Posted on 10/18/2005 1:04:41 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Studies of teenagers suggest that heavy drinkers are more likely to be sexually active, more likely to have multiple partners, and less likely to use condoms. This risky behavior increases the spread of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). A new paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research suggests that reducing heavy drinking among youth may slow the spread of STDs.
The authors analyzed the relationship between incidences of gonorrhea and the price of alcohol. Because beer is the most popular alcoholic beverage among youth, the authors used state excise taxes on beer to represent the price of alcohol. Their models also included the presence (or absence) of 0.08 and 0.10 blood alcohol concentration laws. The authors found that:
A 10 percent increase in the average state excise tax on beer will reduce the gonorrhea rate by 4.4 percent for boys ages 15 to 19 and by 3.7 percent for men aged 20 to 24. Zero tolerance laws -- which typically set the maximum blood alcohol percentage at 0.02 for underage drinkers -- also reduce gonorrhea incidence by an estimated 7 to 8 percent in 15-19 year-old boys. Other drunk-driving laws appear to have no effect; nor does living in a dry county. Nevertheless, the authors believe that increasing the excise tax on beer is effective in combating the transmission of STDs, including AIDS. They estimate that:
A 10 percent increase in the average state excise tax on beer will reduce AIDS rates by a range of 5.1 to 8.5 percent among young males. The magnitude of the effect falls to a range of 3.2 to 6.4 percent for older males. The opposite pattern holds true for female AIDS rates, where a bigger response is expected for older females. Source: Linda Gorman, "Alcohol Policies and Sexually Transmitted Disease Among Youth," NBER Digest, July 2005; based upon: Michael Grossman, Robert Kaestner and Sara Markowitz, "An Investigation of the Effects of Alcohol Policies on Youth STDs," National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 10949, December 2004.
For article:
http://www.nber.org/digest/jul05/w10949.html
For abstract:
http://papers.nber.org/papers/w10949
For more on Health Issues:
http://www.ncpa.org/iss/hea/
I'm so weary of the entire thing.
Time for coffee and a butt---LOL!
Better yet, a class action suit by MADD or somebody, to demand information about marketing beer to children, you know, the commercials with the lizards and sexy girls, etc. That's clearly selling a product to the underage market. And I'll just BET those executives know it.
Well, I missed it on whatever other board you posted it on...but thanks for confirming my worst beliefs about nanny-state goobers.
*sigh*
Yeah, but that's what they did with cigarettes. "It'll make it harder for kids to get 'em if we raise taxes on 'em." As you know, all it did (as stated by someone earlier) was make it cost more for legal adults. And they really know that.
No. It's spreading to other things beside smoking now. As we all predicted it would.
What's the difference between a pig and a fox?
6 beers.
Not to mention the added benefit of fewer accidents, less smog, and a whole lot of great things! While we're at it, let's tax chain saws to reduce the number of chain saw massacres.
Forgive me if I have a small sense of satisfaction over this---I'm a smoker and don't drink so it's nice to see them go after someone else.
I'm the same way. Haven't drank for years. Wasn't an alcoholic, just an obnoxious drunk :D. All the anti-smoking boozers won't be laughing in a few more years. And I said years ago it'd be their turn in the barrel someday. They (all the ones I knew)laughed & said to me: "Never happen. Everybody drinks." No-they don't.
I was taken aback several times when I would see little children (5 or 6 years old) sitting in some of the pubs with their parents. There was no food being served. Mum and Dad were simply enjoying a pint of Smithwick's or Murphy's before walking on home for the evening.
No one raised a stir, no one was concerned that the children were being corrupted. It's just the way things are done there. No big deal. Their attitudes towards alcohol are simply different.
Well, I missed it on whatever other board you posted it on...but thanks for confirming my worst beliefs about nanny-state goobers.
Can't smoke there, though.
Sure you can. Just step outside to the front of the establishment. Most had nice big awnings to accomodate in the event of rain. No one seemed to mind...and there are a lot of smokers over there.
Gotta say though...as a non-smoker...it was nice not being inundated by a lot of tobacco smoke during the evening.
Moonbats.!?. (Eddie Murphy laugh)....
All you need are a 2L bottle of apple juice or cider, a half teaspoon of brewer's or vitner's yeast and a ferment lock. Drain off maybe the top tenth of the juice, cut a small hole in the center of the cap, push the ferment lock through, put it back on, and leave it alone for a couple of weeks. It will probably taste like crap, but it will be booze. I'm sure every teenager who really wants to know already does.
Bet it's nice under those awnings in the dead of winter.
Stopping gay sex can stop the spread of aids too... Why the hell should I pay for it?
Too true. But if it were me, I'd switch from Murphy's to Old Bushmills. That'll warm ya right up.
Good one,XEHRpa,good one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.