accusation that cannot be levelled is that they pushed for stays on alcohol advertising, as had his predecessor Max Mosley, a party (with David Ward, 2013 FIA presidential candidate) to campaigns to gradually eliminate tobacco sponsorship rather than ban it.

The bottom line is that pressure groups should target, if anyone in F1, FOM and the teams, not the FIA. However, as long as a product is legal and its advertising via sponsorship permitted, then, simply put, Eurocare and others should take their issues up with governments, not F1. Islamic states provide pointers: alcohol is banned and its advertising outlawed - such that F1 podium ceremonies feature rose water, not bubbly.

Like it or not, alcohol advertising and sponsorship is in F1 to stay until such time as the practice is banned by governments, much as France did with Evin's Law (1991). The law was piloted through parliament by the country's then-Health Minister, Claude Evin, and, as such, carries his name.

Despite opposition from various factions, and accusations that Loi Evin was discriminatory and encroached upon various European Union decrees, including the Television Without Frontiers directive, the law was enacted, and banned outright any form of alcohol (and tobacco) advertising, plus, for 12 years, outlawed energy drink marketing.

However, F1 is unlikely to escape the beady eye of the WHO even after all forms of alcohol advertising/sponsorship are banned globally, for, as outlined, next on its 'hit-list' are fast foods so in time F1 can expect overtures from the likes of Burger King, McDonalds and Subway - already active in US auto racing.

Thereafter WHO focus will shift to sweets, confectionaries and soda drinks, so fans can prepare themselves for an influx of M&M's, Smarties and Coca Cola logos on grand prix cars. None will, though, have the potentially debilitating effect on F1's existence as the final category on the WHO's list: "power (or speed) advertising", or, in simple terms, the glamorisation of the dangers of speed and power.

The nannies argue that it is nonsensical to shield the youth of today from the ills of breast milk substitutes, tobacco, alcohol, burgers and fries and fizzy drinks, and chocopops, then entice kids to go kill themselves on cars and bikes capable of 0-100 in two seconds and top speeds of 400mph. The eventual plan is to outlaw all forms of marketing that glamorise speed.

That, in a nutshell, is a bigger existential threat to F1 than any amount of beer ever will be.