Attribute the conclusion to Lewis and retain the evidence limits; do not treat decline as proof that every policy goal succeeded.
The conclusion rejects the myth that consumption increased while avoiding the stronger claim that national Prohibition eliminated drinking.
After comparing legal consumption estimates, cirrhosis mortality, drunkenness arrests, and longer-run patterns, Lewis concludes that alcohol consumption decreased during Prohibition even though drinking, illicit supply, and measurement uncertainty persisted.
PDF sheet 102
PDF sheet 98
Myth 5 — Interpreting the consumption evidence
Verified against the sequential extracted-text review and rendered PDF sheets 98–102 on 2026-08-27. Evidence is paraphrased or described; chapter authorship, scope, and corroboration limits are preserved.
Verified atomic evidence from a user-supplied Source. The evidence is stored as a concise paraphrase, table description, or source-claim statement so the knowledge system remains useful without reproducing extended copyrighted text.
Evidence
Use Excerpt Text as the evidence statement and Excerpt Type to distinguish paraphrase, table, and source claim.
Location and context
Locator Start, Locator End, Source Section, and Context identify the rendered PDF passage and prevent the evidence from being detached from the chapter author's argument.
Interpretation boundary
Annotation states the knowledge-system use. Linked Claims must not exceed the passage, and quantitative, legal, causal, comparative, market, or policy statements remain attributed or qualified where required.