Stop drinking

[Pilgrim]

See? I'd say if you can stop at 4 you don't have a problem. Period. That's the definition of control. I personally find it much harder to stop at four than to stop at one.

At four, you are drunk unless it has taken you more than four hours to consume those drinks. At four hours, you've probably run out of time to drink, not exerted self-control. At less than four hours, you are legally drunk and IMO you have a problem.

Getting hammered once a year now qualifies as a drinking problem? If that's your definition than I'd be willing to bet the majority of adults would qualify.

If it happens on purpose, yes, it's a problem. I have no sympathy or patience for people who go out to intentionally get drunk.

Let me add this clarification - people who want to get drunk and not bother others or engage in bad behavior can sort it out for themselves. It's a problem, but it's only their problem...and a problem for their families. But too many people use it as an excuse to get rowdy, drive drunk, commit crimes, etc. Then they claim they were drunk as an excuse. But it's NOT an excuse.

Let me be really clear about this - if you get drunk and break the law, as far as I'm concerned the fact that you were drunk is not material or relevant. YOU got yourself drunk. To me, you are are as 100% responsible for your acts as if you were stone cold sober.

That's beyond the scope of the original post, but that's my attitude and I'm sticking to it. No break, no sympathy, no consideration.

 

[sissy kathy]

Invalid Link Removed

Myth: Alcohol is an addictive drug, and everyone who drinks long and hard enough will become addicted.

Reality: Alcohol is selectively addictive drug; it is addictive for only a minority of its users, namely, alcoholics. Most people can drink occasionally, daily, even heavily, without becoming addicted to alcohol. Others (alcoholics) will become addicted no matter how much they drink.

Best I've been able to find; but I already knew that.

 

[Dash Lashes]

Invalid Link Removed

I bookmarked that link. I think I'll try'n memorize all those myths and their counter facts for a mental reference that I will be able to call upon as long as alcohol is in existence (or until I ). just seems like smart stuff to know seeing as how many people drink in this world. being that we have to, somewhat, live with all people etc.

 

[sissy kathy]

I bookmarked that link. I think I'll try'n memorize all those myths and their counter facts for a mental reference that I will be able to call upon as long as alcohol is in existence (or until I ). just seems like smart stuff to know seeing as how many people drink in this world. being that we have to, somewhat, live with all people etc.

I'm surprised you don't already know that. I believe I was taught everything there (the myths) in junior high (middle school these days.) Maybe it just stuck better with me because of my alki uncle.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

If it happens on purpose, yes, it's a problem. I have no sympathy or patience for people who go out to intentionally get drunk..

Fair enough. But that makes your opinion biased.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

I'm still searching and finding NOTHING.

The Wiki page (Disease theory of alcoholism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) says:

"A national study of doctors in the United States reported in The Road to Recovery asked them what proportion of alcoholism is a disease and what proportion is a personal weakness. The average proportion thought to be personal weakness was 31 percent. Significantly, only 12 percent of doctors considered alcoholism to be 100 percent a disease.

Another study found that only 25 percent of physicians believed that alcoholism is a disease. The majority believed alcoholism to be a social or psychological problem instead of a disease...

Some critics of the disease model argue alcoholism still involves choice, not total loss of control, and stripping alcohol abusers of their choice, by applying the disease concept, is a threat to the health of the individual; the disease concept gives the substance abuser an excuse. A disease cannot be cured by force of will; therefore, adding the medical label transfers the responsibility from the abuser to caregivers. Inevitably the abusers become unwilling victims, and just as inevitably they take on that role. They argue that the disease theory of alcoholism exists only to benefit the professionals' and governmental agencies responsible for providing recovery services, and the disease model has not offered a solution for those attempting to stop abusive alcohol and drug use.

These critics hold that by removing some of the stigma and personal responsibility the disease concept actually increases alcoholism and drug abuse and thus the need for treatment. This is somewhat supported by a study which found that a greater belief in the disease theory of alcoholism and higher commitment to total abstinence to be factors correlated with increased likelihood that an alcoholic would have a full-blown relapse (substantial continued use) following an initial lapse (single use)."

​

Then there's [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]. The short synopsis is that the disease designation was adopted to allow the "recovery community" to tap into insurance funds.

"Early in the 20th Century, the validity of the disease concept was often debated in medical circles. However, in 1956 the American Medical Association (AMA) proclaimed alcoholism an "illness." Then, in 1966, the AMA proclaimed alcoholism a disease. The decision was embroiled in controversy. Historically, Marty Mann had her hand in much of this and manipulated information and doctors into agreeing with the disease concept. Marty Mann used her position as founder of the NCA (National Counsel for Alcoholism) to promote the disease concept through Jellinek and the founder of the NIAAA (National Institute for Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse) whose founder worked with Marty Mann during the institute's early development. The founder of NIAAA, R. Brinkley Smithers, was a major contributor to, and promoter of, the disease concept. It was his money that actually funded Jellinek's work at Yale. Smithers was also responsible for gaining insurance coverage for patients in treatment (hence the 28 day program.) Smithers was certainly not altruistic in his efforts. At that time he had already launched a treatment program for which he was lobbying for insurance payments. Acceptance by the medical community was the only way this could happen; alcoholism had to be a medical problem in order for medical insurance to pay for programs. We can see the influence of these "advances" everyday in treatment programs. Today, the treatment industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, with insurance paying the lion's share of the costs. [Author’s note: In 2008, insurance companies paid for approximately 40% of those who underwent alcohol and drug treatment. By 2008 “the lion’s share” of the cost of drug and alcohol treatment was paid by private payers.] ...

"A natural assumption would be that the classification of a disease requires that characteristics and symptoms can be measured or observed. While the majority of diseases fit this requirement, substance abuse does not. The contradiction to these requirements lies within the defined nature of "alcoholism." This supposed disease's symptoms are only discovered after the consumption of alcohol. The health risks, dangerous behaviors and repercussions only materialize after the alcohol is consumed and not before. In comparison, the diagnosis for cancer comes after symptoms surface or cancerous cell are discovered. There are physically visible anomalies that can be measured. This measurement does not exist with alcoholics. The majority of time, the diagnoses of alcoholism is a guess, if indeed such a diagnosis actually exists. There is little question that a person exposed to enough carcinogens or radiation will eventually get cancer. With alcohol it is questionable if a person will become a problem drinker if exposed to alcohol. While cancer is a separate entity of its own within the body that first exists without the knowledge of its host, over consumption of alcohol, a substance consumed by choice, is necessary before a diagnosis can be made. That is to say that one must choose to create the condition before the condition can exist and subsequently be diagnosed. "​

 

[sissy kathy]

The Wiki page (Disease theory of alcoholism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) says:

​

Then there's [Invalid or Expired Link Removed]. The short synopsis is that the disease designation was adopted to allow the "recovery community" to tap into insurance funds.

"A natural assumption would be that the classification of a disease requires that characteristics and symptoms can be measured or observed. While the majority of diseases fit this requirement, substance abuse does not. The contradiction to these requirements lies within the defined nature of "alcoholism." This supposed disease's symptoms are only discovered after the consumption of alcohol. The health risks, dangerous behaviors and repercussions only materialize after the alcohol is consumed and not before. In comparison, the diagnosis for cancer comes after symptoms surface or cancerous cell are discovered. There are physically visible anomalies that can be measured. This measurement does not exist with alcoholics. The majority of time, the diagnoses of alcoholism is a guess, if indeed such a diagnosis actually exists. There is little question that a person exposed to enough carcinogens or radiation will eventually get cancer. With alcohol it is questionable if a person will become a problem drinker if exposed to alcohol. While cancer is a separate entity of its own within the body that first exists without the knowledge of its host, over consumption of alcohol, a substance consumed by choice, is necessary before a diagnosis can be made. That is to say that one must choose to create the condition before the condition can exist and subsequently be diagnosed. "​

Most of the information in the Wiki article is obsolete. The second reference is just wrong. Now that genetic markers have been found that point to a potential alcohol dependence, there are in fact tests to determine if one is at risk. Granted science has taken awhile to catch up with the determination of a disease, and it still requires a decision by the alki to trigger it, but that doesn't mean the potential for the disease isn't there.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

Most of the information in the Wiki article is obsolete. The second reference is just wrong. Now that genetic markers have been found that point to a potential alcohol dependence, there are in fact tests to determine if one is at risk. Granted science has taken awhile to catch up with the determination of a disease, and it still requires a decision by the alki to trigger it, but that doesn't mean the potential for the disease isn't there.

Obsolete? That was from 2012. It also doesn't disprove my claim that a significant portion of the medical community don't believe it's a disease. Nor does it disprove the claim that the disease designation was adopted to tap into insurance funds.

But let me ask you this. AA's cure for the "disease" of alcoholism is to "embrace a higher power." God. There's even a chapter in the Big Book for the agnostic that convinces them to believe in God:

We needed to ask ourselves but one short question. "Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself?" As soon as a man can say that he does believe, or is willing to believe, we emphatically assure him that he is on his way. It has been repeatedly proven among us that upon this simple cornerstone a wonderfully effective spiritual structure can be built.​

Now let me ask you this. If you had cancer or HIV or ALS or Parkinson's and your doctor prescribed God as your cure, how fast do you think he would lose his medical license?

 

[Pilgrim]

Reality: Alcohol is selectively addictive drug; it is addictive for only a minority of its users, namely, alcoholics. Most people can drink occasionally, daily, even heavily, without becoming addicted to alcohol. Others (alcoholics) will become addicted no matter how much they drink.

And

Fair enough. But that makes your opinion biased.

My opinion is biased against things like alcoholism, genocide, gender discrimination, domestic abuse, drug abuse and some other stuff. Perhaps that makes a me a terrible person because of my biases, but there it is.

 

[JMacBass65]

Here is my perspective. I am the child of an alcoholic, and my dads dad was one as well, as was his mother, etc. You see the pattern there. I also married one. My wife has been sober for over 20 years (she was sober when we met), my Dad was sober on and off since '79, and sober the last 8 years of his life.

Myself? Not an alcoholic. I'll have 1 drink. Sometimes I'll have several. Sometimes I'll have none - all depends on........whatever. I'll go for days, weeks whatever w/o giving it a thought. Or I'll have a beer while grilling burgers. Or, on occasion, I'll be at a party or whatever and clearly have "one too many" - I have a built in designated driver, after all. But, not an alcoholic.

My wife on the other hand, when on occasion I have had a beer w/ dinner or something and not finished it, will often ask "Aren't you going to finish that?" When I say, "nah, toss it", she looks at me like my head just spun around. She say's it's incomprehensible to her how, if you were going to drink, why you wouldn't set out to get drunk. How could you NOT finish a drink - its' the whole point. My dad had expressed a similar mindset to me.

 

[sissy kathy]

Obsolete? That was from 2012. It also doesn't disprove my claim that a significant portion of the medical community don't believe it's a disease. Nor does it disprove the claim that the disease designation was adopted to tap into insurance funds.

But let me ask you this. AA's cure for the "disease" of alcoholism is to "embrace a higher power." God. There's even a chapter in the Big Book for the agnostic that convinces them to believe in God:

We needed to ask ourselves but one short question. "Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself?" As soon as a man can say that he does believe, or is willing to believe, we emphatically assure him that he is on his way. It has been repeatedly proven among us that upon this simple cornerstone a wonderfully effective spiritual structure can be built.​

Now let me ask you this. If you had cancer or HIV or ALS or Parkinson's and your doctor prescribed God as your cure, how fast do you think he would lose his medical license?

I don't know when that wiki ref was posted but here is a post from 2008:

Invalid Link Removed
Much of the information from the wiki ref is prior to the post cited above.

 

[BazzTard]

only on TB lol

 

[48thStreetCustom]

I don't know when that wiki ref was posted but here is a post from 2008:

Invalid Link Removed
Much of the information from the wiki ref is prior to the post cited above.

What does "We know that the level of response to alcohol is heritable and think there are genetic factors behind 40 to 60 percent of alcohol dependence" mean? And what about the other 40%-60% of alcoholics?

 

[JMacBass65]

But let me ask you this. AA's cure for the "disease" of alcoholism is to "embrace a higher power." God. There's even a chapter in the Big Book for the agnostic that convinces them to believe in God:

We needed to ask ourselves but one short question. "Do I now believe, or am I even willing to believe, that there is a Power greater than myself?" As soon as a man can say that he does believe, or is willing to believe, we emphatically assure him that he is on his way. It has been repeatedly proven among us that upon this simple cornerstone a wonderfully effective spiritual structure can be built.​

Now let me ask you this. If you had cancer or HIV or ALS or Parkinson's and your doctor prescribed God as your cure, how fast do you think he would lose his medical license?

There is WAY more to a functioning recovery program than that. My interpretation of the "God" bit in AA is that it is an effort to get the addict to see beyond themselves and get past the ego, because you will rarely find a bigger egomaniac than an addict. This is of course, often combined with a healthy dose of self loathing and feelings of worthlessness.

And you wonder whey they drink.

 

[48thStreetCustom]

There is WAY more to a functioning recovery program than that. My interpretation of the "God" bit in AA is that it is an effort to get the addict to see beyond themselves and get past the ego, because you will rarely find a bigger egomaniac than an addict. This is of course, often combined with a healthy dose of self loathing and feelings of worthlessness.

And you wonder whey they drink.

Seven of AA's twelve steps involve God.

AA Step 2
"Came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity."
Many programs focus on participants having hope and faith that they will return to a healthy state. These programs may involve God, spirituality and meditation in the healing process.

AA Step 3
"Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him."
AA is not strictly a Christian organization. Different groups work with different types of spirituality and religions, and choosing the right one can help participants feel more comfortable and accepted.

AA Step 5
"Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs."
Knowing what you have done wrong and admitting it are two very different things. Admitting past errors and wrongs to a group and receiving support to change your life is a part of AA that all participants go through.

AA Step 6
"Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character."
Once you've admitted all the problems and faults of character, it is time to let go and accept that it is time to change. Accepting responsibility for the change is part of this step.

AA Step 7
"Humbly asked Him to remove our shortcomings."
Since a major part of most AA groups is spirituality, this step focuses on healing, prayer, meditation, hope and faith.

AA Step 11
"Sought through prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His will for us and he power to carry that out."
Whether or not a person is religious, this allows him to have quiet time where he can reflect on the day, what has happened recently and the things he needs to do to make his life better.

AA Step 12
"Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics and to practice these principles in all our affairs." Another serious aspect of the 12-step program is giving back to the community that has helped you to receive the treatment you needed. The main point of this is to help others seek help when they need it and sometimes to give a person someone else to feel responsible for, as this can help them focus on more positive aspects of life. Community service, aiding others and working with future AA groups are all normal choices for this step.

 

[sissy kathy]

What does "We know that the level of response to alcohol is heritable and think there are genetic factors behind 40 to 60 percent of alcohol dependence" mean? And what about the other 40%-60% of alcoholics?

To me that indicates the researchers have found credible evidence that alcohol dependence is genetic and can be passed from parent to offspring. As for the other 40-60%? Misdiagnosis? I don't know; ask them.

 

[the_stoot64]

I agree that some cases of alcoholism are a disease, but not all.

Being an alcoholic can also be a symptom of other diseases. I have bipolar and at times find it very hard to say no to any amount of alcohol. People with depression and/or post traumatic stress disorder use it to self medicate.

There are people in different cultures consume alcohol vastly different to others. I kind of agree with the genetics stance, but I suspect this is linked to culture.

 

[JMacBass65]

Duuuuuude...........

What's your point?

 

[48thStreetCustom]

Duuuuuude...........

What's your point?

That if the cure for a disease is God, than it's not really a disease.

 

[David Jayne]

Disease/not a disease. Those who argue against the disease concept say it's a choice. The whole answer is that for the recovering addict(IF faithfully following a program of recovery), the first one is a choice but the next 12 aren't. The addict doesn't have to start but he can't stop once he does. THAT'S what they're talking about with all the 'powerless' and 'beyond their control' talk. Hence the AA saying, "One's too many and a thousand aren't enough."
So there's some gray area but if you have a condition which, once begun(by choice) immediately overwhelms your common sense and will, and will probably kill you if not stopped(usually by some disaster rather than choice, which rapidly becomes unavailable), I would say it qualifies as a disease. Addiction and its real mental and physical challenges are tough.