Raccor 1

Jenna Raccor

Dr. Dennis Jerz

SEL 106 10

1 May 2018

The Minimum Drinking Age Affects the Development of the Brain, but not the Number of

Traffic Fatalities

The minimum drinking age has been a point of contention throughout the United States

for many decades, and our history has shown the adverse effects of lowering and raising the

drinking age. Today there are many citizens such as William Bowman petitioning for a decrease

in the minimum drinking age to eighteen, which has many advantages such as promoting

responsible drinking and aligning the drinking age with the right to vote (Bowman). However,

Silveri notes that a lower drinking age negatively impacts the brain’s development and a person’s

ability to reason. Researchers such as Miron and Tetelbaum, who have extensively studied the

effects of the drinking age found a decrease in the amount of traffic fatalities when the drinking

age is higher, while also finding an increase in the number of fatalities when the drinking age is

lower. However, researchers such as Robertson provided a more rational reasoning for the

decrease in the number of traffic fatalities by claiming that government safety standards are more

influential to the amount of traffic fatalities observed. While Miron and Tetelbaum argue that the

raising of the minimum drinking age in the United States caused a decrease in the number of

traffic fatalities, Robertson claimed that the decrease in the number of traffic fatalities resulted

from government safety standards, which Carpenter argued could be a result of car

improvements. For these reasons, the number of traffic fatalities should not be factored into what
 Raccor 2

minimum drinking age is established in the United States. While these findings indicate no direct

correlation between the minimum drinking age and the number of traffic fatalities, a higher

drinking age, as extensively studied by Silveri, has a multitude of benefits to the developing

brain.

During the Vietnam War period, the drinking age was lowered to accommodate to the

young soldiers to allow them to drink during their time away from home (Carpenter et al. 137);

however, an increase in motor vehicle fatalities were seen shortly after the reduction of the

drinking age, but only in the states that had lowered their drinking age (Miron and Tetelbaum

318). In hopes to reverse the effects on traffic fatalities, many states had begun to raise their age

back to twenty-one, and the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 was required of all

states to adopt, “otherwise they risked losing ten percent of their federal highway funds”

(Carpenter et al., 137). Miron and Tetelbaum found a 16.7% decline in fatalities during the year

of adoption (328). Although these statistics are indicative that the minimum drinking age played

a vital role in the reduction in traffic fatalities, Robertson found an array of other factors that

could be a cause of these findings. Robertson proposes that the government safety standards play

a huge factor in the reduction of fatalities, as he indicated the rate of deaths per one hundred

million vehicle miles was 5.5 in 1966, however, when the Motor Vehicle Safety Act was enacted

in 1992, the number decreased drastically to 1.8 (31).

During the 1970s, when the minimum drinking age had been lowered, an increase in the

number of sales of alcohol were found, and also the number of alcohol-involved traffic fatalities,

especially amongst the 18-20 year old age groups (Wechsler 986). In 1982, 53% of all motor

vehicle fatalities were alcohol-related amongst people aged 21-24 years old, whereas 45% of all

motor vehicle fatalities were alcohol-related amongst people aged 19-20 years old (Wechsler
 Raccor 3

987). Because the drinking age in 1982 was still lowered to 18, 19, or 20, a higher number of

traffic fatalities should be seen by the lower age group, as Toomey indicated youth aged 18-20

years old had higher rates of traffic crashes (1960). Within the past decade, increases in binge

drinking have been observed amongst youth aged 21-24 years old (Wechsler 987). While this

increase in binge drinking and irresponsible behavior was observed, drinking amongst 18-20

year olds remained stable and consistent, which is not supportive of Miron and Tetelbaum's

claim that an increase in the number of traffic fatalities would be observed amongst lower age

groups. Because Wechsler observed that there were more traffic fatalities amongst 21-24 year

olds than 19-20 year olds during a year in which the drinking age was lowered proves Miron and

Tetelbaum’s claim weak. They believe if the drinking age is lowered then there will be an

increase in traffic fatalities, however this was not found to be true, therefore we must not

correlate the minimum drinking age with the number of traffic fatalities.

Miron and Tetelbaum found that with a higher minimum drinking age, a 9% reduction in

the number of traffic fatalities resulted in 1984 (319). However, in 1984, the National Highway

Safety Traffic Administration showed that New York was the first state to require the use of a

seat belt, which also spread across the United States (NHTSA). The use of a seatbelt was

increased by 50%, which would account for the reduction in the number of traffic fatalities. In

1978, crash tests were to be implemented on all motor vehicles at a rate of 45 mph. Crash tests

performed on vehicles indicated only a 3% chance of fatality (Yoder), which is not supportive of

the increase in traffic fatalities seen during this time. If there was only a 3% chance of fatality,

then a decrease seen in the number of fatalities may be due to the testing done on vehicles during

this period. In 1980, it had been documented that was a 10% decrease in the number of alcohol-

related traffic fatalities (NHTSA). If Miron and Tetelbaum were correct in their claim, that the
 Raccor 4

lower the drinking age, the higher the number of traffic fatalities, a slight increase in the number

of fatalities should be seen, not a slight decrease. So, if not the Minimum Legal Drinking Age,

what else could cause a reduction in the number of traffic fatalities?

Robertson claimed that we needed to attribute the decrease in the number of traffic

fatalities to the safety standards implemented on vehicles starting in the late 1960s and early

1970s (31). Federal safety standards were introduced during the 1968 model year, and almost

three dozen safety standards were placed in vehicles by 1970 (332). If a decrease in fatalities

were already being documented before the National Drinking Age Act of 1984 was in place, then

it does not support Miron and Tetelbaum’s claim that the drinking age lowers the number of

traffic fatalities. In 1966, the Highway Safety Act was implemented to provide uniform safety

standards from the Department of Transportation; funding was an incentive for states to

implement these safety programs (Toomey 1960). In an effort to promote highway safety, a

speed limit of fifty-five miles-per-hour in 1974. A decrease in the number of traffic fatalities

went from about 50,000 people per year, to about 40,000 people per year from 1973 to 1974

(Robertson 31). In 2012, the National Center of Statistics and Analysis recorded that 31% of all

traffic fatalities were alcohol related (Yoder). If about a third of all traffic fatalities involve

alcohol, with a MLDA of 21, it is clear that the MLDA has no effect on the number of traffic

fatalities because even with a higher MLDA, a significant amount of traffic fatalities still result

from alcohol.

Although the drinking age seems to not affect the number of traffic fatalities, the drinking

evidently does have an effect on the development of the adolescent brain. Silveri, who has

extensively studied alcohol's effects on the brain, show through evidence provided by magnetic

resonance imaging (MRI) how crucial the period of adolescence is for the brain (190). Wechsler
 Raccor 5

found that 2 out of 5 college students aged 18-24 have participated in binge drinking on at least

one occasion within a two week period (987). Silveri claims that the initiation of alcohol use and

heavy binge drinking before the age of brain biological adulthood, which can be up to the age of

twenty-two years old, has detrimental implications on the final stages of brain maturation (191).

During this time, cognitive processing and intellectual functioning improve significantly, and the

effects of drinking alcohol greatly impair these processes. Silveri conducted a MRI scan of

college students at the beginning of their freshmen year, and then again six months later, and the

scan showed multiple structural changes to the brain, which included the frontal lobe; where all

of the cognitive processing occurs (190). The brain continues to develop its executive functions,

such as decision-making from 18-21 years of age and beyond. Alcohol impairs judgement and

decision-making, which also impacts the ability to learn and memory up until age 25 (Silveri

194). Therefore, the detrimental effects on the brain must be taken into consideration when

deciding what minimum drinking age is best and prior to the petitioning of a reduction in the

drinking age, but not the number of alcohol-related fatalities.

The number of traffic fatalities has an array of contributing factors; however, it is evident

through Robertson’s and Wechsler’s findings that the minimum drinking age has a minimal

impact on the number of traffic fatalities. While the minimum drinking age seemed to play a role

in the decrease in the number of traffic fatalities in the United States, government safety

standards were evident the primary cause for this decrease through Robertson’s observations.

The implementation of government safety standards, along with vast vehicular improvements led

the way for a decrease in the amount of fatalities. Although a minimum legal drinking age is a

necessity in the United States, the age of twenty-one nor eighteen has made a significant impact

on the number of traffic fatalities, thus when deciding the minimum drinking age in the United
 Raccor 6

States, the number of traffic fatalities should not be considered in the drinking age decision-

making process. However, although the minimum drinking age may not affect the number of

traffic fatalities, it does affect the amount of damage done to the brain. Silveri’s findings

confirmed that adolescence is a critical period for brian’s development, and this time must not be

cut short with a lower minimum drinking age. Government officials must consider the effects of

alcohol on the underdeveloped brain when mandating a minimum drinking age; a higher

drinking age will benefit the citizens of the United States’ health and development of their brain.

Works Cited

Bowman, William S. “Sign the Petition.” Change.org, www.change.org/p/congress- lower-the-

mandatory-legal-drinking-age-mlda-in-the-united-states.

Carpenter, Christopher and Carlos Dobkin. “The Minimum Legal Drinking Age and Public

Health.” Journal of Economic Perspectives,vol. 25, no. 2, Spring 2011, pp. 133-156.

Business Source Elite, doi:10.1257/jep.25.2.133.

 Raccor 7

Miron, Jeffrey A. and Elina Tetelbaum. “Does the Minimum Legal Drinking Age Save Lives?”

Economic Inquiry, vol. 47, no. 2, Apr. 2009, pp. 317-336. Academic Search Elite,

doi:10.1111/j.1465-7295.2008.00179

“NHTSA.” NHTSA, 12 Sept. 2017, www.nhtsa.gov/.

Robertson, Leon S. “Reducing Death on the Road: The Effects of Minimum Safety Standards,

Publicized Crash Test, Seat Belts, and Alcohol.” American Journal of Public Health, vol.

86, no. 1, Jan. 1996, p. 31-34. Business Source Elite, doi:10.2105/AJPH.86.1.31

Silveri, Marisa M. “Adolescent Brain Development and Underage Drinking in the United

States:Identifying Risks of Alcohol Use in College Populations.” Harvard Review of

Psychiatry, vol. 20, no. 4, Jul. 2012, pp. 189-200. Academic Search Elite,

doi:10.3109/10673229.2012.714642.

Toomey, Traci L., et. al. “The Age-21 Minimum Legal Drinking Age: A Case Study

Linking Past and Current Debates.” Addiction, vol. 104, no. 12, Dec. 2009, pp.

1958-1965. Academic Search Elite, doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02742.x.

Wechsler, Henry and Toben F. Nelson. “Will Increasing Alcohol Availability by Lowering the

Minimum Legal Drinking Age Decrease Drinking and Related Consequences among

Youths?” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 100, no. 6, 2010, pp. 986–992.

Business Source Elite, doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.178004.

Yoder, Jean. “National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA).” NHTSA, 16 Oct. 2017,

www.nhtsa.gov/research-data/national-center-statistics-and-analysis-ncsa.