The CSU student-drinking statistics in the July 12 Summer Forty-Niner, while encouraging, can be misleading. Like most stats, they are only indicators, not sure-fire evidence that a problem is in decline. To make claims that binge drinking is down could be a slope too slippery to hold a celebration.
All the figures prove are fewer drunken CSU students have been identified in arrest records or listed on accident reports. They don’t prove lesser numbers of CSU students are guzzling boozy refreshments. The report doesn’t assess out-of-town arrests or accidents.
The report can’t show more because the numbers are based on university and local police reports and informal surveys. Not included are binge-drinking episodes at certain frat parties (where sobriety is a violation of “Man Law”), spring break or athletic victory celebrations, where many students flex their “beerceps.”
Bending the elbow is an aspect of college life many parents dread. Newly discovered freedom from mom and dad’s scrutiny, coupled with the intense pressures of classes and work, create temptations which often can lead to destructive behavior.
CSU’s stats don’t tell which type of drinks students are pumping into their systems, either. As a benchmark, the statistics apply a base of “five or more drinks per sitting” to define binge drinking. No indication of the size of drinks or alcoholic content is mentioned in the article. Going shot-for-shot with 151-proof rum will lift blood alcohol levels far higher than downing equal amounts of 90-proof vodka.
The report highlights perceived program successes. Those success claims could be fueled by flawed data obtained from the 10 hand-picked campuses in the CSU system. The surveys were administered by “trained beverage servers.”
Claiming the “average Cal State Long Beach student has 2.36 drinks in one sitting” is probably overly optimistic. Because denial is part of alcohol’s inevitable grasp on its victims, it’s impossible to speculate on “honest” representation of any data.
Some of the estimates are encouraging. The 14.6 percent reduction for drunk driving is an enormously positive sign – if it is accurate. Unfortunately, those accounts are based on DUI convictions, not actual arrests. Using allegations, and not convictions, is nearly negligent.
Binge drinking presents a host of health and safety issues with long-range consequences. Alcohol awareness and educational programs have proven beneficial in thwarting drunk driving.
While the CSU should be commended for its attempts to solve the drinking “plague,” doing so with mere feel good statistics exacerbates decent evaluation of a deeper problem. Bad math rarely provides a cure.
Duke Rescola is a senior journalism major and the opinion editor for the Summer Forty-Niner.
