Alcoholism - why believing it is a disease could be damaging

[chilli42]

You make some good points. I am far from an expert on the subject but I have observed over that last 60 years that there appear to be people who are susceptible to addiction ... drugs, alcohol, gambling, tobacco etc. Does susceptibility make it a disease, I suppose not. However, there are people who can take it or leave it and never get ensnared by an addiction. Others don't seem to be able to do this without a significant external intervention. This suggests to me that there is more at play than bad lifestyle choices. Perhaps it's low self esteem or never having learned to skill of mastering ones self ... certainly a psychological disfunction that hints at an illness.

[Gonsalviz]

Alcohol consumption is a matter of opinion as to how much.

I drink a good bit but I always eat a balanced diet. Not much junk food and always veggies.

Because of a kidney problem, I have been checked from head to toe for all kinds of problems. Liver problems do not exist in me.

Alcoholism is a lack of food because of a preference for alcohol, not how much you consume.

[mankondang]

From what I have learnt there a two primary concepts/models of problem drinking.

1: The Disease Concept.

2: The Behavioural Concept.

The Disease Concept, takes the view that one is born with a Disease called "Alcoholism" and that a person who suffers from this disease is an "Alcoholic". People who prescribe to this model believe that it is genetic . That there is a gene that causes this problem. To date no such gene has been found that is "directly" associated with alcohol. However, because no gene has yet been found, that does not mean that there isn't one. The brain's pleasure enhancing dopermine associated gene, has been found to increase more with people who have problem drinking, gambling, shopping etc., and therefore alcohol may indirectly play a greater roll in the "alcoholic's" life.

The people, such as those who prescribe to this model believe that, it is a lifelong condition, and total abstenence the only solution.

The Behavioural Concept, takes the view that the problem drinker has learnt to drink to excess, sometimes from childhood experiences with significant other problem drinkers, and is a behavioural issue. Furthermore, they believe that since it is a learned behaviour, it therefore can be unlearned. Some who prescribe to this concept, believe that some people who once were problem drinkers can return to moderate drinkers, whilst other past problem drinkers should refrain from doing so.

There are many variations and modalities on problem drinking, and the one thing they are all in agreement with, is that alcohol consumption (as recent as this week in the UK, a report suggested, any alcohol consuption) causes problems, be it health, social, domestic or other.

My personal view is, that anyone who has a problem with alcohol deserves help. It is up to the troubled individual to find out what works best for them. So irrespective of the Disease or Behavioural concept, if you find it works for you, then go for it.

Edited January 9, 2016 by mankondang

[Ulic]

I thought it was the addiction that was the disease not the alcohol. Oh well I think I'll have another beer.

[gemguy]

Sorry, but most medical professionals concur that alcohol addiction is a disease.

I find the "95% dropout rate" seems to come primarily from a competing, for profit organization.

There are also those who drop out but return for subsequent efforts and are successful whether it be their second, third, fourth, etc., attempt.

AA is only for those who have a problem with alcohol and want to stop having a problem. Even if it really only worked for five percent it would be a worthy and laudable program.

Then there are people like my great uncle who could function well in business and social milieus despite a slight muddling of his speech most every day by 17:00, when perhaps most people have their first cocktail.

Then there is the "Alcohol problem? I don't have a problem! I drink, I get drunk, I fall down. No problem!" crowd.

"Up to you", as my Thai girlfriend says about many things. If you think you have a problem AA people will help.... no charge, and by the few rules no judgement.

AA helped several close family members obtain and maintain sobriety for decades.

Regardless of what the medical community says and all the so called experts say and what is classified as a disease, most people think of a disease and or understand a disease to be a medical based malady that occurs in people naturally and not of their own doing....such as Cancer or Parkinson's or Diphtheria or any number of non self inflicted medical based maladies

In other words, you need to consume a lot of alcohol to become an alcoholic but no one consumes a lot of cancer cells to be come a cancer victim or deliberately consumes a lot of Diphtheria and eventually becomes sick from say 30 years of excessive indulgence in Diphtheria

Alcoholism, under any circumstances, is a self inflicted affair and far from naturally occurring....similar to lung cancer caused from say 30 years of tobacco use.

They can call it what they want or categorize alcoholism in any which way they want but it only happens to people who deliberately drink excessive amounts of alcohol for several years or several decades.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease_theory_of_alcoholism

http://www.medicinenet.com/diseases_and_conditions/alpha_a.htm

http://www.medicinenet.com/alcohol_abuse_and_alcoholism/article.htm

Cheers

Edited January 9, 2016 by gemguy

[pedro01]

This is a discussion forum. The topic at hand had been posted by myself because I think it is worthy of discussing.

As there seem to be a lot of varied opinions, I think we can at least agree it is worth discussing like adults.

Anyone that takes this discussion as a personal attack simply has it wrong. That is not the intent.

The intent is merely discuss the merits of the premise that Alcoholism is an incurable disease that can only be diagnosed by the sufferer. To counter my argument that this is nonsense, it would be good to counter it with non-anecdotal evidence.

In terms of my views on AA - I think it is a net benefit to people that stick with it. AA does not need alcoholism to be a disease. It is a brotherhood, a community, that's why it works. Not because of an incurable disease. AA is still a valid treatment method without the disease aspect. I would say that I disagree with any treatment program that calls Alcohol an incurable disease.

Anyway - I think the following points are pertinent.

FACT: Everybody starts drinking for the effect. Booze tastes like crap, there is no reason to take your first drink other than the effect. It takes time to condition yourself to the point where you actually enjoy the taste. They even have sweeter drinks like Cider for newbies, who would hurl at the taste of a lager. So if any of you think you are different because you drank for the effect right from the start, I would ask why on earth you think anyone else drank for the first time?

FACT: Alcoholism as a disease was dreamt up by a prohibitionist in the 1800's (Benjamin Rush) who also thought being dishonest, political dissension and being black were also diseases. When the AA book was written this was repeated. At that point there was zero evidence that aloholism was a disease, let alone an incurable one.

FACT: Alcohol is addictive, physically addictive. So is heroin, coffee, cigarettes, crack - but only booze gets labelled a lifelong ailment.

FACT: Withdrawal symptoms and alcohol are NOT effects of the disease of alcoholism. They are the effects of alcohol. You only get those effects through drinking. If you stop drinking, you are still not cured of the disease but you no longer had the symptoms.

AA talks about alcoholism as a "A physical compulsion, coupled with a mental obsession. A physical desire to consume alcohol beyond our capacity to control it, in defiance of all rules of common sense." - that describes all addictions.All addicts consume when they know it is not in their best interests.

So the dangers:

Only 5% of people are still in AA after 3 months.

That leaves 95% of people that for some reason didn't stick with it

Those people, were told by their peers that they had an incurable disease, that was not their fault.

Those people were pressured into admitting they had the disease by sitting in a room full of people saying "Hi, I am xxxx, I'm an alcoholic", when the eyes fell on them,it was simply easier to admit it too than say "hi, my names xxx"

Depending on how far someone gets through the program - that's sown a few seeds in the minds of many of the people that don't stick with it.

- The disease narrative strips you of your personal responsibility

- As no disease can be cured by wishing it away, you hand the responsibility to others to cure you

- The alcohol addict becomes no more than a victim of 'bad genetics' and like any self fulfilling prophecy, that is the role they go on to take - it makes their addiction easier to live with because every bottle just shows how much of a victim they are

It has simply never been proven that Alcoholism is a disease and it is merely hearsay passed on from member to member. It is not proven.

Like I say - I am not against AA - but I think there is a lot of damage done programming people to believe they have an incurable disease, more so for those that do not stick with the program. It is simply not necessary to put this idea into people's heads.

[smotherb]

I need a beer

Scuzz Twittly can help you, Anita Beer:

[pedro01]

Pedro I really don't know what this thread is about other than bashing AA. It reads like a troll. You've already had a go at AA and me in another thread telling me how I must feel because of my experience of AA which was so way off the mark as to be mildly entertaining. FYI I am still sober and still feeling good about myself and far away from the knife edge.

If you don't like AA, then move on. However I am concerned that you're not actually offering anyone an alternative beyond theories of disease and addiction. If you are rattling this morning, whether literally or metaphorically, what use is a debate about addiction or treatment? I am trying to conjure up a drunk waking up and thinking: Hey I have a big problem with booze, the problem is I don't know whether to go 12 step or controlled drinking model.

The notion of a desperate active drunk as someone with choices is absurd and is the exclusive construct of social scientists. I never met a drunk who ever did anything about their drinking unless there was some huge pressure on them equivalent to someone putting a sawn off shortgun in their mouth and saying: you better stop drinking. As a species we drunks only get it together when we absolutely need to : like when our liberty as at stake, or our spouses have walked out on us, or we are in the disciplinary process or a major health scare. True to form many of us revert to getting drunk the minute the danger has passed, regardless of the promises we made to bosses, judges and spouses.

So Pedro I have no problem with your views but I think as someone who purports to have turned the corner on their drinking, especially if you post here, bearing in mind that some fragile anxious folk might be reading this, you have a responsibility to provide them with some real alternatives and practical things they can do. In the alternative, i.e. you have nothing to offer in terms of what to do, I don't think you should bash any source of help because you might inadvertently drive people away from seeking help.

Whether you like it or not AA is probably the most accessible help for anyone who is rattling this morning wherever they may be in the world. People can make a phone call, send an email, and they will get some sort of response in the near future. You can attend an online meeting where someone will be happy to talk to you 121. Hell, you might get a car load of AAs arriving at your doorstep. There is no need to wait for an appointment or referral process.

While I am an AA myself I am not here to slag off any other service or approach. There are may ways to skin a cat. Good luck in your efforts.

I am not slagging off AA - I am debating one of the tenets of AA - an unproven belief that it is a disease.

AA does not need this to get people clean. The program is good for those it suits.

To be honest though - it really depends on the group itself and the members. I did have an employee (English) that was drinking all the time (from the moment he woke), regularly passed out in the street, regularly soiled himself drinking - you know the story. He would go days without eating sometimes. He got to the point where he could no longer function as an employee and I had to give him the choice between alcohol and his job. I recommended AA and he went to the meetings at Soi 12. We would chat about the meetings and I told him about Disulfiram and how he might want to chat with a doctor about whether it would be suitable for him (after all, I don't know - but he'd never heard of it). He mentioned it at the next meeting and was told straight that "we don't agree with taking pills for alcoholism" - in effect some Joe off the street with no medical qualifications told him that an effective medication (for some people) was not effective and that it would be looked down upon in the group. So he never took advantage of it. If any of you know Ian from the Soi 12 meetings (about 50 years old, stick thin, very haggard face) - he now has Korsakoff Syndrome and left Thailand in an air ambulance 12 months ago. At the time, he couldn't even recognize pictures of his own children. Gotta love the booze.

So I do think that whoever chaired that meeting overstepped their qualifications in telling a member that a non-AA method of treatment was not appropriate. It probably wouldn't have changed the outcome - Ian never wanted to stop.

Anyway - why have this discussion at all? Well - this is a discussion forum. Is there some reason you want to censor my words? If you don't like what I say, you could always block me/not read it.

I think it is a valid discussion as I think there is some danger in this mindset. Hence me putting forwards my arguments as to why it is fallacious and why it could be damaging. You mention fragile people - and that is EXACTLY who I am concerned about.

Perhaps you could explain why you think AA would be less effective if Alcoholism was perceived as just another addiction? After all, no-one on heroin detox gets told "you'll probably be able to take heroin socially in a few years time". Addiction theory doesn't mean abstinence is not the answer does it?

[pedro01]

stupid thread. Never heard about Gamma GT test?

Liver damage is caused by alcohol/drug abuse - but also by exposure to toxins - In itself, this is not proof that alcoholism is a disease.

[pedro01]

There are genetic differences between occasional users and addicts. One person is exposed and does not become addicted, another does. I also don't think it's a disease, but until we have gene therapy to fix it the best we can do is treat it as a disease, which means dis ease.....

At this point in time, no genetic link has been proven.

If you have links to studies that do claim to prove it, I would love to have a read.

[gemguy]

This is a discussion forum. The topic at hand had been posted by myself because I think it is worthy of discussing.

As there seem to be a lot of varied opinions, I think we can at least agree it is worth discussing like adults.

Anyone that takes this discussion as a personal attack simply has it wrong. That is not the intent.

The intent is merely discuss the merits of the premise that Alcoholism is an incurable disease that can only be diagnosed by the sufferer. To counter my argument that this is nonsense, it would be good to counter it with non-anecdotal evidence.

In terms of my views on AA - I think it is a net benefit to people that stick with it. AA does not need alcoholism to be a disease. It is a brotherhood, a community, that's why it works. Not because of an incurable disease. AA is still a valid treatment method without the disease aspect. I would say that I disagree with any treatment program that calls Alcohol an incurable disease.

Anyway - I think the following points are pertinent.

FACT: Everybody starts drinking for the effect. Booze tastes like crap, there is no reason to take your first drink other than the effect. It takes time to condition yourself to the point where you actually enjoy the taste. They even have sweeter drinks like Cider for newbies, who would hurl at the taste of a lager. So if any of you think you are different because you drank for the effect right from the start, I would ask why on earth you think anyone else drank for the first time?

FACT: Alcoholism as a disease was dreamt up by a prohibitionist in the 1800's (Benjamin Rush) who also thought being dishonest, political dissension and being black were also diseases. When the AA book was written this was repeated. At that point there was zero evidence that aloholism was a disease, let alone an incurable one.

FACT: Alcohol is addictive, physically addictive. So is heroin, coffee, cigarettes, crack - but only booze gets labelled a lifelong ailment.

FACT: Withdrawal symptoms and alcohol are NOT effects of the disease of alcoholism. They are the effects of alcohol. You only get those effects through drinking. If you stop drinking, you are still not cured of the disease but you no longer had the symptoms.

AA talks about alcoholism as a "A physical compulsion, coupled with a mental obsession. A physical desire to consume alcohol beyond our capacity to control it, in defiance of all rules of common sense." - that describes all addictions.All addicts consume when they know it is not in their best interests.

So the dangers:

Only 5% of people are still in AA after 3 months.

That leaves 95% of people that for some reason didn't stick with it

Those people, were told by their peers that they had an incurable disease, that was not their fault.

Those people were pressured into admitting they had the disease by sitting in a room full of people saying "Hi, I am xxxx, I'm an alcoholic", when the eyes fell on them,it was simply easier to admit it too than say "hi, my names xxx"

Depending on how far someone gets through the program - that's sown a few seeds in the minds of many of the people that don't stick with it.

- The disease narrative strips you of your personal responsibility

- As no disease can be cured by wishing it away, you hand the responsibility to others to cure you

- The alcohol addict becomes no more than a victim of 'bad genetics' and like any self fulfilling prophecy, that is the role they go on to take - it makes their addiction easier to live with because every bottle just shows how much of a victim they are

It has simply never been proven that Alcoholism is a disease and it is merely hearsay passed on from member to member. It is not proven.

Like I say - I am not against AA - but I think there is a lot of damage done programming people to believe they have an incurable disease, more so for those that do not stick with the program. It is simply not necessary to put this idea into people's heads.

Have to differ with you on some points:

FACT: Everybody starts drinking for the effect. Booze tastes like crap, there is no reason to take your first drink other than the effect. It takes time to condition yourself to the point where you actually enjoy the taste. They even have sweeter drinks like Cider for newbies, who would hurl at the taste of a lager. So if any of you think you are different because you drank for the effect right from the start, I would ask why on earth you think anyone else drank for the first time?

: Do not forget the fact that alcohol is a liquid and a beverage so all the more appealing to drink alcohol as one of many forms of liquid to quench your thirst or included with a meal or just a social drink or 2 rather than the other choices of liquid refreshments on hand and commonly served or available

Rather than say milk or juice or other liquids many people like to include a glass of wine or sherry or a beer or what ever alcohol based drink they like as part of their liquid consumption and not specifically for the effect.

You did not include many relevant social based factors as to why people drink in the fist place or continue to drink.

FACT: Alcohol is addictive, physically addictive. So is heroin, coffee, cigarettes, crack - but only booze gets labelled a lifelong ailment.

Yes it is..but usually you have to consume a considerable amount over a relatively longer amount of time.

Heroin and Crack and Crystal Meth and a long list of truly addictive drugs, and long recognized as so, will have a person ( any person ) addicted in a much shorter period of time...as in 5 to 10 times in a relatively short period of time and you are hooked and in need of the drug or you will feel seriously sick without the drug.

Furthermore the highly addictive recreational drugs are commonly notably diluted and still you get hooked in a short period of time as compared to alcohol and all that is entailed.

On the rest of your "facts" I agree as I believe most other will also.

Remember the social factors of alcohol when discussing alcohol and all that is entailed and the fact that alcohol, in some form, has been a part of socializing for say 3000 years now.

Cheers

[pedro01]

I really don't know what this therad is all about. Written by an alcohol-addict?

All what you want to know is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism

or find other websites as netdoctor. There are many.

If you need help see a doctor!

If you insist on quoting me sawadee1947 please do so correctly. As you well know my question was: I really don't know what this thread is all about other than bashing AA? The underlining is the bit you left out and by editing it in this way and then closing it with a full stop you have completely altered my sentence and its meaning and have misrepresented me. But hey no problem, it happens all the time. As you might be cognitively challenged I am suggesting by my question that Pedro is trying to put forward a set of arguments to attack AA. That's fine in so far as it goes but in my view is a little irresponsible on his part. My point is he is not offering any alternatives. Thanks for the link.

Fair point that I am not promoting any alternatives. But really, why should I - I am merely pointing out that there is no evidence that alcoholism is a disease.

Remember - I am not saying AA is no good - only that alcoholism is an addiction not a disease.

Addictions effectively reside in 2 places -

1. The conscious 'thinking' mind - the part of you that appears to be reading these words and assimilating them and also in the unconscious mind. The part of the mind you are aware of.That is the part of you that knows you should not have that first drink. That is the part of you that decides to stop
2. The subconscious mind (aka limbic system) - that learns behaviors automatically and unintentionally through experience & observation. The part of the mind that deals with fear response, emotion, learning behavior, memory and is interconnected with the brains pleasure center and so has a role in sexual arousal and alcohol/drug effects. it is the source of love, anger, jealousy, sadness, joy etc. - in short it's not particularly logical but it's not supposed to be.

Whatever you decide with the conscious brain, you cannot automatically program the subconscious to follow. The subconscious brain is still going to be sending "give me a beer" messages to the conscious brain - and this is effectively what a craving is.

So you decide to quit with the conscious mind and that puts you at odds with the subconscious mind. This is something you have to come to terms with as part of the recovery and know that it will take time for the subconscious mind to catch up.

In the Sinclair Method - you take Naltrexone, which blocks the opioid receptors which in turn means you don't get the endorphin buzz. That breaks the feedback loop that tells the subconscious mind that alcohol = pleasure. So you are actually conditioning the subconscious mind to do what the conscious mind wants. This method is the standard treatment in Finland now and claims an 80% success rate. Of course, that doesn't mean you can go and self-prescribe and do it from home.

Whilst quitting completely is an excellent goal, the way you get there can be one of the following:

1. Taking steps forward and felling good about yourself for each improvement you make
2. Giving yourself an "all or nothing immediately" goal and seeing every drink you take as a failure, a "start from zero" point

With the latter, you end up beating yourself up every time you have a slip up. With the former, you pat yourself on the back with each success.

So I think the keys to recovery are:

1. education (so you understand what is happening when you drink, what addiction really is) and in turn understanding which of the effects you may be seeking outside of the 'buzz' (e.g. you could be extremely shy and be enjoying lack of inhibition)
2. group/one on one therapy (including AA) - because your friends and family will probably just tell you "well stop then"
3. a properly supervised treatment/rehab plan (e.g. Sinclair)
4. Most importantly - not beating yourself up when you slip up and not setting goals that are too lofty from the outset

Edited January 9, 2016 by pedro01

[pedro01]

Here is a terrific article on alcoholism. A bit long, but spot on imo. Everyone in my family is or has been alcoholic. Why not me? I think that perhaps smoking some weed got me through that vulnerable age (haven't had any of that for at least 30 years, btw).

To me alcoholism is a behavior: you have to get that drink and bend your wrist. Not true for cancer, Parkinson's etc. AA rankles me because it is religion pretending to be something else. Same "you are hopeless sinner BUT we can fix that"... actually not fix as implore you going to meetings forever so don't "relapse". "Being willful" seems to equal "thinking and questioning for yourself", which is not allowed in most religions...

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/04/the-irrationality-of-alcoholics-anonymous/386255/

Interesting article and one that puts my point across better than I ever could...

Everyone there warned him that he had a chronic, progressive disease and that if he listened to the cunning internal whisper promising that he could have just one drink, he would be off on a bender.

J.G. says it was this message—that there were no small missteps, and one drink might as well be 100—that set him on a cycle of bingeing and abstinence.

[arjunadawn]

While it is argued that some who are alcoholics or narcotics users have a disease this was offered not from genetic research but from the overall debasement of liberal society that makes everyone a victim and a special needs person. There is power in victimization in the West.

[dotpoom]

Thank you for your i teresting post. As a man who spent 30 years trying to stop drinking and finally suceeded 15 years ago,I would like to make a contrabution.

To the best of knowledge no medical cure has yet been found for Alcoholism, surgery or tablets. The reason they say it can only be self diagnosed is because the Alcoholis cannot lie to himself...he never tells the truth about his drinking to those who could diagnose him,if he did it would be easy to see he has a problem.

I tell every Alcoholic that comes to me for help that he is indeed fully responsible for his past and the damage he had done (it wasn't the neighbour thst caused it all)..although he was a very sick man at the time and now it is ti.e to get well....he's not a "bad" man trying to get good. I myself have no power over Alcohol...if I delibrately ever take another drink I cannot guarentee I will have the ability to stop...as I have no Power over it I looked for that power outside of myself..I found it and I call it God. My sick mind could not cure my sick mind. Alcoholism is a 3 fold illness...mental, physical and spiritual. Indeed the sufferer is actually physically differnt in body from the non Alcoholic...(see the "Chalk Talk" by Fr. Martin).

Finally never claimed to be the only answer to Alcoholism...see it's book..."Alcoholics Annonymouss".

God blesd all who have this afflication...I will always be an Alcoholic...But I havn't suffered from it for tha past 15 years.

[lanng khao]

Take me drunk, I'm home..

[Jingthing]

There are genetic differences between occasional users and addicts. One person is exposed and does not become addicted, another does. I also don't think it's a disease, but until we have gene therapy to fix it the best we can do is treat it as a disease, which means dis ease.....

At this point in time, no genetic link has been proven.

If you have links to studies that do claim to prove it, I would love to have a read.

As a matter of fact.

This is personally interesting to me as in general I have a rather addictive tendencies for lots of things (posting here ), but early in my life I had a strong feeling that I had ZERO risk to be an alcoholic.

http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/9935/jews-drink-less-but-get-drunk-more-easily-new-studies-show/

NEW YORK -- Jews don't drink, the old myth goes.

And now there's scientific evidence to prove it.

Two new studies are bolstering the view that Jews don't drink as much as other Caucasians -- and researchers attribute the difference largely to a genetic mutation that is found in a much higher proportion among Jews than among other whites.

Those surveyed possessed a particular genetic mutation that regulates an enzyme responsible for determining how the body breaks down alcohol.

A similar mutation is also found at relatively high rates among Asians.

The mutation makes people "more sensitive to alcohol -- in other words, they get drunk very quickly," said Yehuda Neumark, an epidemiologist at the School of Public Health and Community Medicine at the Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem.

http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/genetics/a/blcah030307.htm

Scientists are not exactly sure why, but a gene variation first known as alcohol dehydrogenase 2 (ADH2*2), but later called alcohol dehydrogenase 1B (ADH1B), tends to discourage heavier drinking in the persons who have the gene.

Because an estimated 20% of the Jewish population has the ADH1B gene, it is believed to be a factor in the low rates of alcoholism reported in this ethnic group. The gene produces a more active from of the enzyme that catalyzes the first step in alcohol metabolism.

Edited January 9, 2016 by Jingthing

[dotpoom]

Sorry about the spelling and the bsd writing in parts. I am on holiday and replying on my small phone with big fingers...and cannot find a way to edit on thia contraption. GB.

[thaiduncankk]

I got bladdered last night and had a great time !

Night in tonight.

[pedro01]

At this point in time, no genetic link has been proven.

If you have links to studies that do claim to prove it, I would love to have a read.

As a matter of fact.

This is personally interesting to me as in general I have a rather addictive tendencies for lots of things (posting here ), but early in my life I had a strong feeling that I had ZERO risk to be an alcoholic.

http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/9935/jews-drink-less-but-get-drunk-more-easily-new-studies-show/

NEW YORK -- Jews don't drink, the old myth goes.

And now there's scientific evidence to prove it.

Two new studies are bolstering the view that Jews don't drink as much as other Caucasians -- and researchers attribute the difference largely to a genetic mutation that is found in a much higher proportion among Jews than among other whites.

Those surveyed possessed a particular genetic mutation that regulates an enzyme responsible for determining how the body breaks down alcohol.

A similar mutation is also found at relatively high rates among Asians.

The mutation makes people "more sensitive to alcohol -- in other words, they get drunk very quickly," said Yehuda Neumark, an epidemiologist at the School of Public Health and Community Medicine at the Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center in Jerusalem.

http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/genetics/a/blcah030307.htm

Scientists are not exactly sure why, but a gene variation first known as alcohol dehydrogenase 2 (ADH2*2), but later called alcohol dehydrogenase 1B (ADH1B), tends to discourage heavier drinking in the persons who have the gene.

Because an estimated 20% of the Jewish population has the ADH1B gene, it is believed to be a factor in the low rates of alcoholism reported in this ethnic group. The gene produces a more active from of the enzyme that catalyzes the first step in alcohol metabolism.

Do you have this yourself? Is it a strong reaction you get?

This is called "Asian Flush Syndrome" too - it's similar to an allergy. It is the same reaction somebody taking Antabuse/Disulfiram will get and it's not pleasant at all. If you ever go the Disulfiram route (which is effective as part of a program) - you at some point will end up trying a beer whilst on it. In fact, it's recommended that you do. Obviously you have to take it very slowly as in some people the reaction is severe.

It turned me red as a beetroot and gave me slight breathing difficulties. I have some Thai and Japanese friends that have this and they do actually drink and after experiencing Disulfiram, I wonder how they do it.

Still - I don't think you've proved that alcoholism is a genetic disease. It's quite a leap to go from an allergy to alcohol because you cannot process it, to saying there must also be a disease that gives you an all consuming desire to ingest alcohol.

[norfolkandchance]

I need a beer

Scuzz Twittly can help you, Anita Beer:

[norfolkandchance]

Is my arsh big in this outfit and is he bald

[pedro01]

Thank you for your i teresting post. As a man who spent 30 years trying to stop drinking and finally suceeded 15 years ago,I would like to make a contrabution.

To the best of knowledge no medical cure has yet been found for Alcoholism, surgery or tablets. The reason they say it can only be self diagnosed is because the Alcoholis cannot lie to himself...he never tells the truth about his drinking to those who could diagnose him,if he did it would be easy to see he has a problem.

I tell every Alcoholic that comes to me for help that he is indeed fully responsible for his past and the damage he had done (it wasn't the neighbour thst caused it all)..although he was a very sick man at the time and now it is ti.e to get well....he's not a "bad" man trying to get good. I myself have no power over Alcohol...if I delibrately ever take another drink I cannot guarentee I will have the ability to stop...as I have no Power over it I looked for that power outside of myself..I found it and I call it God. My sick mind could not cure my sick mind. Alcoholism is a 3 fold illness...mental, physical and spiritual. Indeed the sufferer is actually physically differnt in body from the non Alcoholic...(see the "Chalk Talk" by Fr. Martin).

Finally never claimed to be the only answer to Alcoholism...see it's book..."Alcoholics Annonymouss".

God blesd all who have this afflication...I will always be an Alcoholic...But I havn't suffered from it for tha past 15 years.

Glad to hear you got better.

Your beliefs that alcoholism is a disease comes from meetings where people that helped you told you it was a disease, right?

This is a bit like being a Catholic because your parents were Catholic. So in turn, you found help in a group and that group taught you a number of things that you now hold dearly as truths.

It's like the 3 blind men feeling an elephant. One thinks he's feeling a snake(the trunk), the other a wall, the other a rope (the tail) - all believe what they perceived as an absolute truth.

Your beliefs are dogmatic. They are not backed by scientific research. But you put faith in people - believed everything they told you, followed the 12 steps and stopped drinking. So for you, it's all upside.

In my opinion, you have long been cured of your addiction. Not that you should now attempt social drinking - but there is no evidence that what you believe to be fact is anything other than a dogma.

Edited January 9, 2016 by pedro01

[ozyjon]

codwollop

my coffee ready yet

[Rhys]

self responsibility vs surrendering yourself to a higher being.....

[The Deerhunter]

As a long-term recovering alcoholic, I can tell you from the very start I drank for the effect. I liked the woozy switch off for my mind, and it seemed the panacea to all problems, just get drunk and the problems go away. Of course,I had to hit that rock-bottom, when the problems caused by my uncontrollable drinking caused living problems. Now, I would suggest, that 'normal' people don't drink this way. Additionally, 'normies' have something that tells them instinctively that they have absorbed too much alcohol and so stop, as they are poisoning their body. I believe the alcoholic doesn't have this warning system and just keeps drinking on the basis that if 1 or 2 drinks have a good effect - keep going, it must get better. Now, if this isn't an illness, I don't know what is.

The very basis of AA is step 1, powerless over alcohol, life becomes unmanageable. This reinforces the disease concept.If the OP can control drinking, all well and good. Just don't denigrate people like me who have the life answer in AA.

One of the biggest problems for the drinker seeking help is breaking through the denial element of what their drinking is doing, the 'reality' truth. So, what is the OP doing, reinforcing the rationalizations that avoid making the denial breakthrough? OK, go your own way, but don't push this kind of stuff that creates more harm than good.

He is not preaching to you, one of the 5% AA successes. He is trying to give the 95% of AA failures a reason to carry on and try and control their lives not encourage them to give up because they have an incurable disease and AA, the only possible solution, failed and therefore they are doomed by their disease!!!

AA is a religion of specific life self disciplines to help people replace alcohol. It is not for everyone because we are all different. Like all religions, it sells itself as the only solution a cluster of our self-perceived weaknesses.

It must be an psychological addiction, a symptom of an addictive personality similar to religion, addiction to sex, gambling, smoking and many of the other substance addictions, not a separate disease. If it was a disease, then gambling, golf, membership of a lodge, special interest club, smoking, religion, marijuana and heroin etc are all separate diseases as well. But they are not. No more than alcohol is. Alcohol is only a disease because it helps some people to control it to think it is one. But this self deception does not work for most.

The people who go from one religion to another must have a disease. They need a code of hierarchically imposed self discipline but can never decide which one to stick with. Or the unlucky ones find one that turns them into a mysoginist, a suicide bomber or an idiot who gives all his money to an invisible friend. Is that a disease? Is religion a disease? Many people with addictive personalities experience in their lives, together or serially, several or all of these "diseases", of which alcohol is only one.

It is caused by behaviour, and a desire to escape from unwelcome reality. The actions that AA bring about are not a drug to cure your disease. They are life changes you need to cure one of a number of similar addictions caused by actions. Ergo, AA is a specific religion. It gives some people a usefully addictive belief system to help control another less desirable behaviour.

AA is a religion of life disciplines to help you control your alcohol addiction but many people do not like religion. They prefer other psychological; addictions. That is why it fails for so many and that was his point, (not his pint.) . People who like alcohol too much seem not to like religion so religion, (AA) fails them.

Edited January 9, 2016 by The Deerhunter

[Petchou]

We hear lots of talk of alcoholism being a disease as opposed to s self-inflicted problem.

Yet we never hear that people addicted to drugs, cigarettes, sex, coffee have a disease. We know full well that people are responsible for those addictions through poor life choices.

The pioneer of "Alcoholism is a disease" was Benjamin Rush, who in the 1800's, without any scientific backing proclaimed that

• Those who drank too much were diseased
• That this should be used as a reason to prohibit alcohol
• That dishonest and political dissention were also diseases
• That being of African-American descent were diseases

So a real stand-up guy, right?

This is the basis of alcoholism is a disease.

In addition many are told...

• The disease has no cure
• The disease can only be diagnosed by yourself
• Following a certain program is a remedy for an incurable disease

I think this is the only disease on planet earth that can not be diagnosed by a specialist. What a peculiar disease that only the sufferer can diagnose. How peculiar that this disease has no cure and can never have a cure, despite the world moving on, new medications and new approached to addiction treatment, alcoholism is immune to everything and is incurable.

So what is the damage done?

Well there's a few ways this hurts people

• When they relapse, or if they do not like certain treatment approaches, they can give up because they first learn they are incurable and if the cure doesn't work for them, they lose hope
• They are psychologically programmed to make alcohol
• The concept of having a disease, effectively strips the addict of their personal responsibility - it's not their fault, they have an ailment - which in turn absolves them of responsibility in a relapse and the recovery process itself - hence the "higher power"

In other words - the belief that alcohol is a disease can lead to worsening their habits because they are now no longer responsible or it's a hopeless task. They have been programmed to fail outside of the treatment program that taught them it was an incurable disease.

Alcoholism is not a disease scientifically speaking because it has no physically measurable symptoms. There is no way to diagnose an alcoholic or test for the signs of the disease in it's development. For instance, if you took a Muslim that had never had a drink, there would be no test that would identify that person as an alcoholic. The only way to tell is when they start drinking - because there is nothing there to see.

The dropout rate at AA us roughly 95%. That's 95% of people that make the first meeting are no longer going after 3 months. Many of these people leave with the belief that they have an incurable disease as opposed to the fact that they have a substance abuse issue. So whilst many people abstain through AA, it is by no means the "last resort" or the only means of treating the addiction.

For those that got to recovery through AA, I salute you.

For those that found it not for them, do not give up hope, you are in the vast majority of people that do not stick with that program. This does not mean you are stuck with something for life. You may well have to accept responsibility for where you are now, that you are not diseased but addicted.

It's urgent to go consult.

[gerryBScot]

It's good to be alive this Sunday morning and to be able to function without a drink or the prospect of getting drunk today. I spent yesterday afternoon in the rice paddies to the north of Phetchburi with my six year old son looking at eagles, harriers and other birds. I had a relaxed Saturday night with my wife and our kids before an early sleep. My son is playing in a football tournament later today so we'll head for that.I've got some reading to do for some personal study (non-recovery related) I'm doing so I'll spend a couple of hours on that this morning. Work tomorrow. Life is good.

[MiKT]

I need a beer

Thank you for introducing Scuzz, a great way to start a (hell what day is it?) I will get back to the serious stuff later.

Scuzz Twittly can help you, Anita Beer:

[impulse]

I suspect the main reason for the 5% success rate of AA is that the vast majority of people who darken the door of AA don't really want to stop drinking.

They want to get the law off their back, they want to fill in their court ordered attendance records, they want to get their wife back (or just off their back), they want to get their boss off their back (or not lose their job), they want to get their driver's license back, and on and on.

Or they want to learn how to keep on drinking in a controlled manner without suffering the consequences of their drinking. Sadly, even modern science doesn't have that answer, never mind a bunch of recovering drunks who enjoy each others' company. There is no magic secret.

2 things I've learned in 26 years: AA can't make you want it, and AA can't do it for you. You have to want to stop, and you have to do the work.

All we (as AA members) can do is to show you how our lives were, what we did to change it, and what our lives are like today. Then it's up to you to decide and to act- or not.

The good news: Nothing is required that anyone can't do- no matter what their IQ, their economic status, their religion (or lack thereof) or their busy schedule.

Edited January 10, 2016 by impulse