Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    There are a huge number of unbiased scientifically valid and peer reviewed sources out there.

    The fact that they happen support my argument rather than yours is merely indicative of the fact that I have researched this subject far more accurately than you have done. You think Home Office research is biased in favour of alcohol? That would be a turn up for the books.
    How do I know that they happen to support your argument rather than mine? You haven't provided anything to suggest this.

    And even so, who says your sources (which you have yet to provide) are any less biased than mine? Just the brand name that's been stuck on it?
    This is nothing more than a case of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. You simply call every site that disagrees with you "biased" and all the sites that agree with you "unbiased", and then expect me to consider it very telling that all the "unbiased" sites agree with you and all the "biased ones" don't.

    Even including indirect "unwanted consequences" skiing is still far more dangerous than binge drinking.
    And you haven't provided anything to support this either.

    PS from their own website: "The core aim of the Institute of Alcohol Studies is to advocate for the use of scientific evidence in policy-making to reduce alcohol-related harm. We are lucky in being one of the few organisations that do not depend on the Government for funds" So basically they're a privately funded anti-alcohol pressure group, about as unbiased a source as the National Front website.
    What they've described themselves as, and the way you've interpreted it don't sound similar in the slightest. You seem to think that anybody who isn't the government must be biased, and anybody wanting to reduce a particular problem is merely imagining or fabricating the existence of that problem.

    Just what exactly do you think is biased about the numerical data provided and referred to in the source? Unless you think they're just outright lying?

    Btw, have you ever binge drunk?
    No, I haven't.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    How do I know that they happen to support your argument rather than mine? You haven't provided anything to suggest this.
    I checked his previous threads, dont worry, anything that they post can be dismissed as biased junk :bunny:.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CarryOn123)
    At my university I have seen it happen to people like my flatmates and I were walking back when we were just about to go through the car park of our halls and a girl was extremely drunk to the point she couldn't stand but a boy who looked perfectly sober was snogging her and fingering her. One of my flatmates said they knew her and they never thought she'd do that sort of stuff as she didn't seem like that sort of girl and she probably wasn't but with the amount of alcohol she'd drunk that evening her common sense/ control just went out of the window so she allowed the boy to do that to her :/
    We did phone the security to let them know about it but it wouldn't surprise me if the boy had gotten his way.
    and whose fault is that?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SuziieB)
    I am a girl and I completely agree.

    I get really pissed when people try to say, 'well the man should know better.' Seriously? Sure. In an ideal world! If you dress like a slut and are so drunk you cannot even speak, whose fault is it that some scum picks you off the street and rapes you?

    If you leave your car unlocked with the key in the ignition, would you say that the robber should know better?

    People need to stop being naive and stupid. Women should also start taking more responsibility for their actions.

    __________________________
    Save time. See it my way.

    If someone's carrying a gun and aims it at you, would you just nonchalantly let them? Think about what you're saying. If you instigate a certain emotion in someone, then they will act upon it. It's a primal and natural instinct augmented by women's vacuity.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    How do I know that they happen to support your argument rather than mine? You haven't provided anything to suggest this.

    And even so, who says your sources (which you have yet to provide) are any less biased than mine? Just the brand name that's been stuck on it?
    This is nothing more than a case of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. You simply call every site that disagrees with you "biased" and all the sites that agree with you "unbiased", and then expect me to consider it very telling that all the "unbiased" sites agree with you and all the "biased ones" don't.



    And you haven't provided anything to support this either.



    What they've described themselves as, and the way you've interpreted it don't sound similar in the slightest. You seem to think that anybody who isn't the government must be biased, and anybody wanting to reduce a particular problem is merely imagining or fabricating the existence of that problem.

    Just what exactly do you think is biased about the numerical data provided and referred to in the source? Unless you think they're just outright lying?



    No, I haven't.

    You know, because I'm telling you. It would only be the no true scotsman fallacy if I was either an idiot or a liar, and I am neither.

    If that isn't enough for you then go away and research it yourself, and treat the prohibitionist sources you find with the same degree of suspicion as you sources of evidence about the denial of climate change. Look at what the actual scientists have to say, rather than the pressure groups.

    The numerical data you allude to is quite obviously heavily massaged. I'm sure you're intelligent enough to be able to see that. Give us an example if you really need me to explain how its misleading, although I would be disappointed if you couldn't figure it out for yourself.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Okay, back to the original topic, I'm not sure if anyone has read this article before:

    http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/drinking-in-the-uk

    It draws some interesting conclusions:

    * The proportion of women who binge-drink almost doubled between 1998 and 2006 and is now at 15%

    It argues that this may be because "of the historically recent emancipation of women in Western society, the pressure of positive advertising and also the increased financial security and independence of women."


    * The study also claims that there has been a "recent decrease in drinking among 16- to 24-year-olds".

    Bear in mind this was seven years ago now so maybe the percentage has risen again. Also "variability in consumption between successive survey years is greater in this age group than any other. This means that we should be more cautious about interpreting this as a convincing downward trend."


    I only stumbled upon this because I was looking for possible reasons as to why women binge drinking has become so much more popular and socially acceptable.

    I'll abstain from expressing my own opinion but does anyone have any views on this they'd like to share?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dagnabbit)
    Okay, back to the original topic, I'm not sure if anyone has read this article before:

    http://www.jrf.org.uk/publications/drinking-in-the-uk

    It draws some interesting conclusions:

    * The proportion of women who binge-drink almost doubled between 1998 and 2006 and is now at 15%

    It argues that this may be because "of the historically recent emancipation of women in Western society, the pressure of positive advertising and also the increased financial security and independence of women."


    * The study also claims that there has been a "recent decrease in drinking among 16- to 24-year-olds".



    Bear in mind this was seven years ago now so maybe the percentage has risen again. Also "variability in consumption between successive survey years is greater in this age group than any other. This means that we should be more cautious about interpreting this as a convincing downward trend."


    I only stumbled upon this because I was looking for possible reasons as to why women binge drinking has become so much more popular and socially acceptable.

    I'll abstain from expressing my own opinion but does anyone have any views on this they'd like to share?

    If the JRF are forced to admit that binge drinking *might* be falling, you can be damn sure that the actual numbers reveal that they're plummetting.

    Here are the unmassaged stats:

    The average adult drank 11.5 units a week in 2010 – and that’s a fall of 20 per cent in five years, down from 14.3 units a week in 2005, according to the General Lifestyle Survey published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) last week.

    in 1998 75% of men and 59% of women drank in the week prior to report’s survey compared to 68% of men and 54% of women in 2010

    For secondary school pupils aged 11 to 15, 13% reported drinking alcohol during the week in 2010 compared with 18% of pupils in 2009 and 26% in 2001.

    The annual quantity of alcohol consumed by those aged 18 and over has fallen more than 12% from its peak of 9.5 litres in 2004 to 8.3 litres in 2011, the same as in 1999.

    the overall volume of alcoholic drinks purchased for consumption outside the home has decreased by 44% from 733 millilitres (ml) of alcohol per person per week in 2001/02 to 413 ml per person per week in 2010.

    Official figures show that binge drinking is down across all age groups – except for those over 65.

    Meanwhile, binge drinking among young men and women between the ages of 16-24 has dropped the most – down 8 per cent and 10 per cent respectively since 2005.

    Currently (ie 2012) 3.8m or 19 per cent of all men and 2.9m or 13 per cent of all women are categorised as binge drinkers; down from 23 per cent and 15 per cent in 2005 respectively.


    The only worrying trend is the increase of spirit drinking and corresponding drop in beer and cider consumption over the last 10 years - it is this change in consumption habits that correlates with increased cases of liver disease and throat cancer, despite overall alcohol consumption plummetting.

    Kids: don't drink shots drink pints.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)

    Kids: don't drink shots drink pints.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/19759446

    http://www.caskreport.co.uk/images/d...%20Release.pdf - "While cask drinkers remain predominantly male and upmarket, interest from younger and female drinkers is holding steady after significant recruitment from these groups. "

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ys-cask-report

    These sources seem to show an increase among young people and women drinking real ale. I assume real ale is less harmful than spirits, right (much like lager and cider)?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dagnabbit)
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/19759446

    http://www.caskreport.co.uk/images/d...%20Release.pdf - "While cask drinkers remain predominantly male and upmarket, interest from younger and female drinkers is holding steady after significant recruitment from these groups. "

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandsty...ys-cask-report

    These sources seem to show an increase among young people and women drinking real ale. I assume real ale is less harmful than spirits, right (much like lager and cider)?

    I'm glad you brought this up because its good news from whatever angle you look at it.

    Locally microbrewed real ale and craft beer is growing, within the context of a falling beer share of a falling alcohol market in general. So its seriously bucking the trend.

    This is a fantastic victory for a traditional, British brewed, high quality artisan product. Last year the number of independent UK breweries topped the 1,000 mark for the first time in over 100 years!

    Real Ale and Craft Beer are not typically drinks you binge on. They are drinks to be savoured and enjoyed with friends.

    The underlying story is: binge drinking is plumetting, and the sales of the kind of beer you might binge drink on (ie mass produced cheap and nasty) are plummetting with it.

    Social drinking, drinking for the enjoyment of flavour, is growing, and the kind of beers you might drink for pleasure are growing with it.

    In 2005 the government changed the licencing laws with the express intention of creating this exact effect, more social drinking, less binging, and despite all the naysayers and hate-filled prohibitionists, the stats show its actually having the desired effect.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)
    I'm glad you brought this up because its good news from whatever angle you look at it.

    Locally microbrewed real ale and craft beer is growing, within the context of a falling beer share of a falling alcohol market in general. So its seriously bucking the trend.

    This is a fantastic victory for a traditional, British brewed, high quality artisan product. Last year the number of independent UK breweries topped the 1,000 mark for the first time in over 100 years!

    Real Ale and Craft Beer are not typically drinks you binge on. They are drinks to be savoured and enjoyed with friends.

    The underlying story is: binge drinking is plumetting, and the sales of the kind of beer you might binge drink on (ie mass produced cheap and nasty) are plummetting with it.

    Social drinking, drinking for the enjoyment of flavour, is growing, and the kind of beers you might drink for pleasure are growing with it.

    In 2005 the government changed the licencing laws with the express intention of creating this exact effect, more social drinking, less binging, and despite all the naysayers and hate-filled prohibitionists, the stats show its actually having the desired effect.
    Completely agree. I would bet that none of the people pictured in the OP went that way because of drinking ale or 'drinking because of the taste'. I'll admit that, despite the increases in taxes and changes in laws and what not, my access to local real ale has not been affected. It's still affordable and available - good for social drinking, as you say. And by social drinking I mean having a chat in a quiet-ish pub where you can actually hear each other without having to shout.

    But, yes, statistics certainly seem to be painting a different image to the tabloids. I live in an area which is supposedly high for binge drinking and yet, despite being out on NYE, I saw surprisingly little of the sort (although this might have been because double vodka was £5 and entrance was £16 where I was).
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dagnabbit)
    Completely agree. I would bet that none of the people pictured in the OP went that way because of drinking ale or 'drinking because of the taste'. I'll admit that, despite the increases in taxes and changes in laws and what not, my access to local real ale has not been affected. It's still affordable and available - good for social drinking, as you say. And by social drinking I mean having a chat in a quiet-ish pub where you can actually hear each other without having to shout.

    But, yes, statistics certainly seem to be painting a different image to the tabloids. I live in an area which is supposedly high for binge drinking and yet, despite being out on NYE, I saw surprisingly little of the sort (although this might have been because double vodka was £5 and entrance was £16 where I was).
    The problem is, the newspapers don't even write the stories themselves. They are fed them wholesale by organisations with Cromwellian prohibitionist agendas to try and get all forms of drinking stamped out and are too lazy to fact-check them. The barefaced lies you see printed in newspapers and repeated parrot fashion by members of this forum are terrifying.

    I was fortunate enough to grow up before lying about alcohol became common place, so I was able to recognise the bull**** for what it was. Unfortunately, many members of this forum were brought up being told lies such as "Britain has a binge drinking epidemic", "even one pint is too much to drive after", "even moderate alcohol consumption is bad for you" and "alcohol makes you violent", and they actually swallow these lies whole and believe them; you see them being repeated over and over.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by py0alb)

    I was fortunate enough to grow up before lying about alcohol became common place, so I was able to recognise the bull**** for what it was. Unfortunately, many members of this forum were brought up being told lies such as "Britain has a binge drinking epidemic", "even one pint is too much to drive after", "even moderate alcohol consumption is bad for you" and "alcohol makes you violent", and they actually swallow these lies whole and believe them; you see them being repeated over and over.
    Is there a link between moderate alcohol consumption and cancer? That's one thing I get told a lot by other people at my university.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dagnabbit)
    Is there a link between moderate alcohol consumption and cancer? That's one thing I get told a lot by other people at my university.
    Yes there is a strong link. Numerous studies suggest that moderate alcohol consumption* decreases the risk of several cancers, as well as significantly reducing the risk of heart disease and stress related conditions. Hence the reason we live on average 3 years longer than teetotallers.





    *This only applies to beer, wine and cider, spirits are just plain bad for you.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Don't care, what is fabricated is your take on things, you have twisted what has actually been said to fit your agenda. 'Minimising the risk' = woman's fault apparently. Everything you say is manipulative and emotionally driven. You have also called those who disagree with you 'rapists' you absolute embarrassment.

    And that is the last time my keyboard will type a response to you.
    You keep saying that I'm emotional but you just admitted that the only "fabricated" thing is my opinion. Well no **** Sherlock. Try coming up with new ideas that... aren't fabricated.

    As for the bold bit, yes, minimising the risk DOES actually equal women's own fault according to some people:
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...6#post40801136

    I don't think you disagree with me, I think you're being driven by a wild rage that I'm apparently accusing all men of being rapists, so you go around accusing me (I presume I'm a "feminazi") of being emotionally driven and manipulative (I don't see where I was manipulative but I seem to recall that "manipulation" is quite a big female stereotype out there )

    But that's fine, you don't need to reply to my posts anymore, because obviously this "absolute embarrassment" is the emotionally driven one.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.