You're making sh*t up again. I said that people who can't go 4 hours without alcohol need treatment. That is a fact and is pretty clear to anyone.
If you want to rip me on something, rip me on my equating people who think they absolutely must have beer at college football games to alcoholics.
You're really, really terrible at this.
Here, I cherry picked a quote from an epidemiologic handout by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism at the NIH: "According to the most recent National Vital Statistics Report (Hoyert, Kochanek, & Murphy, 1999), age-adjusted death rates from alcohol misuse declined from 1979 to 1997."
Not making "sh*t" up. Sales of alcohol nationally in 2009 and 2010 declined in consecutive years. This file shows historical trends for total alcohol consumption per person in the US in common alcohol units. It has remained somewhat constant but with a slightly lower trend over time. Make of this what you will. Because a University wants to promote abstinance does not make abstinance a reality. I recent MNDaily article quoted guys who want to drink at the beer garden as stating that they would otherwise get wasted prior to the game, instead of stretching out their alcohol consumption during the game. In other words, they would prefer not to get smashed prior to the game, but just stay a bit buzzed and not as alcohol laden during the games. I think the later option is not only healthier, but much less risky behavior. These students are claiming that their overall level of alcohol abuse would be less with a place to imbibe socially during the game. That conforms to models of alcohol use in social settings across the strata. More availability does not mean automatic abuse. It means more controlled use by users, and less pressure to get wasted. As an Abstainer of alcohol, I was Less Frequent drinker in college of maybe drinking 1-3 times per month, all on campus, in the dorm, in my room with friends. Now, post college, I drink maybe 2 times per quarter.
To quote further on the NIH site: "Per capita ethanol consumption consistently increased from the mid 1880's until 1915, and decreased just prior to enactment of Prohibition in 1919. After Prohibition ended in 1934, consumption of all types of alcohol continued to ncrease until the 1950's. The overall per capita level of alcohol consumption peaked in 1975, and began to decline during the 1980's. The decline has continued with consumption dropping 43% since 1975."
We are a nation of self regulating consumers who needs little extra attention to alcohol consumption from the likes of the administration. There seems to be a long term trend which continues to this day in terms of total per capita alcohol sales in the US. Dpo, I enjoy your vigilence against alcohol sales at the U. But, the fact of the matter is there are sales around the U which travel into the U every weekend. The overwhelming evidence is that sales are smaller now than at the peak of sales in the 70's. Having a beer tent may actually drop sales around the U and promote a more balanced drinking social style in students. If we promote acceptable limits to alcohol use, most people will follow it. The only class of people who need absolute prohibition are those who have a genetic propensity to becoming addicted to alcohol, which occurs in about 25% of the population. The other 3/4's of the population don't need extra moral guards to our ability to control our consumption. We can handle it just fine.
