Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

  • Home
  • About
  • Editorial
  • Birthdays
  • Art & Beer

Socialize

  • Dribbble
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • GitHub
  • Instagram
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
Powered by Head Quarters Built on WordPress
You are here: Home / Beers / Inflating Binge Drinking Statistics

Inflating Binge Drinking Statistics

October 6, 2010 By Jay Brooks

binge-barney
The biggest problem with binge drinking statistics is that the definition keeps changing. Over the last few decades it’s gone from somewhat vague to an increasingly narrow definition. Each change in the definition increases the number of binge drinkers. It’s not that more people are binge drinking necessarily, but that more people fall under the definition as they lower it and lower it.

At the bottom of an NPR story, Binge Drinking: A Big Problem, Especially For The Prosperous, there’s a strange little video about binge drinking put together by the CDC. In it, they reveal some disturbing ways of looking at what it means to binge drink.

The most recent way our government defines binge drinking is “[f]our or more drinks within a few hours for a woman and five or more for a man.” That actually narrows yet again, as recently as the last few years it’s been “five or more drinks in a row,” which tends to imply more speed. Adding “within a few hours” means even drinking at a leisurely pace makes you a binge drinker. I wrote more about this shift last year in a post, Inventing Binge Drinking.

The CDC video further claims that “half of all alcohol consumed by adults in the US is binge drinking.” Wow, that’s pretty remarkable, especially if you consider that according to the DOJ only 54% of adults drink alcohol. We’re now a nation of binge drinkers. You’d think a society where 1 in 2 people drinking is on a bender would be more noticeable. But look out your door or window and unless there’s a car alarm going off, it’s more likely you’ll hear crickets and birds chirping, not the devastation implied by that alarming factoid.

They also claim “1.5 billion episodes of binge drinking” take place each year in the U.S. That’s 5 for every man, woman and child in the country, or 6.25 times for every adult. If we assume the DOJ’s statistic that 46% of adults don’t drink alcohol, then that’s 11.6 for every adult who does imbibe, or nearly once a month. That’s a lot of benders. Or is it? Is having five drinks less than once a month really an alarming societal problem? I go to a beer dinner probably at least once a month and most are at least five courses. That makes me a binge drinker, but I’m hardly a danger to society because of it. Clearly, for some individuals persistent binge drinking is a serious problem, but the people who fall into that category represent a very small minority of all drinkers.

Toward the end of the NPR article, they have this to add.

The problem, though bad, isn’t a lot worse than it used to be. In 1993, the CDC says, about 14 percent of adults had gone on drinking binges. But as Dr. Thomas Frieden, head of the CDC put it, “Because binge drinking is not recognized as a problem, it has not decreased in 15 years.”

That’s a pretty glaring inconsistency. On one hand, the CDC claims that “half of all alcohol consumed by adults in the US is binge drinking” but only “14 percent of adults had gone on drinking binges.” But my favorite howler is the statement that “binge drinking is not recognized as a problem.” What planet is he living on, because neo-prohibitionists and the health, university and government research communities, not to mention all the treatment and addiction businesses that stand to make more money if the problem keeps increasing, have been screaming about the perils of binge drinking as long as I’ve been an adult, and probably longer. And the hue and cry has only increased in recent decades. But this just serves to prove that binge drinkers aren’t born, they’re created … by statistics.

But wait, it gets worse. According to the CDC video, the NIAAA now defines binge drinking as “consumption that raises blood-alcohol content to .08%.” That’s right folks “binge drinking” and being “drunk” are now exactly the same! Then they go on to say that binge drinkers are “14 times more likely to drive drunk.” Duh, if you define binge drinking as getting drunk, then that’s a self-fulfilling statistic, isn’t it? But it’s pretty alarming that a government agency’s standard for binge drinking is simply drinking enough to raise your BAC to 0.08%.

Other interesting tidbits include that statistic that 70% of binge drinkers are 26 or older and that 80% of binge drinkers are not alcoholics. Of course they’re not alcoholics if all they have to do to binge drink is get drunk once. And if most are legal adults, why the insistence later in the video to maintain 21 as the minimum age of consumption?

Naturally, they propose all the same old chestnuts to “fix” the problems they just created by inflating the statistics. Nothing new is ever proposed. Of course, none of the proposals ever work, either, wherever they’ve been implemented. Here’s the CDC recommendations.

  1. Increase alcohol taxes
  2. Close places that sell alcohol, reducing their number
  3. Close the remaining outlets earlier
  4. Enforce the laws that prohibit underage drinking

But by continually widening the net and artificially adding to the number of people that are considered binge drinkers, it lessens the chances of actually helping the people who truly do need help. All they do is increasingly demonize alcohol manufacturers and criminalize law-abiding people. It’s as if all of the organizations that are anti-alcohol or who make their money from addiction, be it through treatment, medications or whatever, need to keep the issue a dangerous one and have to keep it just bad enough so the money keeps flowing. So it becomes a game of creating the perception of effectiveness while the problem remains perpetually, and conveniently, elusive.

Filed Under: Beers, Editorial, Politics & Law Tagged With: Health & Beer, Prohibitionists, Science, Statistics, Video



Comments

  1. Russ says

    October 8, 2010 at 7:27 am

    That’s right folks “binge drinking” and being “drunk” are now exactly the same! Then they go on to say that binge drinkers are “14 times more likely to drive drunk.” Duh, if you define binge drinking as getting drunk, then that’s a self-fulfilling statistic, isn’t it?

    Actually, it’s a mathematically-incorrect statistic. If they define “binge drinking” as drinking until .08, then as you point out, everybody who binge drinks is drunk. On the flipside, if you’re not a binge drinker, then you’re not at .08 and therefore incapable of driving drunk. Ergo, a non-binge-drinker–by definition–CANNOT drive drunk. So if 0% of non-binge-drinkers drive drunk, then binge drinkers aren’t 14 times more likely to drive drunk, they’re INFINITELY more likely to drive drunk than their sober counterparts. Somebody better call MADD and let them know!

    • Jay Brooks says

      October 8, 2010 at 7:37 am

      Ha, awesome clarification. Thanks for that.

  2. Pete Guither says

    October 9, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    Jay, you say “That’s a pretty glaring inconsistency. On one hand, the CDC claims that ‘half of all alcohol consumed by adults in the US is binge drinking’ but only ’14 percent of adults had gone on drinking binges.'”

    It’s not actually an inconsistency. If, for example, you have 10 people and 9 of them have just one drink each, while the last one has 9 drinks by himself, then half of the alcohol consumed has been binge drinking (9 drinks) but only 1/10th of the drinkers are binge drinkers.

    It’s a matter of mixing the statistics of alcohol and people.

    Other than that, excellent article.

    • Jay Brooks says

      October 9, 2010 at 2:36 pm

      Pete,

      Thanks for the clarification.

      J

  3. beerble says

    October 23, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    there is a lot that can be said about the binge.

    first of all, it is excellent! welcome to the statistical fold, all ye above and beyond .08.

    mind you, do not mix this pleasure with cannaboids nor hallucinogens, or the pleasure will dissipate unto the crawling hell.

Trackbacks

  1. Morning Links | The Agitator says:
    October 8, 2010 at 6:52 am

    […] Excellent dissection of the latest government scare study about “binge drinking.” Just absurd that the NIAA now defines a “binge” as drinking until your BAC hits .08. Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark […]

  2. Feds Say We’re All Binge Drinkers Now | says:
    October 22, 2010 at 9:54 am

    […] Read the rest of the article to learn how big government is inflating binge drinking statistics to “demonize alcohol manufacturers and criminalize law-abiding people,” as the Brockston Beer Bulletin’s Jay Brooks reports. […]

Find Something

Northern California Breweries

Please consider purchasing my latest book, California Breweries North, available from Amazon, or ask for it at your local bookstore.

Beer Bulletin Email

Enter your email address to receive daily digests:

Recent Comments

  • Lucy Corne on Beer Birthday: Lucy Corne-Duthie
  • Kendall Staggs on Beer In Ads #4341: Miss Rheingold 1955 Filling Yuletide Requests
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Robert Burns » Brookston Beer Bulletin on John Barleycorn
  • Susan Appel on Historic Beer Birthday: John Roehm
  • S. Pavelka on Beer Birthday: Rich Norgrove

Recent Posts

  • Beer In Ads #4388: Miss Rheingold 1957 Finalists In A Circle March 22, 2023
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Joseph A. Straub March 22, 2023
  • Beer Birthday: Steve Wellington March 22, 2023
  • Beer In Ads #4387: Miss Rheingold 1957 Finalists Framed March 21, 2023
  • Historic Beer Birthday: Sampson Salter March 21, 2023

Tag Cloud

Advertising Anheuser-Busch Announcements Bay Area Belgium Brewers Association Brewing Equipment Budweiser Business California Christmas Europe France Germany Guinness Health & Beer History Holidays Hops Humor Infographics Kegs Law Mainstream Coverage Miller Brewing Northern California Pabst Packaging Patent Pennsylvania Press Release Prohibitionists Rheingold San Francisco Schlitz Science Science of Brewing Sports Statistics The Netherlands UK Uncategorized United States Video Washington

The Sessions

session_logo_all_text_1500

Next Session: Dec. 7, 2018
#142: One More for the Road
Previous Sessions
  • #141: Future of Beer Blogging
  • #140: Pivo
  • #139: Beer & the Good Life
  • #138: The Good in Wood
  • #137: German Wheat
Archive, History & Hosting

Typology Tuesday

Typology-png
Next Typology:
On or Before March 29, 2016
#3: Irish-Style Dry Stout
Previous Typologies
  • #2: Bock Feb. 2016
  • #1: Barley Wine Jan. 2016
Archive & History

This month’s posts

March 2023
S M T W T F S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
« Feb    

BBB Archives

Go to mobile version