Alcohol advertisement should be banned due to insufficient information

The second citation in R3 from weirdman was the NIAAA. "Researchers are examining other environmental influences as well, such as the impact of the media. Today alcohol is widely available and aggressively promoted through television, radio, billboards, and the Internet. Researchers are studying how young people react to these advertisements. In a study of 3rd, 6th, and 9th graders, those who found alcohol ads desirable were more likely to view drinking positively and to want to purchase products with alcohol logo" (corrected link: . http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov... ) He dropped the very next sentence though, "Research is mixed, however, on whether these positive views of alcohol actually lead to underage drinking. " The reason of course is that his own quote supports the case I made that there isn't really strong evidence tying alcohol advertising to alcohol consumption for non drinkers. The paragraph from the NIAAA study that he cited is even worse in context. NIAAA is making a list of 6 factors that lead to underage drinking in order of importance. That paragraph occurs in the 6th, Environmental Aspects. The previous 5 were: 1) Risk-Taking (characteristics of people that age)2) Expectancy. Whether they had previous had good experiences and drinking experiences age 11-14.3) Sensitivity and tolerance to alcohol. Essentially young bodies get more of a euphoric lift and less of the negative consequences. Though they need to consume more.4) Behavioral problems and emotional problems.5) Heredity. That is 5 characteristics none of which is influenced by advertising and a 6th where the NIAAA lists factors like influence of parents and peers as the primary driver and dismisses advertising as playing much of a role. This is indicative of the affirmative case. Wild supposition about ties between advertising and under age drinking that are either contradicted or unable to be determined by the available evidence. The data is again clear, consumption has been falling while advertising has been increasing: His own source shows falling consumption among teens: . http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov... And here is a graph of the tie between per capita consumption and advertising for all persons: . http://www2.potsdam.edu... Further Pro ignored completely his statements about ignorance and in this final round turned this into a policy debate. As if the topic were, "under age drinking is bad so let's ban alcohol". But that is not the topic, the topic has centered on claims like the fact that people needed advertising to be aware of the substance or that advertising leads to cravings. There was also a claim of some sort of universal ban on advertising targeting minors. "However, it should be emphasised, as noted in the introduction, that cartoon format, animals and special characters that could be appealing to those under the legal drinking age, are not permitted by EU, US or Australasian regulatory bodies for example". I'm not sure where this came from, but again factually this is not true for most states at all. There are no federal rules, this Pew study breaks down the state restrictions: (. http://www.pewtrusts.org...) There was one relevant quote in round 3 which showed a correlation between youth drinking and advertising, "Youth who saw more alcohol advertisements on average drank more (each additional advertisement seen increased the number of drinks consumed by 1% [event rate ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.02])". Here is a link to the original article (. http://archpedi.ama-assn.org... ). As can be clearly seen when the quote is read in context this is part of a study that is kicking data up to the NIH for a summary report. Similar to the reports that we've been quoting that show some slight effects and mixed evidence. This particular study by the author's own admission should not hang on its own: a) The study had huge methodological problems with about a 1 in 4 participation rate and high drop out. b) The study found a slight correlationc) The study found massive longitudinal changes between markets that may have overwhelmed any advertising influenced effects. In summary: No clear case was ever presented and the hints of a clear case that were presented were contradicted by the evidence, the research and the leading authorities in the field. Thank you for your time and attention.