Is it fair to ban a product because of its potential misuse? As the popular alcohol−infused energy drink Four Loko flies off the shelves, either because of popularity or prohibition, we must ask this question.
Four Loko, along with similar beverages, has already been banned in the states of Michigan, Washington, Utah and Oklahoma. The Daily on Friday reported on a statement released by Somerville's Board of Aldermen; the body does not have the power to impose a citywide ban, so it appealed to local liquor distributors to voluntarily remove the product from their shelves.
The issue of Four Loko consumption has also been taken up by college administrators. Harvard University undergraduates recently received an e−mail from their health services director outlining the dangers of the drink. Following an especially troubling incident at Central Washington University in which nine students at a single party were hospitalized after consuming Four Loko, the drink was banned on that campus. A similar ban was put into effect at the University of Rhode Island and Ramapo College of New Jersey.
This is far from the end of the story on Four Loko. It has received a great deal of press and, if incidents keep occurring, the response from state liquor boards, college administrations and the Food and Drug Administration is likely to be swift and heavy−handed.
The danger presented by Four Loko is obvious: A heavy dose of caffeine conceals the effects of alcohol, increasing the risk of overconsumption — without a proper understanding of the drink's potency, incidents like the one at Central Washington can occur. The brightly colored can and the price of the drink also make it highly marketable and appealing to minors.
It is undeniable that Phusion Projects LLC, the company that produces Four Loko, is culpable to some degree. Its product is inherently dangerous because of the drink's contents and price. But banning the substance is the wrong response. It misses the point of the issue at hand: the responsible consumption of alcohol by college students. There will always be new products that are dangerous to students — Four Loko is only filling a niche once occupied mainly by the mix of Red Bull and vodka.
Four Loko has become an easy target for politicians and college administrators in recent weeks despite having been on the market for the past two years. Banning Four Loko is the easy response, a way to demonize the product rather than the consumer. The focus must remain on cultivating a healthy drinking culture in U.S. colleges and universities, a culture in which students do not find it acceptable to regularly abuse the substances they have access to. Unfortunately, this is not the case: Students at Tufts and elsewhere frequently consume alcoholic drinks other than Four Loko in dangerous excess.
The manner in which Harvard University dealt with the issue is commendable — it promotes a culture of education and cooperation between the students and the administration rather than strict paternalism. To its credit, the Tufts administration has taken a similar stance for the time being. Four Loko will be treated like any other alcoholic drink on campus unless a serious issue arises.
The potential for the abuse of Four Loko is there, just as is the case with any alcoholic beverage. Banning it merely temporarily addresses the symptoms of a drinking problem among college students.
We must attack the issue at its source and address the need for a shift in our attitude toward alcohol consumption.
