Alcoholism is not a disease.

[SilentZero]

Its a character trait

 

[cheesehead]

I'm loath to use such profanity, but most of you can just jump in a lake filled with flaming thermite. Alcoholism is NOT F*CKING FUNNY!
A good friend of mine has had his life ruined by his father's alcoholisim. He's still in therapy as a result of the abuse he recieved. Regardless of whatever the blazes you call it, it's a horrible thing for a person-and everyone he or she knows-to deal with.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd

Originally posted by: BriGy86
they don't HAVE to start drinking

So it's just like homsexuality. It's a choice. Right?

I'll probably break with most people here, but I'd say yes, that's a valid comparison. Genetics may predispose people to a certain path, but ultimately it's their choice to walk it.

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
I'm loath to use such profanity, but most of you can just jump in a lake filled with flaming thermite. Alcoholism is NOT F*CKING FUNNY!
A good friend of mine has had his life ruined by his father's alcoholisim. He's still in therapy as a result of the abuse he recieved. Regardless of whatever the blazes you call it, it's a horrible thing for a person-and everyone he or she knows-to deal with.

How does a debate over whether or not is falls under the category of a "disease" lessen its evils?

 

[cheesehead]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Piobaireachd

Originally posted by: BriGy86
they don't HAVE to start drinking

So it's just like homsexuality. It's a choice. Right?

I'll probably break with most people here, but I'd say yes, that's a valid comparison. Genetics may predispose people to a certain path, but ultimately it's their choice to walk it.

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
I'm loath to use such profanity, but most of you can just jump in a lake filled with flaming thermite. Alcoholism is NOT F*CKING FUNNY!
A good friend of mine has had his life ruined by his father's alcoholisim. He's still in therapy as a result of the abuse he recieved. Regardless of whatever the blazes you call it, it's a horrible thing for a person-and everyone he or she knows-to deal with.

How does a debate over whether or not is falls under the category of a "disease" lessen its evils?

Some people are saying it's simply just a choice, or a lifestyle, or in some way or another not a serious problem.

 

[FinalFantasy]

I would have been considered an alcoholic before...I'm guessing. I did not, I mean really DID NOT even realize it. I would drink at least 4 to 5 times a week...come home from work, crack open at least 2-3 40oz's a night and drink the hard stuff on the weekends. My vodka shots were 5-6 oz. each...and that was nothing to me.

Thinking back I guess the main reason I used to drink so much to get rid of "stressors", as some stated earlier in the thread, but still drinking was fun to me...I just didn't realize how much it was changing my personality, shaping my lifestyle and how many additional problems it was causing even though I didn't "care" about my other ones...heh

I still drink and get wasted on the weekends, but I just turned 21 so that's expected... ;D

I think drinking really drove a wedge in the relationship with my gf also.....I guess you could have, at the time, called me a "violent" drinker. Nothing physical, but it came close. The worst was just the stuff that I would say......one thing I really noticed is that alcohol makes you deal with your problems in other ways and they're not neccessarily too constructive. The worst thing to happen though is that now my gf/close to being my ex gf now drinks too much too.....first it was just with me, but now her and her bestfriend (my best friends gf, who he got drinking also) get wasted before they go out.....I can't even begin to say how unsafe that is...DUI, rape and to be real possibly doing some $h(t she might regret etc etc...

Don't know if this matters but, I know both my grandfathers would drink a lot and from some stories i've heard I don't think they were the "best people" when they were drunk either....same for a couple of my uncles too.

Well to stick to topic: Drinking alcohol is a CHOICE, drinking excessively is a LIFESTYLE, but ultimately IMO I think alcoholism is a DISEASE.

Definition of disease: A disease is any abnormal condition of the body or mind that causes discomfort, dysfunction, or distress to the person affected or those in contact with the person. Sometimes the term is used broadly to include injuries, disabilities, syndromes, symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts these may be considered distinguishable categories.

Like I said, I mentally didn't realize how much I was drinking and how much drinking so much was ****ing up my life...and I think I would classify getting wasted 5 times a week as deviant behavior. And alcohol did effect those who were in contact with me.

Hope this helps...

 

[MartyMcFly3]

Genetics didnt put the bottle of Jack Daniels in my Uncle's hands...


(he's recovered now)

 

[letter rip]

It certainly IS a disease. It's an incurable, progressive disease. I have no doubt that if I were to pick up a drink today, I'd be dead and gone in a matter of weeks or less. DEAD and GONE! Alcoholics who pick up after a time of sobriety soon find themselves in a condition far worse than when they quit because the disease progresses, even though they are not drinking. This is a proven fact.
Even though I haven't had a drink in nearly 4 years, my disease has progressed all that time so that if I started again today, it would be as if I never stopped. And, 4 years ago, I was dead-in-bed-drunk 24/7, ONLY came out of the house to get more alcohol, slept very little, ate very little, always made sure I had exact change to slap down on the counter to avoid the violently shaking hands...I'm pretty sure I would expire in no time at all.
You folks who disagree should do a google on 'alcoholism progressive disease' (no quotes neccessary) to learn a little more about a disease that affects millions.
Right On - shilala, iwearnosox, NL5, hammer01, and others who know better.

 

[BATCH71]

Hi,

I normally just read these but.......... this one hits home for me.

My mother is recovered 30+ years. She quit during the very same month I was born and was born with a nice lazy eye. She has not had a drink in 30 goddamn years and every time I have Martini with my pop, I can see her mouth watering for it. Almost creepy to say the least.

Congrats to my mom for all she has done and not done for the last 30 years. She also has just begun mentoring a teen alcoholism group. Astonishing that kids 13-18 have these real problems but they do.

I know alot of the peeps here are quite young and still learning but I will say this and move on.

Alcoholism is a disease, without a doubt.

Dave

 

[Deeko]

Too bad I missed this thread for so long, some of you really need a clue.

Alcoholism is not something so easily avoided. Lets be serious....most college students drink in excess. If you read the symptoms of stage 4 chronic alcoholism, the average binge drinking college student has many of them. The difference, is as many people here have pointed out, some people get physically addicted MUCH easier than others. I drink like a goddamn fish, 4+ nights a week I'm hammered, and I can very easily not drink. I am not addicted. However, a good friend of mine is. He is 21, his family has a long history of alcoholism, and he's going that route too. he drinks the same amount I do, but he HAS to have a drink the next day. He can't stop, he already gets the shakes.

Get on your damn high horse and say all you will about how its a choice and its so easily avoided. Fact is, living a normal lifestyle can very easily lead to alcoholism in certain people. Consider yourself lucky that you aren't one of them. Alcoholism is a chronic disease, meaning once you've got it, its yours. You can be a recovering alcoholic for 40 years, but have a few drinks one night, and you're right back in. That's just the way it works.

Now all you ignorant fools shut your mouths. Thank you.

 

[chrisms]

Originally posted by: Deeko
Now all you ignorant fools shut your mouths. Thank you.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Deeko
Get on your damn high horse and say all you will about how its a choice and its so easily avoided. Fact is, living a normal lifestyle can very easily lead to alcoholism in certain people. Consider yourself lucky that you aren't one of them. Alcoholism is a chronic disease, meaning once you've got it, its yours. You can be a recovering alcoholic for 40 years, but have a few drinks one night, and you're right back in. That's just the way it works.

Whether or not it is easily avoided has little to do with whether or not it is a disease. Not all racist authoritarians are Nazis.

 

[Deeko]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: Deeko
Get on your damn high horse and say all you will about how its a choice and its so easily avoided. Fact is, living a normal lifestyle can very easily lead to alcoholism in certain people. Consider yourself lucky that you aren't one of them. Alcoholism is a chronic disease, meaning once you've got it, its yours. You can be a recovering alcoholic for 40 years, but have a few drinks one night, and you're right back in. That's just the way it works.

Whether or not it is easily avoided has little to do with whether or not it is a disease. Not all racist authoritarians are Nazis.

dis·ease (d-zz)
n.

A pathological condition of a body part, an organ, or a system resulting from various causes, such as infection, genetic defect, or environmental stress, and characterized by an identifiable group of signs or symptoms.

Sounds like a fit to me.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: Deeko

Originally posted by: jagec
Whether or not it is easily avoided has little to do with whether or not it is a disease. Not all racist authoritarians are Nazis.

dis·ease (d-zz)
n.

A pathological condition of a body part, an organ, or a system resulting from various causes, such as infection, genetic defect, or environmental stress, and characterized by an identifiable group of signs or symptoms.

Sounds like a fit to me.

English is ultimately defined by how it is understood...dictionaries are simply meant to give a general definition, the subtleties are too complex and varied to capture in print. That dictionary definition would call being born with short fingers a "disease", but few people would consider it so.

 

[forrestroche]

English is ultimately defined by how it is understood...dictionaries are simply meant to give a general definition, the subtleties are too complex and varied to capture in print. That dictionary definition would call being born with short fingers a "disease", but few people would consider it so.[/quote]

You obviously don't understand the meaning of "pathological." I will let you look it up yourself.

 

[forrestroche]

Originally posted by: Amused
BULLSH1T...

They DO NOT lack the control to avoid use altogether...

I know addiction very well. It is, and always will be, a CHOICE.

...Millions of dry and clean addicts prove you 100% wrong.

You are correct that we lack the ability to moderate. And today I have the choice of whether or not to drink. But you ought to aknowledge that your characterization of addiction as MERELY a "choice" is self-contradicting. Addiction by its very nature implies some lack of choice. You should also be the first to point out that out of the millions of clean and sober individuals you cite above, very very very few achieved sobriety by simply making a "choice." The choice is necesary but not sufficient in most cases. My recovery and that of ALL of the sober individuals that I know combined a choice with a the help of others like me and a structued program of recovery.

A little more thoughtful commentary and a little less telling others that they are full of "Bullsh1t" would go a long way in debating such a sensitive topic.

Forrest
12 yrs sober

 

[forrestroche]

Originally posted by: BATCH71
Hi,

I normally just read these but.......... this one hits home for me.

My mother is recovered 30+ years.
Dave

Many congratulations to your Mom. Mine wasn't so lucky. Alchohol killed her 11 years ago. I was one year sober myself at the time. Nice to hear from the people who aren't just interested in slamming a group of people who suffer from a grave and most often fatal affliction.

To me the whole "disease/not disease" debate is designed to make for a great flame war and preclude any serious and thoughful discussion.

Too bad.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: forrestroche

Originally posted by: Amused
BULLSH1T...

They DO NOT lack the control to avoid use altogether...

I know addiction very well. It is, and always will be, a CHOICE.

...Millions of dry and clean addicts prove you 100% wrong.

You are correct that we lack the ability to moderate. And today I have the choice of whether or not to drink. But you ought to aknowledge that your characterization of addiction as MERELY a "choice" is self-contradicting. Addiction by its very nature implies some lack of choice. You should also be the first to point out that out of the millions of clean and sober individuals you cite above, very very very few achieved sobriety by simply making a "choice." The choice is necesary but not sufficient in most cases. My recovery and that of ALL of the sober individuals that I know combined a choice with a the help of others like me and a structued program of recovery.

A little more thoughtful commentary and a little less telling others that they are full of "Bullsh1t" would go a long way in debating such a sensitive topic.

Forrest
12 yrs sober

Again, no matter how much outside help you get, unless you CHOOSE to quit, you will not.

It all boils down to making that CHOICE and sticking to it. No one can "help" an addict if the addict does not CHOOSE to help themselves.

All the various treatment programs have the same exact failure rate of people who quit on their own. Why? Because unless the addict makes that choice, and sticks to that choice, no amount of outside help will work.

Treating addiction like a disease merely gives people excuses and shifts blame, in my opinion.

 

[StageLeft]

Addiction is a qualitative difference between deciding to do something and not, where addiction removes any choice from the matter. I know that technically people like to refer to addiction as an uncontrollable compulsion, like urinating if you've just drank three gallons of water...you can't help it;urinating at that point is not a choice. You WILL lose control of your body. It's a total inevitability. People like to refer to something as addictive when really all it is is hard. So-called addictions to smoking have been terminated cold-turkey by people who'd finally had enough. Any of the mainstream "addictions" have been beaten by thousands/millions of people who one day said "Fvck this, I'm done." and that "addiction" was cut off at the knees. It's hardly an addiction in the true sense if somebody can just stop simply because their determination finally has enough weight.

There are few true addictions. I'd say breathing is an addiction, although there are some people probably who could voluntarily pass out without breathing. Going to the bathroom is a true addiction. Gagging could be a true addiction if something is stuck in your throat. Quiting booze, eating, smokes, heroin--these are hard, but they aren't addictions in my book. But then, I read from a different book than the one most people who have no real control over themselves read from.

"I can't stop" is analagous to "I don't want to stop enough"

 

[shilala]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: forrestroche

Originally posted by: Amused
BULLSH1T...

They DO NOT lack the control to avoid use altogether...

I know addiction very well. It is, and always will be, a CHOICE.

...Millions of dry and clean addicts prove you 100% wrong.

You are correct that we lack the ability to moderate. And today I have the choice of whether or not to drink. But you ought to aknowledge that your characterization of addiction as MERELY a "choice" is self-contradicting. Addiction by its very nature implies some lack of choice. You should also be the first to point out that out of the millions of clean and sober individuals you cite above, very very very few achieved sobriety by simply making a "choice." The choice is necesary but not sufficient in most cases. My recovery and that of ALL of the sober individuals that I know combined a choice with a the help of others like me and a structued program of recovery.

A little more thoughtful commentary and a little less telling others that they are full of "Bullsh1t" would go a long way in debating such a sensitive topic.

Forrest
12 yrs sober

Again, no matter how much outside help you get, unless you CHOOSE to quit, you will not.

It all boils down to making that CHOICE and sticking to it. No one can "help" an addict if the addict does not CHOOSE to help themselves.

All the various treatment programs have the same exact failure rate of people who quit on their own. Why? Because unless the addict makes that choice, and sticks to that choice, no amount of outside help will work.

Treating addiction like a disease merely gives people excuses and shifts blame, in my opinion.

Somewhere along the way, I lost the "choice" in the matter of drink. At the end, my mind was so fvcking corkscrewed that I could not, regardless of being beaten beyond all recognition both pysically and mentally, stop drinking for any period of time.
The best I could manage was stopping for 8 days after totally destroying my new truck, barely escaping death, destroyingt my marriage and all other meaningful relationships, the list goes on.
I swore off alcohol with all my soul.
8 days later I was drunk, regardless of making the "choice to quit".
The next day, I called AA, a rehab, and a psychologist. I made appoinments with the latter two and attended my first meeting that night.

I could not make the "choice" to just stop drinking. I was both mentally and physically incable of doing so. The best I could do for myself was to admit that and choose to get help.

A "choice" implies two equal factors to me. Choose to drink or not to drink. I could choose to drink, but could not choose to avoid drinking.
That, to me, clearly indicates a lack of choice.
I had another choice at the end of my career. "Pull the trigger or don't pull the trigger". I chose not to.
I did have a choice in whether or not I could accept help. I chose to do that.
Since then, I've gained many opportunities to make choices. Many of them require me to get help and I do.
I still have absolutely no choice in the matter of drink. I'm an alcoholic. I drink. That's what I do. I even earned a special name for what I do.
The only choice I have is to take my "medicine". That means to do the things which I have been taught in order to avoid the inevitablity that I will drink again.
I never considered alcoholism a disease while I was an active drinker, or for quite some time after the compulsion was lifted. I understand the disease much more carefully now, and I respect it for what it is...
A chronic, insidious illness.

 

[Falloutboy]

alcoholoics go to meetings

since I don't go I must not be one

 

[shilala]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Addiction is a qualitative difference between deciding to do something and not, where addiction removes any choice from the matter. I know that technically people like to refer to addiction as an uncontrollable compulsion, like urinating if you've just drank three gallons of water...you can't help it;urinating at that point is not a choice. You WILL lose control of your body. It's a total inevitability. People like to refer to something as addictive when really all it is is hard. So-called addictions to smoking have been terminated cold-turkey by people who'd finally had enough. Any of the mainstream "addictions" have been beaten by thousands/millions of people who one day said "Fvck this, I'm done." and that "addiction" was cut off at the knees. It's hardly an addiction in the true sense if somebody can just stop simply because their determination finally has enough weight.

There are few true addictions. I'd say breathing is an addiction, although there are some people probably who could voluntarily pass out without breathing. Going to the bathroom is a true addiction. Gagging could be a true addiction if something is stuck in your throat. Quiting booze, eating, smokes, heroin--these are hard, but they aren't addictions in my book. But then, I read from a different book than the one most people who have no real control over themselves read from.

"I can't stop" is analagous to "I don't want to stop enough"

Skoobie, that's the best argument I've seen in this thread.
The only thing I can add is, it's something you have to experience to understand. Alcoholism somewhere along the way takes over mind, body and soul. The insane thinking and physical addiction completely remove any mindful defense.
After a period of sobriety, the same mental condition and physical propensity exists unless it is treated, making it equally impossible to abstain. With help, the mental condition can be improved to a point where the mind can be of some help in maintaining sobriety. The physical propensity remains in full force, just waiting for a drink, and battling tooth and nail to have you back feeding it.
Once the alcohol is removed from the picture, I have the ability to do the things I have to do to maintain sobriety, but only if I want it bad enough, or want to stop enough.

 

[forrestroche]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain
even in the elite academic and professional psychology world, there is rampant debate about this and no agreement.

This is absolutely true. There is still a great deal of ignorance and painfully little real research. What the psychology field abounds in however, if I may say so, are faddish theories backed by little or no empirical research.

...but you aren't born an alcoholic, you become one through a series of choices to drink, whether to feel good, self-medicate, or escape a stressor. alcoholism runs strongly in my family, but everyone in my particular line of family has ultimately resisted it. there are cousins who haven't. so by making the right choices, you can avoid problems.

Your conclusion suggests you can accurately measure the degree to which those in your line are afflicted (you can't). If you could, then you might be able to say "my line and my cousins' line have similar levels of suscepibility. My line resisted. Therefore there is another mechanism at work. This mechanism might be choice." So your conclusion that " by making the right choices, you can avoid problems." is hardly a scientific one.

THAT SAID, everyone in my line of family has had a pretty soft life. no one has been on the street and everyone was raised by parents who cared about them and had the finances to support them. so maybe we made the right choices, or maybe those choices were made for us by our upbringing and social networks.

Sorry, but your reasoning is getting really shoddy here. Without critiquing the actual logic I will just say that the evidence shows that alcoholism shows no preference in economic or social class.

i should point out that Amused's pointing to himself as "proof" that you can make a choice not to drink and have it work is irrelevant.

I am fimiliar with Fundamental Attribution and it doesn't really apply to Amused's assertion. He is not positing a lack of ability in others. Rather, his case is not proof because it is not statistically significant. I myself do not constitute a sufficiently large sample that I may look at myself and draw conclusions about the larger population of alcoholics.

but i am not aware of any long-term research that prove's AA's effectiveness or superiority over other methods at preventing relapses, and i have vague memories of research that showed AA to not be any better.?).

True. Whatever works for you, that's what you should do. Most of the people that I meet in AA have tried one or more other solutions. Many also leave AA and find help elsewhere.

and the point is, i've read most of this long thread, and those of you who are arguing most passionately have no idea what the fvck you are talking about (isn't that usually the way it works out?).

Ditto.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: forrestroche

Originally posted by: jagec
English is ultimately defined by how it is understood...dictionaries are simply meant to give a general definition, the subtleties are too complex and varied to capture in print. That dictionary definition would call being born with short fingers a "disease", but few people would consider it so.

You obviously don't understand the meaning of "pathological." I will let you look it up yourself.

RELATED TO OR CAUSED BY DISEASE?

Yeah...nice catch there.

Both being born with short fingers, being born colorblind, being born blind, diabetic, with Down syndrome...

Obviously at some point society draws the line and calls it a "disease", rather than just a condition. The dictionary does not...cannot...say where that line is.

 

[jemcam]

As a recovering alcoholic who has been sober for a little over 4 months after drinking for 20+ years, I can tell you that I believe it is a disease that certain people are predisposed to. I guess you could call it a weakness, but after being in AA, I have learned a hell of a lot about the disease and realize it's something that I will not only have to avoid for the rest of my life, but I must constantly continue to work on my problem if I don't want to relapse.

Yes, the first drink is a choice, after that, it's out of my control.

Those who think otherwise are ignorant of the facts.

 

[forrestroche]

Originally posted by: Amused
All the various treatment programs have the same exact failure rate of people who quit on their own.

In fact, noone has yet conducted a rigorous study of the success and failure rates of various programs. The numbers floating around out there about "spontaneous" remissions are "believed to be" true. Your claim about failure rates has no grounding in hard empirical evidence. Nobody knows right now, and neither are any such studies being conducted currently. That is a sad state of affairs given the social costs of alcohol and substance abuse worldwide.

Treating addiction like a disease merely gives people excuses and shifts blame, in my opinion.

That's one way of looking at it. But is it helpful to view addiction in terms of "blame" and "excuses"? Whether you want to call it disease or not, fine. But I don't accept that my mother was to "blame" in her own death. She was suffering from a self-destructive pathology, that much will fit ANY dictionary definition. Choosing for her (and for me for many years) was not enough. She tried unsucessfully for years to quit, but refused help. But under your interpretation aparently she chose to aspirate her own vomit while in an unconcious state. No matter, she would have died of liver failure within months the coroner said. I believe that what saved me was my CHOICE combined with the SUPPORT of others. Do some recover spontaneously and self-sufficiently? Yes, that is a fact, not an opinion. They make a choice, period. But do you really insist that it is MERELY a matter of making a choice? That those who continue to abuse alcohol are just lazy? I hope that experience (if not your own, that of others) and common sense tell you otherwise.

forrest