We deserve better - biased and distorted conclusions of study on college students' drinking habits

A prestigious group at Columbia University releases a report on collegiate drinking that receives national attention and we naturally assume that it was prepared by qualified researchers. In this case, that is a totally incorrect assumption. Here's the story...

Former First Lady Betty Ford, former cabinet member Joseph Califano and other well-known figures who constitute the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse a Columbia University appointed a commission of citizens to prepare a report on drinking on American college campuses.

The resulting Commission consisted of business people, politicians, college administrators, a judge, a coach and other concerned citizens.

Commission members talked with college presidents, convened student focus groups, held hearings, reviewed some studies and listened to anecdotal stories. And then they issued their report with great fanfare at a large press conferenc in Washington, D.C.

Their report and conclusions were frightening. They talked of death and the destruction of lives resulting from a rapidly escalating abuse of alcohol.

They reported, among other things, that heavy drinking by college women has gon up three-fold. It appeared painfully obvious that something drastic had to be done--and fast--to save our young people from their self-destructive folly.

It's disturbing to think that heavy drinking has gone up three-fold among college women. But, fortunately, it just isn't so. Research by scientists acros the country indicates that such drinking among college women has actually been remarkably stable over ten years.

In fact, fewer college students are now drinking than in the last 15 years. And those who choose to drink are consuming less than in the past. Study after stud confirms this. Research by Professor Ruth Engs of Indiana University and me for over 20 years and reported in dozens of scholarly publications is part of the voluminous evidence.

So, it turns out that college student drinking should not be a cause for panic. The real alarm should be with the Commission's biased and distorted conclusions But what would we expect? After all, the Commission is a political, not a scientific body, and its report is a political rather than scientific document.

While well-meaning, Commission members were not qualified or competent to evaluate the scientific evidence. At best, they were unduly influenced by anecdotal stories and other unscientific evidence. At worst, they let anti-alcohol prejudices distort their judgement.

In either case, the Commission's near-hysterical conclusions are neither accurate nor valid and must be repudiated.

We deserve better.

David Hanson is a Professor at State University of New York College at Potsdam, NY. He writes and speaks widely on alcohol issues and is author of a forthcomin book on the neo-prohibitionist threat.

COPYRIGHT 1994 Business Journals, Inc.
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group