Pure Energy...Or Pure Stupidity?

While sucking down my morning java, I was flipping around the Sunday morning news shows. I came across a very well known physician who is often seen on these sorts of talk shows.

One of his commentaries was about the consumption of energy drinks while consuming alcohol. Paraphrasing here, but the spirit of the doc's position was this:

"If you're going out to have drinks, don't consume energy drinks. They mask the effects of the alcohol."

Um, isn't that precisely why people DO drink energy drinks?

Whether it's mixing energy drinks with booze to create a cocktail that won't knock you out, or slugging down an energy drink at the beginning of the night, this is precisely why people do consume these things! And why? Because going out on the town, dancing, drinking, socializing, flirting...they're all fun. And when alcohol may make a drinker sleepy or groggy, why wouldn't he/she want to suck down some energy so as to continue the night?

Back in the day, people used to think that, if they were drunk and had to drive home, a cup or two of coffee would help sober them up. We now know that this is simply not true. It may keep the person more alert and less likely to nod off, but it does not diminish the level of intoxication. Only time can do that.

Whether it's energy drinks or a cup of coffee or whatever, these news studies don't really tell us anything we didn't already know. And as always, it's personal responsibility and having a plan that'll truly keep you safe when you're out on the town. Be careful, folks!

The Problem With Letting Crazies Talk...

I have this personal philosophy. The crazier someone's ideas (neo-Nazis, isolationists, eco-crazies, etc.), the more I WANT to give them a platform to speak. The more looney someone's ideas, the more likely they are to spout off enough that people will see how "off" this person's viewpoints are.

Now, there are some obvious issues with this philosophy. Namely, we're assuming that those in the audience are able to rationalize how crazy the speaker's ideas are. As we know, this isn't always the case. Heck, it may not even be the case very often.

So, here's a story to bring this around...

Recently, a man was charged in an impaired driving crash in the midwest. No one was killed in this single car crash, but the driver himself was injured. Apparently, while he was driving, said impaired driver had been huffing inhalants.

Bad enough, right? The thing is, the driver said he learned how to get high from inhalants off the TV show, "Intervention." Really?

If you haven't seen it, "Intervention" shows some horribly sad stories of addiction and abuse of substances. It's reality TV, so of course, they show some terribly shocking cases. Somewhere in this driver's mind, he watches a tragic story on TV and thinks, "Hey, that sounds like a thing I'd like to try!"

Just like my philosophy of letting crazies talk as much as they want, there's a downside to "Intervention." I.E., it teaches people in the audience to get high.

I caught an episode of "Intervention" a few months ago, featuring a wife/mother. Alcohol was her drug. For most of the episode, she was seen staggering around the house with a giant bottle of mouthwash, swigging it all the while.

Now, if I was a 14 year old kid ready to experiment with alcohol...would I go through the difficulty of stealing booze from a store, sneaking it from the parents liquor cabinet or trying to get someone 21 to buy? No way! I'd be headed to the medicine cabinet and grabbing the Scope.

This is why it's so, so essential for parents to know what their children are watching. That way, parents can intervene to be sure the kids know the dangers to themselves and others before trying something they've seen on the tube.

Buena Vista University

Feb 8 found me speaking for several different factions of Buena Vista University in Storm Lake, Iowa. This was my first trip to Storm Lake and, well, it lived up to the name! For a Floridian boy now, being knee deep in snow drifts and negative temps was quite the eye opener! (pardon the pun)

The only thing more fun than being hunkered down in a warm suite, cuddled up under a blanket watching the Superbowl with Marvelyne was the programs themselves. A HUGE thanks goes to the human relations class, the Buena Vista student athleetes and coaches, the nursing and pre-med majors and reps from the local hospital for the patient care program. Plus, the nearly 20% of campus that showed up for the evening keynote...Wow! You guys rock!

Extra special thanks goes to Donna and Tom Musel for being such incredible hosts! Had so much fun with you guys...smiley fries and one of the best reuben sammiches ever! Look forward to a journey back to Storm Lake sometime in the future!

Idaho State University

On Feb. 4, Idaho State University hosted yours truly to campus for keynotes. Thanks to the fraternities and sororities at ISU for being such an awesome audience for the afternoon keynote, and thanks to the general student population of ISU for coming out that evening!

Special thanks to Aaron McCabe, Val, Sammie and Tanya for being such awesome hosts! Also thanks to the ISU chapter of Kappa Sigma for welcoming in a brother into their midst! Thanks, gentlemen! AEKDB

What's the Answer?

The below link is to an article in the St. Louis Post Dispatch concerning drunk driving in Missouri.

I haven't been intimately involved with the anti-DUI movement in Missouri since moving to Florida three years ago. However, I'm so pleased to see that the justices, lawmakers and policy makers are all on board for more effective anti-DWI measures.

A little factoid from my days at Missouri State University...

In an old substance abuse intervention class, we were taught a stat that said of 100 alcoholics, 94 will die as a direct result of their drinking. MVA, falling down stairs, drowning in a bathtub, etc. Four alcoholics will have organic brain damage which will effect them the rest of their lives. Two alcoholics will make it into permanent recovery.

Now, cross reference this with an old tour to the medium security prison in Fordland, MO. Every prisoner is required to work a 12 step program for his substance abuse issues. Due to these 12 step mandatory processes, this prison has only a 40% "rate of return" by prisoners released. The national and state average? 80%.

The question remains: How do we keep the chronic alcoholics with a history of DUI off the roads? Incarceration with a focus on treatment? Seems to work. But what about just keeping them off the roads? Obviously if a prisoner is incarcerated, he/she is driving nowhere. But it takes so many resources to accomplish this.

This is why so many folks in the anti-DWI fight are in favor of using technology to accomplish the goals. Breathalyzers installed in the cars of offenders, alcohol detection devices planted in steering wheels, retinal scans in rearview mirrors that show if a driver is drunk, etc. Does this technology cost a lot of money? In some cases, yes. But is this a better way to keep offenders off the streets? I think so.

Again, the most heartening thing of all is seeing such an active interest in the DWI fight. Props to Missouri for being so progressive with their DWI enforcement, prosecution and goals of keeping drivers safe.



http://m.stltoday.com/STL/db_/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=Im7SYAg7&src=cat