US drinking age and road deaths

May 9th, 2012 at 7:00 am by David Farrar

Thomas Lumley at Stats Chat blogs:

In an earlier post I looked at male youth suicide rates in the US before and after the drinking age was raised in July 1984, and said that expecting a decrease in road deaths made sense. It does make sense, but it seems that it didn’t happen in the US. …

The graph shows road deaths per 100,000 people by age group (from CDC), and there isn’t anything prominent that happens in 1984 or 1985. The pattern is pretty much the same for ages 15-19, 20-24, and 25-34. The younger two groups would have been affected by the law (with its supporters usually arguing that the youngest of the groups is the real target) and the oldest group would not have been affected. You can think of all sorts of explanations for why a difference might not have been seen (for example, the US is bad at detecting and deterring drunk drivers), but the data has to be disappointing to people who want a change in the drinking age.

The move in New Zealand to go to a split age may, in my view, increase the road toll. Why? Well 18 and 19 year olds will no longer be legally able to purchase some alcohol at an off-licence and take it home to drink. They will be forced to head out to bars to drink.

Now in Wellington this might not lead to an increase in drink driving, as it is such a compact city. But in Auckland it could well do so, and in more rural areas, I think is highly likely to. A split age will send out some bad incentives.

Tags: drinking age

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 9th, 2012 at 7:00 am and is filed under NZ Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

5 Responses to “US drinking age and road deaths”

Fletch (4,305) Says:
May 9th, 2012 at 10:01 am
From CNN

In a September 16 commentary on CNN.com, Amethyst Initiative leader John McCardell, a former president of Middlebury College, proposes lowering the drinking age, which he suggests will lead to less drinking and related problems among college students.

History and a comprehensive review of the research tell a much different story. The evidence is clear, consistent and compelling: A drinking age of 21 has led to less drinking, fewer injuries and fewer deaths.

In the 1970s when many states reduced their drinking ages, drinking-related deaths among young people increased. When the drinking age of 21 was restored, deaths declined. This effect is not simply a historical artifact explained by advances in safety technology and other policies.

New Zealand recently lowered the drinking age based on many of the same arguments advanced by the Amethyst Initiative. The result was more alcohol-involved traffic crashes and emergency room visits among 15- to 19-year-olds. New Zealand is now considering raising its drinking age. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that setting the drinking age at 21 saves the lives of 900 young people each year and has saved more than 25,000 lives since 1975.

It was on the basis of compelling research evidence about its lifesaving benefits that a bipartisan effort created Public Law 98-363, “The National Minimum Legal Drinking Age Act” in the first place. Subsequent research has strengthened the evidence. College students who are underage, for example, binge drink less than students aged 21-23.

Underage students who attend colleges that rigorously enforce the drinking age, and who reside in states that have more laws restricting access to alcohol for those under the legal age, are less likely to binge drink.

Another myth promulgated by the Amethyst Initiative is that European young people are taught by families to drink responsibly because of the typically lower legal drinking ages there. The reverse is the case. Surveys of youth in multiple European countries show that rates of frequent binge drinking among adolescents are higher in Europe than in the United States.

MORE – http://bit.ly/KMupXu
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Fletch (4,305) Says:
May 9th, 2012 at 10:05 am
Reuters –

(Reuters Health) – The number of U.S. teenagers involved in fatal drunk-driving accidents has declined because of laws that raised the legal drinking age to 21, according to a new study.

Researchers found that two “core” drinking-age laws passed in all U.S. states in the 1980s were responsible for an 11 percent decrease in the number of drunk teenage drivers involved in fatal crashes. The two laws made it illegal for anyone younger than 21 to buy or possess alcohol.

The findings, the researchers say, suggest that calls for once again lowering the minimum drinking age in some states could end up reversing those gains.

In 1984, the U.S. passed a federal law that spurred all states to raise their minimum drinking age to 21.

MORE – http://reut.rs/J1Dq1M
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Fletch (4,305) Says:
May 9th, 2012 at 10:13 am
Drinking age of 21 saves 1200 women a year –

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2011/11/study-of-the-day-drinking-age-of-21-saves-1-200-women-a-year/248475/
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
anonymouse (492) Says:
May 9th, 2012 at 10:26 am
The problem looking at the US data as a whole is that it is not consistent,

Some states already had an age of 21 (covering over 1/3 of the population) and for those that did change many did it after 84/85, Texas and NY did not change until 86 and Dec 85 respectively, and those states combined with those that did not change cover nearly 50% of the US population,
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote
Ajax151(1) Says:
June 8th, 2012 at 7:21 am
The 21 drinking age in the USA is the greatest alcohol policy failure since Prohibition. Just Google “Miron and Tetelbaum” and you will see that any supposed lifesaving effect was really just a mirage. Also, Canada, the UK, Australia, and even New Zealand all saw a similar or faster decrease in traffic fatalities as the USA despite NOT raising the drinking age to 21.

Living in the USA all my life at a time when the drinking age was 21, I can honestly tell you from experience that it does NOT work. It did NOT stop me or my friends from drinking as a teenager. In fact, I went to my first kegger when I was 14 in 1998, which was really not unusual where I’m from. All the 21 drinking age does is force drinking underground and make it more dangerous than it has to be.

New Zealand would be very foolish to raise the “drinking age” (which is really just a purchase age by the way) to 20 or 21 and actually expect it to save lives. Ditto for the split age proposal, which would be more likely to increase traffic deaths rather than decrease them as the author of this blog entry points out. A better solution would be to close the loopholes (make it an actual drinking age of 18) and enforce the law better, raise the price of booze, cut back the number of alcohol outlets, and crack down very hard on drunk driving, drunk violence, and disorderly conduct. Education is also important for changing the drinking culture. If you’re worried about 18-20 year olds buying booze for their younger friends, it would make more sense to simply put a cap on the quantities that 18-20 year olds can legally buy at the store (i.e. no kegs/cases/large liquor bottles and only one transaction per day) rather than ban purchases (or drinking) by that age group entirely.

Take a look at my blog Twenty-One Debunked and learn the truth about the 21 drinking age. I also looked at the CDC’s data for American traffic deaths as well as suicides, homicides, and other types of deaths in various age groups, and really found no connection between the drinking age and such deaths for either gender. This was true when I compared time trends of the states that raised the drinking age from 18 to 21 versus the 12 states that remained 21 throughout with no change in the drinking age. I found no support for the claim that the 21 drinking age saves any lives at all in the affected age groups.

Let America be America again, and lower the drinking age to 18. If you’re old enough to go to war, you’re old enough to go to the bar. ‘Nuff said.
Vote: 0 0 You need to be logged in to vote

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Kiwiblog