2 ms·
Yeah, I think that probably a huge chunk of the difference is just that actually a lot of alcohol purchased is disposed of unconsumed. Tie that with a modest i
by aetherson 10y ago
Yeah, I think that probably a huge chunk of the difference is just that actually a lot of alcohol purchased is disposed of unconsumed.
Tie that with a modest increase in the lower-end reporters, and perhaps a modest decrease in the highest-end reporters (are there people who said they average 5 drinks a night who really average 4 because in fact their drinking is variable per night and averaging across a week is more mental record keeping + math than they bothered with when answering a survey?), and you get something that strikes me as more congruent with basically all other facts that I've observed about the world.
Now, that probably does still mean that the top decile accounts for an astonishing percentage of overall alcohol consumption, on a relative basis -- just the absolute amount is less incredible.
- Bartweiss 10y agoThe 'failure to consume' part didn't even occur to me. Between half-emptied drinks that go bad and liquor cabinets which have been stocked but barely used for decades, it can't be a small amount. And yeah - I don't doubt it's a power law thing, pretty much all addictive substances are. I imagine the 95th percentile of use for a lot of drugs would be lethal for a first-time user. But the raw dose claimed for alcohol here was bizarre, and I'm glad to have it explained.