Hi, I am looking for someone to write an article on minimum legal drinking age Paper must be at least 3000 words. Please, no plagiarized work!

Hi, I am looking for someone to write an article on minimum legal drinking age Paper must be at least 3000 words. Please, no plagiarized work! Chafetz argues that the MLDA of 21 “has not worked,” and is not linked to reduced drunk-driving fatalities (7). He holds that enforcing a minimum legal age for drinking does not take into consideration the deaths caused by alcohol off the highways, and drives teenagers to binge drinking in unsupervised surroundings. On the other hand, Nelson and Toomey take the position that the MLDA of 21 has reduced drinking-related deaths, and decreased binge-drinking in underage college students. Although both authors have credibility and are knowledgeable and logical about the subject, and Chafetz is more accommodating of opposing viewpoints, Nelson and Toomey make a more convincing argument as their stand is supported by extensive references to research studies.

Both the essays are authored by writers with impeccable credentials. Chafetz is a credible speaker in the MLDA debate, as he is the founder of the National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse and The Health Education Foundation in Washington. His reputation is further bolstered by the fact that he was a member of the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving, Director and Executive Member of the National Commission Against Drunk Driving and the Presidential appointee at The White House Conference for a Drug-Free America. He is also a Doctor of Psychiatry, with a long history of association with social issues, such as alcoholism and drug abuse. Chafetz’s credentials are more than matched by Nelson and Toomey, who belong to the University of Minnesota’s School of Public Health. Their argument is further supported by a group of academicians and researchers. The reputation of the writers contributes to the trustworthiness of the essays and makes them both credible.

Similarly, both the essays are written by knowledgeable authors who make their respective positions clear through unambiguous declarations. Chafetz emphatically states that “Prohibition --- is not working among 18-20 year-olds now” (8). On the other hand, Nelson and Toomey are equally firm in their conviction that “A drinking age of 21 has led to less drinking, fewer injuries, and fewer deaths” (9).