next »

[womanofproperty]

It is a myth that the "European model" where kids are exposed to alcohol at an early age and are allowed to drink as teens leads to many fewer problems as they mature.

Kedves, the ESPAD info was meant to provide some documentation for Zharkov's statement.  The European survey is modeled on the CDC's Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS).  But both surveys focus on teens, not college students, so the information doesn't directly address questions about college students. 

You may already be aware of this article: 

O'Malley, P., & Johnston, L. (2002, March). Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use among American college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol.  Special issue: College drinking, what it is, and what do to about it: Review of the state of the science. pp. 23-39. (Retrieved from PsycINFO database).  The article isn't that recent but it identifies a number of data sources for college students.

Donstefano is right that when you look at the European data you can see marked differences among the different countries.  However, the survey originated because in many countries, alcohol & drug abuse are issues.

I have to disagree with donstefano regarding lowering the drinking age.  Zharkov's other point

One's brain develops into the early 20s, and excessive alcohol consumption interferes with that process.

is correct. 

[kaysixteen]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

If we are motivated by teaching them responsibility and how to become adults, let's let em choose to drink in socially controlled settings, with oversight, rules, etc., rather than forcing them to go underground and act like criminals.

[zharkov]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

Works for me.

[kedves]

Kedves, the ESPAD info was meant to provide some documentation for Zharkov's statement. 
...

Sorry, I didn't realize that.  I'm not disagreeing, far from it.  I know that many factors influence college-student drinking and that what seems intuitively to be true often is not true.  I only wondered if there were any of direct-comparison studies of U.S. vs. European (or Canadian) 18-24 year olds, or college students that age vs. other people that age, or even before-and-after studies from the earlier experiment with drinking age of 19.

The fairness argument is a different sort of argument, a more libertarian argument.  The voting and tobacco analogies hold.  I'm not sure about the military service argument.  Hypothetically, 18-year-olds could be drafted, but in practical terms, I've heard from military people that they don't want a draft of any-old-teen (i.e., the job requirements are more complex than in the Vietnam era).  The average age of servicepersons in Iraq--I don't know what it is.  On principle, though, it's a sound argument.

It's not obvious what is the trend toward government protectionism or liberty.  On the one hand, most states have legislated and enforce stronger drinking-driving and seat-belt laws.  On the other hand, my home state, Pennsylvania, removed the helmet requirement for motorcyclists a few years ago.  I'm torn as well.  A family friend on a ride went missing last summer.  It took a few days to find his body.  His son, who had been apprenticing with his plumber dad, got into drugs and killed himself a year later.  I strongly want people to be free to make their own choices, but I see the ripple effect that a death causes.  As a social scientist, I would like all of us to form our conclusions from facts rather than feelings, but as a person, I understand the outrage of MADD members against this "Amethyst Initiative" or the activism of Jenny McCarthy against immunizations.  If the outcome is the same, I tend to like liberty, but I understand that in the classic statistics metaphor, this is an urn filled with tickets or balls of very different values for different people.

[inthelab]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

Works for me.

And for me too.

I sort of resent the notion that if you grant 18 year olds the right to drink, they will all drink to excess.  Some will, but then they are doing it now anyway.

[zharkov]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

Works for me.

And for me too.

I sort of resent the notion that if you grant 18 year olds the right to drink, they will all drink to excess.  Some will, but then they are doing it now anyway.

I think the key point, for me, is that lowing the age from 21 to 18 increases the amount of alcohol abuse, and thus traffic fatalities.

At the risk of dating myself, I remember when the age went from 21 to 18 back in the day.  That meant that the 18 yo sibs and pals could then provide hooch to the 15-17 year olds.  Also, the number of drunk 18-21 year olds getting in accidents went way up, as did automobile fatalities.  (And SADD and MADD were born.)  I worked with a 19 year old young woman who rolled her Mustang and died.  I was a passenger when my friend totaled his Camaro.  (We were 19 or so, not seriously hurt.) 

[inthelab]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

Works for me.

Well according to the ESPAD data (if I remember corectly), 60% of 14 to 16 year old have access to alcohol, or drink alcohol.
Whom are we kidding?

What I really want to see is raising the age for voting and selective service.  That will now be in line with gambling and drinking.  Make 21 the legal age of adulthood instead of the hypocricital hodgepodge of ages we now have.

And for me too.

I sort of resent the notion that if you grant 18 year olds the right to drink, they will all drink to excess.  Some will, but then they are doing it now anyway.

I think the key point, for me, is that lowing the age from 21 to 18 increases the amount of alcohol abuse, and thus traffic fatalities.

At the risk of dating myself, I remember when the age went from 21 to 18 back in the day.  That meant that the 18 yo sibs and pals could then provide hooch to the 15-17 year olds.  Also, the number of drunk 18-21 year olds getting in accidents went way up, as did automobile fatalities.  (And SADD and MADD were born.)  I worked with a 19 year old young woman who rolled her Mustang and died.  I was a passenger when my friend totaled his Camaro.  (We were 19 or so, not seriously hurt.) 

[zharkov]

If we are primarily motivated by saving the lives of late adolescents, let's ban them access to tobacco, and certainly keep em out of the military.

Works for me.

Well according to the ESPAD data (if I remember corectly), 60% of 14 to 16 year old have access to alcohol, or drink alcohol.
Whom are we kidding?

What I really want to see is raising the age for voting and selective service.  That will now be in line with gambling and drinking.  Make 21 the legal age of adulthood instead of the hypocricital hodgepodge of ages we now have.

And for me too.

I sort of resent the notion that if you grant 18 year olds the right to drink, they will all drink to excess.  Some will, but then they are doing it now anyway.

I think the key point, for me, is that lowing the age from 21 to 18 increases the amount of alcohol abuse, and thus traffic fatalities.

At the risk of dating myself, I remember when the age went from 21 to 18 back in the day.  That meant that the 18 yo sibs and pals could then provide hooch to the 15-17 year olds.  Also, the number of drunk 18-21 year olds getting in accidents went way up, as did automobile fatalities.  (And SADD and MADD were born.)  I worked with a 19 year old young woman who rolled her Mustang and died.  I was a passenger when my friend totaled his Camaro.  (We were 19 or so, not seriously hurt.) 

Trying to interpret your (mis) quote, I think the point you are making is that increasing the drinking age does not eliminate alcohol abuse among teenagers.

I agree.

My point is that lowering the drinking age in the US would (and has in the past) increase alcohol abuse among teenagers.  Yes, many teens have access to alcohol and many underage teens abuse it, even thought the legal age is 21.  But lowering the age to 18 would make the current problem worse and take away some of the power law enforcement current has with respect to controlling teenage drinking.

[scheherazade]

I disagree, Zharkov.  Alcohol abuse is already rampant among high school students.  I've taught high school in the last few years, and I have a brother who just graduated from high school, so I've gotten the front-line details pretty often.  As it is, there was rarely a high school party that didn't involved alcohol abuse, and most of them drove afterward.

I think lowering the drinking age brings the alcohol abuse out in the open a bit more, though, making it easier to address and treat.

[zharkov]

I disagree, Zharkov.  Alcohol abuse is already rampant among high school students.  I've taught high school in the last few years, and I have a brother who just graduated from high school, so I've gotten the front-line details pretty often.  As it is, there was rarely a high school party that didn't involved alcohol abuse, and most of them drove afterward.

I think lowering the drinking age brings the alcohol abuse out in the open a bit more, though, making it easier to address and treat.

We've tried this experiment before and the results were pretty bad, so the drinking age was raised back up from 18 to 21.  So maybe the key question is, What do we need to do differently this time?

One idea I have, which I admit is fairly radical, is to put control and regulation of alcohol and tobacco in the hands of the public health authorities.  Let pubic health make the regulations, set the ages for legal alcohol and tobacco consumption, set the tax rates, and keep the tax money to administer programs to deal with the problems that tobacco and alcohol abuse lead to.

[scheherazade]

I disagree, Zharkov.  Alcohol abuse is already rampant among high school students.  I've taught high school in the last few years, and I have a brother who just graduated from high school, so I've gotten the front-line details pretty often.  As it is, there was rarely a high school party that didn't involved alcohol abuse, and most of them drove afterward.

I think lowering the drinking age brings the alcohol abuse out in the open a bit more, though, making it easier to address and treat.

We've tried this experiment before and the results were pretty bad, so the drinking age was raised back up from 18 to 21.  So maybe the key question is, What do we need to do differently this time?

One idea I have, which I admit is fairly radical, is to put control and regulation of alcohol and tobacco in the hands of the public health authorities.  Let pubic health make the regulations, set the ages for legal alcohol and tobacco consumption, set the tax rates, and keep the tax money to administer programs to deal with the problems that tobacco and alcohol abuse lead to.

Previously, there was not nearly as much education about alcohol as there is now.  I think that can very well be the mitigating factor in all this.