Loyal readers of NoBullBar.com know that CASA has a long history of playing fast and loose with the facts.  And just last week, Susan Foster showed that they’re at it again.

She was quoted in the New York Daily News saying, “’We’re seeing an increase in rates of drinking to get drunk” among teens.

Sounds terrible!  And it would be…if it were true.

Susan based her comments on The National Youth Risk Behavior Survey conducted by the Department of Health and Human Services, a federal agency that is a part of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention.  The study was conducted from 1991-2005 with a representative sample of 9th trough 12th grade students throughout the United States. 

It found NO CHANGE in episodic heavy drinking from 1991 to 2005.  In fact, they found a DECREASE from 1997 to 2005 in heaving drinking behavior and the trend was consistent when they looked at lifetime alcohol use, current alcohol use and use of alcohol on school property.

Susan, CASA: I encourage you to join us in being part of the SOLUTION.  It’s about time you stop twisting the facts to support your political agenda.

As always, we invite Susan to post her comments on why she distorts these and other facts right here on www.NoBullBar.com

Cheers!

guy

Radley Balko, a blogger from http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/, the official Cato Institute blog, recently deconstructed the CASA study we�-?ve been discussing here and brought up some�= interesting points that I wanted to share with you.

Bottom line - according to independent experts, the misuse of data that we have been discussing in this space may actually be putting our youth at risk. Read on.

Balko points out that CASA has a nasty habit of fudging its numbers for the sake of sensationalism.�= (And you don�-?t have to take my word for it �-? read what a Ph.D., who suggests CASA change its name to �-�the Center for Alcohol Statistics Abuse,�-? has to say about their historical manipulation of the facts.)

Subsequently, and perhaps even worse, there is a dangerous trend among some well-respected journalists at top tier media outlets �-? The New York Times, for one �-? who fail to confirm the accuracy of CASA�-?s research and jump to cover the �-�news�-? from this organization and others in the habit of fictionalizing science.

One of the reasons I find this trend so troubling is because perpetuating this �-�data�-? could actually increase underage drinking.�= At Diageo, we think any underage drinking is too much, period.�= Exaggerating these numbers is not only unethical, it is also downright dangerous.

H. Wesley Perkins, Ph.D., Professor of Sociology and department Chair at Hobart and William Smith Colleges has done extensive research that suggests students often believe their peers drink more, and more often, than they actually do.�= And the troubling part is that those students will then model their behavior after what they think their peers are doing, oftentimes leading them to drink more.

Dr. Perkins accurately hypothesized that correcting these misperceptions can reduce underage drinking.�= This led to a revolutionary new approach to alcohol education.�= Instead of utilizing traditional, ineffective �-�scare tactics,�-? many academic institutions now use the social norms approach to educate students on accurate norms amongst their peers.

And it works.

In April 2006, when the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) issued its Alcohol Alert, it was noted that �-�the phenomenon of perceived social norms�-�or the belief that �-�everyone�-? is drinking and drinking is acceptable�-�is one of the strongest correlates of drinking among young adults�-�Recent research has shown that addressing these misperceptions can help reduce drinking.�-?

At the end of the day, we all want to eliminate underage drinking.�= And the good news is that underage drinking is on the decline.

So why does CASA continue to release erroneous �-�research,�-? putting our youth at risk?

Cheers!

guy

Liquor Angel is right.  Parents need to teach their kids how to behave responsibly and pay more attention to what their kids are doing.

The crowd over at CASA wants you to believe that underage drinking is at its absolute worst in years.  Here’s one of the things they’ve had to say:

“Beer and other alcohol is the number one drug of abuse for American children and teens.  Rates of teen drinking remain at epidemic proportions with underage drinkers annually downing 19.7 percent of all the alcohol consumed in the U.S.”  (Joe Califano, CASA, Sept. 10, 2003)

This sounds harsh, doesn’t it?  If CASA is your source for information on underage drinking, then of course the situation looks grim.

Now, we can all agree that in the U.S. there is too much underage drinking, but let’s consider what some other sources are showing us.

“Monitoring the Future,” an ongoing study of the behaviors, attitudes, and values of American secondary school students, college students, and young adults has shown that current drinking is down among 8th graders, 10th graders and 12th graders.  In fact 8th grade current drinking is at the lowest level since 1991, when it began to be tracked (down 32%), 10th grade is at the lowest level since 1991 (down 22%), and 12th grade current drinking is at the lowest level since 1975, when it began to be tracked (down 6% since 2000 and down 41% since 1982).

And while we’re spouting out facts, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, in 2004, teenage alcohol-related traffic fatalities were down 13% since 2000 and down 62% since 1982.

Another government agency, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), has found that 82% of adolescents ages 12-17 do not drink and 71% of underage youth, ages 12-20 do not drink.

As we’ve said before, any underage drinking is too much and we want parents to help us keep alcohol out of the hands of their kids. The white coats at the National Academy of Sciences said as much in their 2003 report on the problem: “…[U]nderage drinking cannot be successfully addressed by focusing on youth alone….[Youth] usually obtain alcohol—either directly or indirectly—from adults. Efforts to reduce underage drinking, therefore, need to focus on adults and must engage the society at large.”

Obviously, we don’t want anyone under the age of 21 purchasing our products.  We do, however, want to make sure that everyone gets their facts straight so we can know how to fix the problem. 

Underage drinking is on the decline, not as rapidly as we all want, but if we don’t have an accurate understanding of where we are and where we’ve been, it makes it doubly hard to figure out what to do next. 

Let me end today’s epistle with a question.  Susan, where are you?  The Susan we’re searching for is Susan Foster, referred to in our inaugural posting.  Susan is a wheel over at CASA and she has her name on lots of these outrageously wrong “facts” about underage drinking.

We haven’t had a retort from Susan (or anyone else at CASA) defending her position and her “facts.”  Come on Susan, we are all waiting…and hopeful!

Cheers!

guy

WJLA (ABC) Channel 7 in Washington, D.C. - whose location in the nation’s capital makes them even more influential than most local TV stations might be - has weighed in for the second time this month on the subject of underage drinking.  Channel 7 got it right for focusing the responsibility for preventing alcohol consumption by youth where it belongs:  on parents.  As the TV station — known for its “Seven on Your Side” slogan — pointed out in its report, “The number one thing parents can do is be parents, not pals. Stay on top of the kids. Supervise and network. Realize what kids are up against.”

This focus on parents represents a marked improvement on the station’s earlier effort this month on the issue of underage drinking, in which it accepted at face value a study by a researcher Columbia University’s National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA).  The CASA study argued that 17.5 percent of the alcohol industry’s revenue comes from underage drinkers. Interesting. Yeah, but get this: George Mason University’s Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) recently reviewed the CASA study and found that it was “riddled with errors.”  Based on the statisticians’ at George Mason University review of the calculations and assumptions, STATS writes of CASA’s research:  “The number of drinks consumed by youth under 21 is overestimated, the cost per drink is overestimated, the amount of drink attributed to abuse and dependence is overestimated, and the benefit to the industry of youth drinking and alcohol abuse and dependence is overestimated.”

Or as we baseball fans would put it:  CASA was 0 for 4, but then CASA has a history of being out on lots of there research! Not a good night at the plate - or in the field of research.

Here’s the deal: despite the accusations and flawed research of CASA and others, we don’t want young people’s (meaning anyone under 21 years of age!) business.  We don’t need it.  

We hope that parents will take Channel 7’s advice and step up to bat - and join us in our efforts to keep our products out of the hands of their kids.  We need not only Seven — but also more important, America’s parents — on our side in the battle against underage drinking. Check out what The Century Council has to say on parents and underage drinking. They have a dynamite website chock full of information that is very useful in the fight against underage drinking.

Listen, any underage drinking is too much. Dontcha just wonder why CASA persists in getting their figures wrong?

Cheers!

guy

Welcome to nobullbar.com from Diageo North America. I’m Guy Smith, Executive Vice President of Diageo North America and will be serving as host of nobullbar.com. I guess you may be wondering why the world’s largest beer, wine and spirits company would have a blog in the first place and also why we would call it nobullbar.com.

Well, here’s why. Diageo North America is the biggest player in the alcohol business. We take great pride in the way we make and market our products. We have the toughest marketing code of conduct in the industry and we are serious about living up to both the letter and the spirit of that code. We are quite aggressive about putting social responsibility reminders in our advertising and on our promotional materials. We advance legislation that is designed to prevent underage access to alcohol. We do not want underage persons having access to our products. We don’t want that business. We don’t need that business. Lots more on this as we go forward.

It won’t surprise you to learn that the subject of alcohol frequently elicits very strong emotions from many people. And in a country that thrives on and benefits from the free expression of ideas that is a good thing. What’s not a good thing is when free expression twists facts in ways that are simply not true in the hopes of advancing a cause. That’s the second reason why we’re here with nobullbar.com. We’ll be highlighting in this space some of the more egregious examples.

What’s important to remember is what Abraham Lincoln had to say about alcohol: “The making of liquor is regarded as an honorable livelihood. If people are injured from the use of liquor, the injury arises not from the use of a bad thing but from the abuse of a very good thing.” Alcohol abuse is a real problem. Underage access to alcohol is a real problem. We take pride in the fact that our company and our employees work very hard to address these issues and to always remind our consumers to drink responsibly.

Too often these days the efforts of thousands of well-meaning, thoughtful, and dedicated citizens, including our company and its employees, are overshadowed by the misstatements of those masquerading as serious policy advocates.

For example …

Here’s an example, just for starters. But we’ll be back in this space frequently to point out, comment upon, and clarify some of these outrageous things that are said about alcohol and alcohol companies.

You may have noticed the other day an announcement from a group called the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA). These guys have a history of issuing specious studies on alcohol. CASA’s deeply flawed study claims that huge portions of the alcohol industry’s revenue come from underage drinkers, 17.5 percent, according to their claims. Now, in order to get to such a boxcar number, CASA followed this assumption: every underage drinker, from 12 to 20 years of age, must consume 100 drinks a month in order to arrive at that claimed 20.1 billion drinks that CASA claims young people between 12 and 20 drink per year.

Nice try CASA, but that just won’t wash.

Think about it. Even one 12-year-old who is drinking is one too many, but can we really believe that there are thousands of 12-year-olds out there drinking 100 drinks per month. Give me a break. Want to see for yourself? Here’s the press release from CASA and here’s a couple of analytical documents from some of our colleagues at the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States. OK, so you’re thinking, sure, what do you expect somebody from the liquor industry’s trade association to say? What we expect them to say is the truth. Not something we’re getting from Susan Foster and her boss, Joe Califano. Check out the DISCUS analysis and you can see for yourself how the facts are being twisted.

Now, before you go thinking that Smith is just picking on CASA and Susan Foster, let me tell you a bit more. Susan and CASA are serial statistic abusers. Now that’s kinda harsh. Read on.

On February 26, 2002, CASA released a 145-page report on alcohol consumption leading with the attention-grabbing statistic that 25 percent of all the beverage alcohol consumed in the US is consumed by people between the ages of 12 and 20 – or “children,” as the study delivered. CASA’s statistical conclusion, as startling as it was inaccurate, was based on data taken from a comprehensive 1998 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse that was conducted by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

Upon seeing an advance copy of the CASA report the day before it was to be released, at Diageo we immediately recognized the 25% figure as inaccurate so we contacted SAMHSA and asked them the check their original study upon which CASA based it’s report. At the same time, economists from DISCUS did their own demographic analysis. Quickly, CASA’s study was proven wrong.

By matching the population of 12-20 year olds (according to the 2000 census) and the total amount of alcohol consumed, DISCUS found that in order for CASA’s 25% figure to be correct, everyone in that age bracket would have had to consume at least 120 drinks a month. Not likely.

Simultaneously, SAMHSA was comparing its original data to the conclusions drawn by CASA and they soon found CASA’s methodology completely flawed. While the 12 to 20 age group represented 38% of those surveyed by SAMHSA, the group only accounts for 13% of the total US population. Clearly CASA had not weighted the sample correctly. Rather than 25%, the real number was more like 11.4%.

The next morning, CASA called a D.C. press conference to release its “blockbuster” study to the media. As they were releasing the study, we made sure that the media had the correct numbers. By early afternoon CASA was in full retreat and was forced to issue a statement repudiating their own major study released only hours earlier.

The next morning the New York Times ran the CASA story on the front page under the headline: “Disturbing Findings on Young Drinkers Proves to be Wrong.” Not exactly the headline CASA was hoping to see. But the truth was exposed. And although some real-time electronic media reported the 25% figure immediately after the press conference, including NBC Nightly News, almost all corrected their reports within hours. And on the evening of February 26th, during the following evening’s news broadcast, Tom Brokaw read a correction.

Alcohol abuse of any kind is too important for this kind of folly. This is serious. We are serious. And we think everyone involved in alcohol policy should be serious—and play with the facts. Twisting information and masquerading as real research to advance some policy goal does a real disservice to all of us who work to keep alcohol out of reach of underage persons. There are way too many serious people in the United States who feel very deeply that we need to create alcohol public policy based on the facts.

Well that’s it for openers. Maybe CASA will post a comment. I hope they do and I hope they come to nobullbar.com to explain themselves. I look forward to your comments as well.

So welcome to nobullbar.com. We’re glad you visited. We hope you’ll come back. And we hope to advance the debate on alcohol policy in a real and substantive manner without resorting to masquerades.

Cheers!
guy