Pauly P J
Department of History, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08903.
Am J Public Health. 1994 Feb;84(2):305-13. doi: 10.2105/ajph.84.2.305.
The reliance of current advocates of recreational drug legalization on parallels between "drug prohibition" and the repudiated experiment of National Prohibition in the 1920s invites renewed attention to the history of the legalization and normalization of drinking. A new scientific conception of the nature and effects of alcohol formed an important element in both the politics of repeal and the ensuing legitimation of alcohol consumption. The industrial toxicologist Yandell Henderson argued that alcohol should be considered analogous to carbon monoxide--clearly a poison, yet a normal part of civilized life and only problematic above a determinable and manageable exposure threshold. This argument had political force in the early 1930s as part of the contention that beer was not an "intoxicating liquor." It was more broadly persuasive because it was consistent with Americans' experience with industrial poisons, for which exposure levels had been set by toxicologists such as Henderson. This historical perspective illuminates the more recent reassessment of the risks of alcohol consumption. It also challenges the applicability of the model of the normalization of drinking to proposals to legalize cocaine and opiates.
当前主张将消遣性毒品合法化的人,将“毒品禁令”与20世纪20年代遭摒弃的全国禁酒实验相类比,这使得人们重新关注饮酒合法化及常态化的历史。一种关于酒精性质和影响的新科学观念,在禁酒令废除的政治进程以及随之而来的饮酒合法化过程中都构成了重要因素。工业毒理学家扬德尔·亨德森认为,酒精应被视为类似于一氧化碳——显然是一种毒物,但却是文明生活的正常组成部分,只有在超过可确定且可控制的接触阈值时才会产生问题。在20世纪30年代早期,这一论点作为认为啤酒不是“致醉酒类”的争论的一部分,具有政治影响力。它更具广泛说服力,因为它与美国人对工业毒物的经验相符,工业毒物的接触水平是由亨德森等毒理学家设定的。这一历史视角阐明了对饮酒风险的最新重新评估。它还对饮酒常态化模式适用于可卡因和鸦片制剂合法化提议提出了质疑。