Alcohol induced deaths in the US

[REWahoo]

Reading an article about the "affluenza" teen seeking release from jail, I ran across the following county-by-county graphic showing alcohol induced deaths per 100,000 in 2013. I understand the high numbers in Arizona and New Mexico, but I was very surprised to see the high numbers on the "left coast." That's supposed to be the land of milk and honey, not booze and demise. What gives?

https://www.graphiq.com/vlp/esYN4SMD0vr

[W2R]

Wow, and look at Alaska! Guess they don't have much else to do there.


Interesting that New Orleans only has 7.1 deaths due to alcohol, for every 100,000.

Actually, I don't feel at all out of place as a non-drinker here. A lot of the drinking here is done by tourists who come here for that purpose.

[euro]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R Wow, and look at Alaska! Guess they don't have much else to do there. .

Yes, probably has to do with people getting depressed in the winter with no daylight. Same problem in Europe - the further North, the bigger the alcohol problems (likely the case in Russia/Siberia too although alcohol seems a big problem EVERYWHERE in Russia)

[Sojourner]

Looking carefully at that graphic, it appears that almost all counties where alcohol induced deaths are greater than about 25 / 100,000 are in regions with large, widespread Native American populations. So that makes sense to me, given the known correlations. But it doesn't explain certain counties in California, like Lake County (just north of the SF Bay area). The Native American population there is only 3-4%, so it can't be that. Maybe because it is part of Northern California's "Wine Country", but probably more rural with fewer good doctors and much lower incomes than places like Napa and Sonoma?

[Sojourner]

Hmm... something else about that graphic isn't making sense to me. Apparently, about 6% of people in the U.S. are suffering from alcohol-abuse disorder. Yet for the vast majority of counties in the graphic, the number of deaths due to alcohol use is under 10 per 100,000, which is equivalent to just 0.01%. Does this mean only a tiny fraction of alcoholics actually die from things like liver disease or other ailments directly related to their drinking? Or maybe it means that the vast majority of people suffering from alcoholism get treated successfully and manage to stave off the most serious health problems related to drinking?

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sojourner Hmm... something else about that graphic isn't making sense to me. Apparently, about 6% of people in the U.S. are suffering from alcohol-abuse disorder. Yet for the vast majority of counties in the graphic, the number of deaths due to alcohol use is under 10 per 100,000, which is equivalent to just 0.01%. Does this mean only a tiny fraction of alcoholics actually die from things like liver disease or other ailments directly related to their drinking? Or maybe it means that the vast majority of people suffering from alcoholism get treated successfully and manage to stave off the most serious health problems related to drinking?

I'm not sure how alcohol-abuse disorder is defined, but I'd imagine that most drunks don't drink themselves to death. They just make their own lives and the lives of their loved ones, miserable.

OK, I'll stop talking like that now, because most people don't like it.

[2017ish]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R I'm not sure how alcohol-abuse disorder is defined, but I'd imagine that most drunks don't drink themselves to death. They just make their own lives and the lives of their loved ones, miserable. OK, I'll stop talking like that now, because most people don't like it.

Nah, that's not out of order. "Drunks" to me are those who can't control their drinking and make lives miserable. (DW and I share a full bottle of wine nearly every night, which may constitute "problem drinkers" on some scales, but since it hardly makes our lives miserable, I don't consider us drunks!)

[Winemaker]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2017ish Nah, that's not out of order. "Drunks" to me are those who can't control their drinking and make lives miserable. (DW and I share a full bottle of wine nearly every night, which may constitute "problem drinkers" on some scales, but since it hardly makes our lives miserable, I don't consider us drunks!)

+1

[Persn]

The statistics don't count accidents as a result of drinking, so I think they are missing a lot of alcohol induced deaths. Also, alcohol contributes to several conditions that may cause death, yet are only indirectly alcohol induced, so are not included in these numbers.

I am pretty surprised at the high rates in California. Having lived in both the midwest and in California, I would have expected the opposite pattern.

[Teacher Terry]

Alcoholism is a disease just as diabetes is. Genetics plays a role. It is not a question of willpower. If someone's life is being made miserable by a alcoholic then they are free to leave. People have choices.

[Rustward]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sojourner Looking carefully at that graphic, it appears that almost all counties where alcohol induced deaths are greater than about 25 / 100,000 are in regions with large, widespread Native American populations. So that makes sense to me, given the known correlations. But it doesn't explain certain counties in California, like Lake County (just north of the SF Bay area). The Native American population there is only 3-4%, so it can't be that. Maybe because it is part of Northern California's "Wine Country", but probably more rural with fewer good doctors and much lower incomes than places like Napa and Sonoma?

I just finished watching an episode of Drugs Inc (National Geographic) on Alaska. The show seemed to say that low availability of illegal drugs in the remote areas makes alcohol the drug of choice and it is widely abused. Many areas are dry (alcohol is illegal) but there are plenty of bootleggers to make it available. One guy was drinking hair spray because he couldn't get alcohol.

[MRG]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Persn The statistics don't count accidents as a result of drinking, so I think they are missing a lot of alcohol induced deaths. Also, alcohol contributes to several conditions that may cause death, yet are only indirectly alcohol induced, so are not included in these numbers. I am pretty surprised at the high rates in California. Having lived in both the midwest and in California, I would have expected the opposite pattern.

+1
I think there's many deaths that are not included in the graph.

I don't understand the CA data either, maybe something skewed in the data(it was just one year).

[Sojourner]

The graphic excludes alcohol-related deaths due to accident or injury, but otherwise includes all deaths due to alcohol use/abuse. I suppose the exclusion of deaths from DUI and things like falling, drowning, etc. might explain the very low incidence of alcohol fatalities. It makes sense that a large percentage of people who are severe, long-term abusers of alcohol would not live long enough to die from liver cirrhosis or cancer, since they would be much more likely than the average person to be killed via DUI or other mishaps due to being drunk so often.

[gerntz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2017ish Nah, that's not out of order. "Drunks" to me are those who can't control their drinking and make lives miserable. (DW and I share a full bottle of wine nearly every night, which may constitute "problem drinkers" on some scales, but since it hardly makes our lives miserable, I don't consider us drunks!)

Sounds like us though DW's share is on the small side.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2017ish Nah, that's not out of order. "Drunks" to me are those who can't control their drinking and make lives miserable. (DW and I share a full bottle of wine nearly every night, which may constitute "problem drinkers" on some scales, but since it hardly makes our lives miserable, I don't consider us drunks!)

I agree, I don't consider you to be drunks either.

Now, if you frequently beat your kids, yelled at your wife, wrecked the car, and got fired from job after job for coming in to work late and drunk, then I'd think you might have a problem.

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sojourner Looking carefully at that graphic, it appears that almost all counties where alcohol induced deaths are greater than about 25 / 100,000 are in regions with large, widespread Native American populations. So that makes sense to me, given the known correlations. But it doesn't explain certain counties in California, like Lake County (just north of the SF Bay area)...

Yes. The "dark areas" of AZ and NM are at the Four Corner region, and include counties such as Navajo (AZ), Apache (AZ), Mc Kinley (NM), etc... These encompass the larger Indian reservations in the country.

Maricopa County which is the most populous county in AZ has the number of 10.4 per 100K, which is a bit lower than that of Los Angeles (11.1) and San Diego Counties (11.7).

The dubious honor of being the highest may belong to Shannon County in South Dakota. This has been renamed Oglala Lakota County, and is entirely inside the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. The number is 101.2 per 100K.

[Alan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R Interesting that New Orleans only has 7.1 deaths due to alcohol, for every 100,000.

The drug abuse must get them first.

My sister's MIL is an alcoholic as was her husband who was well through his 2nd liver before he died of Alzheimer's about a year ago.

The MIL is moving down to an assisted living facility close by and my sister was telling me this week that MIl drinks a liter of scotch a day!! That boggles my mind, I don't know how her body copes. She is only 5' tall and slightly built, aged 72 and her last medical check up only showed early indications of possible liver damage despite many years of abuse.

[JohnnyBGoode]

I too am surprised at the skewing of the data toward the west. It may be correct, but I am doubtful that the rest of the United States is really that much "healthier" relative to alcohol than California, Oregon, or Utah(!). The statistics that are being tracked are pretty precise:

Quote:

Age-adjusted death rates from alcohol-related deaths for the year 2013. Alcohol-related deaths include any deaths attributable to alcohol use, such as alcohol poisoning, alcoholic liver disease, intentional self-poisoning, alcoholic gastritis, and others. It does not include newborn deaths due to maternal alcohol use, or any accidents or injuries indirectly related to alcohol, such as drunk driving.

I wonder if it is something as simple as better/more detailed reporting on causation of death in the west vs the rest of the country? There are quite a few counties listed where there is no data, which is suspicious as well.

[W2R]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan The drug abuse must get them first.

I was thinking that maybe when they get drunk, they grab their guns and shoot each other dead for some stupid reason like "he looked at my woman" or "she bought everyone a hamburger except me".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan My sister's MIL is an alcoholic as was her husband who was well through his 2nd liver before he died of Alzheimer's about a year ago. The MIL is moving down to an assisted living facility close by and my sister was telling me this week that MIl drinks a liter of scotch a day!! That boggles my mind, I don't know how her body copes. She is only 5' tall and slightly built, aged 72 and her last medical check up only showed early indications of possible liver damage despite many years of abuse.

I can't imagine drinking that much without throwing up everything I ate for the past week. But then, I am not a drinker and despite my Scottish ancestry, I thoroughly despise scotch.

[Alan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by W2R I was thinking that maybe when they get drunk, they grab their guns and shoot each other dead for some stupid reason like "he looked at my woman" or "she bought everyone a hamburger except me".

There is always that

Quote:

I can't imagine drinking that much without throwing up everything I ate for the past week. But then, I am not a drinker and despite my Scottish ancestry, I thoroughly despise scotch.

As a young man in my early 20's I once drank about a half bottle (much less a half liter) of scotch and I was so ill I was off work for 3 days. That's why I just can't imagine such a small, frail woman in her 70's drinking a liter a day.