Dills, Angela K., and Jeffrey A. Miron. “Alcohol Prohibition and Cirrhosis.” NBER Working Paper 9681, May 2003. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9681.
The authors summarize a 10–20 percent cirrhosis reduction, but the tabulated simulated decreases span -20.8 to30.9 percent, with a reported average12.6 percent. Negative decreases denote estimated increases. This is neither a 10–20 percent reduction in whiskey drinking nor a measure of all policy harms or benefits.
Dills, Angela K., and Jeffrey A. Miron. “Alcohol Prohibition and Cirrhosis.” NBER Working Paper 9681, May 2003. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9681. Printed pp.20–20; PDF22; Tables8–9/PDF36–37.
20
20
Dills and Miron, “Alcohol Prohibition and Cirrhosis,” 20–20.
PDF22; Tables8–9/PDF36–37
Citation-ready for this attributed, qualified paraphrase of the2003working paper; not blanket factual corroboration.
No access
Source and locator
Dills, Angela K., and Jeffrey A. Miron. “Alcohol Prohibition and Cirrhosis.” NBER Working Paper 9681, May 2003. https://doi.org/10.3386/w9681.
Printed pp.20–20; PDF22; Tables8–9/PDF36–37.
Formatted outputs
Dills and Miron, “Alcohol Prohibition and Cirrhosis,” 20–20.
Usage map
The authors summarize a 10–20 percent cirrhosis reduction, but the tabulated simulated decreases span -20.8 to30.9 percent, with a reported average12.6 percent. Negative decreases denote estimated increases. This is neither a 10–20 percent reduction in whiskey drinking nor a measure of all policy harms or benefits.
