Every alcoholic beverage is “potentially hazardous,” and none will ever be proven “safe,”… But there’s no question that a can of Four Loko, which has less alcohol than a bottle of wine and about as much caffeine as a cup of coffee, can be consumed without serious adverse effects. If every alcoholic beverage had to pass the reckless college student test, they all would be banned.
I’m sure it’s no surprise, but I agree.
The whole episode seems to me a textbook case of moral panic. As Wikipedia summarizes — I think fairly — there are five basic attributes to a moral panic:
- Concern – There must be awareness that the behaviour of the group or category in question is likely to have a negative impact on society.
- Hostility – Hostility towards the group in question increases, and they become “folk devils”. A clear division forms between “them” and “us”.
- Consensus – Though concern does not have to be nationwide, there must be widespread acceptance that the group in question poses a very real threat to society. It is important at this stage that the “moral entrepreneurs” are vocal and the “folk devils” appear weak and disorganised.
- Disproportionality – The action taken is disproportionate to the actual threat posed by the accused group.
- Volatility – Moral panics are highly volatile and tend to disappear as quickly as they appeared due to a wane in public interest or news reports changing to another topic.
The folk devils here are the evil alcohol pushers, of course. They may even include yours truly, indicted before I’d so much as made a peep about the stuff. I still haven’t tried it, and I’m not too enthusiastic, to be honest. While I greatly enjoy both caffeine and alcohol, I also enjoy a good night’s sleep, thanks.
The disproportionality is that Four Loko is mostly just caffeine and alcohol, two very familiar substances. Taurine only has minor effects, if any, on one’s mental state, while guarana — the fourth of the four horsemen — is mostly just a vehicle for more caffeine.
All of which is to say Four Loko’s got nothing much on rum & Coke. That drink brings another risk factor, because you never know quite how much alcohol you’re getting if someone else mixes it for you. Why don’t we ban that, too? (Is someone coming after my French press and 1.5L of Jack Daniel’s? Why on earth not?)
Still, the consensus seems to be building. I’m mystified. I genuinely don’t get it. No, a world without Four Loko isn’t going to be an appreciably worse world. Maybe a handful more people unemployed, but no biggie, I guess. I’m not worried about Four Loko bootleggers, or the bathtub variants you might cook up in the space next to your meth lab. I just find it silly to imagine that we’re doing any particular good here. We seem to be banning a class of drinks based on a few anecdotes and an embarrassing tic of human social psychology, by which we demonize a little too easily, and only later come to question it.
So why am I the one being asked to blush here, and not all of you?
My brother was killed by a drunk driver.
Every time I see you people say that alcohol is perfectly fine, I wonder what it would be like to go over to his house for dinner and watch football. I wonder what his kids would be like. I wonder if they would call me “Uncle Bird”. I wonder if they would grow up and cure cancer.
But no. Instead of typing this on his computer, I’m typing it on mine.
In a world with legal Four Loko and cancer.
(Okay, that’s my best shot.)Report
I don’t know how these things happen either. My best guess is that a lot people go along with these bans not out of some sense of panic or folk demonizing, but along the lines of ‘better safe than sorry’. To wit: okay, probably there’s nothing wrong with X and I’m sure it will turn out to be safe, but we just don’t know for sure, and until we do, let’s be on the safe side in banning it. We can always undo the ban later.
At least, that seems the more charitable explanation.Report
Sounds like if we could just ban the reckless, college students, we could clear this whole thing up.Report
Okay, but I still reserve the right to judge people for actually CONSUMING Four-Loko. Their fear of my slightly arched eyebrows and skeptical expression will be enough to sink this company, I promise.Report
So I guess you’re off the guest list for my Four Loko solidarity party, huh?Report
I’ll either be protesting outside, or protesting the protesters. I’m not sure which category a cardboard sign reading, “Drinking Should Be Done In Accord With Kierkegaard’s Aesthetic Mode!” falls.Report
“But there’s no question that a can of Four Loko, which has less alcohol than a bottle of wine and about as much caffeine as a cup of coffee, can be consumed without serious adverse effects”
I am not familiar with this product; I have no idea how big a can is, or how many cans are typically consumed at a sitting. I will point out though that a bottle of wine is something that is typically shared between multiple people and that drinking a whole bottle of wine is actually quite a bit of alcohol for one person.Report
drinking a whole bottle of wine is actually quite a bit of alcohol for one person
Pace yourself, eat bread.Report
I was about to scoff at the idea that a can of Four Loko could possibly contain as much alcohol as a whole bottle of wine, but once again Google and math have proven their superiority over truthiness. Four Loko comes in a 24-oz can and is 12% ABV. Wine comes in a 25-oz bottle and is usually 12-14% ABV.
I was thinking that 750ml was significantly more than 25 ounces, but I guess not. Stupid tricksy metric system.Report
Not this person!
But, certainly, for people who can’t drink a bottle of wine in one sitting, or while lying in bed, maybe a warning label would suffice?Report
I believe that not enough attention has been paid to the fact that milk has been shown to be very ineffective in reducing hiccups.
Ban milk!
Consider the inherent danger to all the kids trying to text while they’re riding around on their bicycles, hiccuping like nobody’s business. It’s a recipe for disaster.
And take into consideration the evil bovine plot to DESTROY OUR PLANET with the greenhouse gases contained in their evil cow farts.
And I’m sure George Soros has money going into milk somewhere– to destroy America by giving Americans the hiccups!
THIS MILK MUST BE STOPPED!!!Report
I don’t think the stuff should be banned. However, the moral hazard of a product like this is the fact that people don’t actually know how volatile the stuff is, i.e. they probably know they’re being reckless when they drink the stuff excessively, but they don’t think they’re being any more reckless than any other time they’ve spent a night of binge drinking. the fact that the drink hasn’t been on the market for very long and kids are already DYING from drinking the stuff should at least give us pause. Of course, the answer is not to ban it. It is to help people make more informed decisions. So how do you do that?
My buddy, who is a die-hard libertarian, put it well: whenever you’re dealing with a dangerous product, all you need to do to meet the burden of a moral hazard is to put a label on the product that fairly informs people of the risks. Cigarettes are a perfect example. if people still want to buy it after being fully informed, let them. Not only do you end up with a more informed citizenry, but the individuals who end up getting hurt or killed have less of an excuse to “blame society” for their poor decisions.Report
First, if you’re 21, you’re not a “kid” by any measure that our society recognizes. You can drink, you can vote, you can get drafted, and in general qualify for most other perks of citizenship. Let’s not infantilize these people. They are indeed adults.
Second, binge drinking kills. If it’s not this, it WILL be something else. The label already says 12% alcohol by volume. That’s strong, but not stronger than many malt liquors or strong beers. It’s very typical for a wine. Compared to a hard liquor, it’s not much at all.
As to having an excuse to blame society… I recognize no such excuses as valid here.Report
A 21 year old male is nothing more than a dog with a limited vocabulary set. Get real. It is all relevant in a sense, but come on, what did you know about life or people at 21?Report
So… what you’re really saying is you’d raise the drinking age in general. To what? And should we take away voting rights while we’re at it? Probably — I mean, dogs don’t vote, do they?
But die in a war? I’m betting that one would be just fine with you.Report
I just bought a can, not because I’m a fan of drinks like this, but because of the hype. I also drink in a responsible manner and don’t binge then drive. All this attention is only making the product more desirable in my opinion, and the only harm I have heard of comes from people who drink too much and then drive. That has been going on since the invention of the motor vehicle, and drunk wagon drivers and equestrians before that. These alarmist are finding a scapegoat instead of addressing the actual problem. Drink in moderation, binge drinking is deadly even if your drinking water.Report