4 ms·
Even according to that article, Prohibition only worked in a public health sense if you considered a reduction in alcohol consumption an absolute public health
by hx87 10y ago
Even according to that article, Prohibition only worked in a public health sense if you considered a reduction in alcohol consumption an absolute public health good in itself. I don't know about you, but drinking 50 gallons a year of legitimate, old school, high-quality pre-prohibition beer and wine doesn't exactly sound worse than drinking 25 gallons a year of moonshine from questionable sources.
- idlewords 10y agoIt is an absolute good, in that death rates from alcoholism and its diseases are directly related to consumption rates. Cirrhosis, for example, fell by some 20%. But there are also follow-on effects, like the death of saloon culture, a drop in domestic violence, and lower infant mortality. This stuff is documented, so you don't actually have to deduce it from first principles. http://eh.net/eha/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Depew.pdf http://eh.net/eha/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Depew.pdf
- alphydan 10y ago>> death of saloon culture, a drop in domestic violence, and lower infant mortality Didn't all those things happen in other countries which didn't implement prohibition? Are you sure it wasn't a natural evolution of society rather than a direct cause-effect from making alcohol harder to get?