College Presidents Seek to Lower Drinking Age

[ree-Xi]

We all know that one can skew the presentation of statistics to demonstrate an argument (argument as in one's position, not "fight).

Examples:

1. Let's say the American Society for Statistics publishes a report that 40 percent of people who eat shellfish at some point in their lives will get food poisoning. Upon hearing of this study, The United Chicken Coalition puts out a warning that says "Seafood borne illness strikes two-fifths of all seafood consumers!" Their campaign fails to include that the chances increase only when fish are not cooked to a proper temperature, stored properly, or left out for too long before eating.
2. Or a warning on a medication label: "Thirty percent of people using this wart cream reported flu or flu-like symptoms". No where does it state that the drug testing was reported during January and February in Michigan, where 30% of the population gets the flu anyway.

In my reading, I came across several studies, surveys and opinion sites.

• Statistics will tell you that in the years (A-G) following the increase in legal drinking age, the number of alcohol-related motor vehicle fatalities for the 16-21 age range decreased by X%.*
• Since the change in drinking age, according to the Fatality Awareness Reporting System of the Natioanal Highway Transportation Safety Administration, the number of motor vehicle deaths related to alcohol DECREASES across all age groups.* http://silk.nih.gov/niaaa1/database/crash01.txt
• The one glaring change is that the majority of alcohol-related crashes resulting in death shifted from the younger age range to the 21-24 age range. In author Mike Males' book, The Scapegoat Generation, he claims that:
  • "the first year or two after a person can legally drink alcohol - regardless of what age is chosen - is the period in which that person is most likely to be involved in an alcohol-related accident. http://www.asfar.org/zine/6th/cover.html

I am guessing here that the changes in speed limits, mandatory seatbelt laws, mandatory airbags, more dilligent carding, stricter punishments, stronger car frames, etc. may likely have contributed to changes in drinking habits and therefore the decrease of deaths in this age range. That is, more people may have prevented or walked away from alcohol-related motor accidents for several reasons.

• According the a national survey, that the percentage of high school students drinking has stayed relatively the same. http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/monographs/vol1_2005.pdf

The argument can be made that stricter laws for legally purchasing or consuming alcohol has made no difference in adolescents' drinking behaviours.

• The stated survey did, however, shine light on the growing trend of binge drinking.
  • When youth drink they tend to drink intensively, often consuming four to five drinks at one time. MTF data show that 11 percent of 8th graders, 22 percent of 10th graders, and 29 percent of 12th graders had engaged in heavy episodic, or binge, drinking within the past two weeks.

Age restrictions on drinking are often viewed as arbitrary. "Most kids drink anyway", "If you can vote and die for your country, then you should be able to drink". The other side argues that the lower the legal age, the lower the age group of kids with fake IDs or sneaking into bars hoping that they don't get carded. Both sides' arguments are valid, but the first one is based on emotion, while the second is a logical assumption.

I don't have an answer, but I my biggest question is, if an 18 year old's brain is still developing, as are their level of maturity, responsibility, and worldliness, wouldn't handing them something that all but absolutely can/will skew their judgment only increases the lieklihood of impulsiveness that is more prevalent in younger people?

Yes, there are many "kids" out there who are capable of drinking in moderation, driving responsibly, and managing their lives productively, but even the most savvy, intelligent, world-traveled 18 or 19 year olds still have so much to learn. Presumably, then, giving them something that decreases their judgment (as more than one drink can) has no merits other than to satisfy emotional reasoning.

So to those who advocate lowering the drinking age, how would you respond to my last few paragraphs?

*Some of my points were inspired/triggered from http://www.asfar.org/zine/6th/cover.html with additional citations I found. The rest (in green) are my own thoughts.