Wow. That's a lot. Are those actual counts, or are they estimates?

We who are concerned about this issue have to be careful when considering data such as these. The media truncate such reports to sensationalized reactions that prompt web site hits and sell newspapers. When we consider the methodology used to deduce these numbers, there may be room to ponder its reliability. An interesting article that addresses fuzzy methodology is "White Blankets Many Make You Smarter and Other Questionable Social Science Findings" by Gregory Blimling (http://media.wiley.com/assets/774/94/jrnls_ABC_JB_blimling903.pdf). The article presents a reasoned consideration of questions surrounding these data first raised by FoxNews (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,50104,00.html) following the original 2002 "Call to Action" (see page 3 of the Blimling article), but the question remains…can we generalize results to a population different than that from which the original data were collected? Those working in prevention need to look beyond the headlines proffered by the media. We need to read the actual research to which the sound bites refer, including the methodology used to generate the reported data. It is important to rethink our historic tendency to view the behavior of a minority of students as "the problem" and sole issue of primacy regarding collegiate drinking. Such results in calls to "eliminate" collegiate drinking, which in turn generates administrative pressure to "make this happen." This casts preventionists in the role of campus "neo-prohibitionist" and this is not the position from which to mount proactive harm reduction strategies. What do you think?

Dr. Chapman makes several great points. The sensationalization leads health promotion efforts to respond to "media and administration" instead of working with the majority of students to promote critical thinking skills which will ultimately lead to better choices by students. I thank you for the links to the articles--very interesting.

Dr. Chapman says a lot of jibberish with many fancy words that strung together don't say anything useful! The fact that he quotes Fox News is a sure sign of his lack of critical thinking! Dr. Hingson has been a renowned researcher for many decades always offering facts and conclusions based on sound science and with prevention in mind.

Um, he's actually calling Fox News into question.

No sign here that the NIAAA has considered the contingent factors stemming from the tobacco industry's war against cannabis. If cannabis were legalized, millions of students might "feel" more capable of simply omitting alcohol from their parties. Binge-drinkers are probably at increased risk of acquiring a nicotine addiction through self-medicating with "a cigarette" to alleviate a hangover, or (pertinent to the statistics provided by Hingson) "clear the mind" before driving home from the party ("Well, I can't leave the car in this neighborhood overnight"). Then there's side-stream smoke passively inhaled while passed out...

Wow,Fox news I did not think that channel had news.Maybe I'll watch it when I sober up from the alcoholism I developed in College.If prohabition saves one life I'm all for it.Who knows maybe the life it saves will cure cancer.

I would say the numbers are low since the most recent data is from 2005. The drastic increase in technology (cell phones, texting, facebook and twitter) has made access to alcohol much easier over the last 4 years. I have 2 college age children and 1 in high school. The increase in underage drinking from 2005 when my oldest left high school and now is frightening.

I agree that we need to look beyond the short blurb offered by the media and look deeper into the real study. As we know, the numbers can be presented however an author sees fit. I would like to know if there is a significant difference presented in the study, or if the few percentage points change are just that, a few percentage points. In regards to the comment "can we generalize results to a population different than that from which the original data were collected?" I would respond that this change in the population is exactly what prevention is focused on... and to compare results from past populations tells us that the current population has changed, and perhaps more attention should be focused on preventing the negative changes.