Is alcoholism a disease or something else?

[littleroundman]

Are we really going back to this sad, tired, overused, abused, question AGAIN?!?

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/156/1/34

"In this first population-based study of male twins from the United States, it was found that genetic factors played a major role in the development of alcoholism among males, with similar influence for alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence. Prior findings implicating the influence of common environment may be attributable to sampling strategy; in this population-based sample, environmental factors shared by family members appear to have had little influence on the development of alcoholism in males."

See that single word ????

it is MAJOR

it is NOT "ALL" or "EVERY" or even "MOST"

Now, let's just for ***** and giggles, assume, for a moment, that "MAJOR" means "95% of"

95% of 10,000,000 still leaves half a MILLION or 500,000 people in the USA alone whose "alcoholism" is NOT due to genetic factors.

Not important, perhaps, within the context of discussions of a theoretical nature on internet forums, but bloody important to those with "alcoholism", those involved with treating the problem and those directly affected by the problem. i.e. partners, families, friends, employers and workmates.

And, for that, whoever it is who has to bear the cost of the billions of dollars it is estimated that alcohol related problems cost the US economy annually.

Do not use alternate spelling to get around the auto-censor.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

 

[Dancing David]

Mindset equals state of mind? You define it, you used the term.

When they can condition a fear into an animal and then the offspring are BORN with the fear. I would call that a biological mechanism that controls a state of mind, or mindset.

You haven't shown that either.

I said that there is not a good way for a scientific model of 'mindset' to be biologically determined by genetics. Arousal levels, yes, irritability levels, yes, levels of overall energy yes, 'mindset' no. So you give me a definition of 'mindset' that works as genetically determined. Most definitions would fall into 'behavioral conditioning'. It would be really hard to suggest a genetic mechanism for ‘A fixed mental attitude or disposition that predetermines a person's responses to and interpretations of situations.’

And so when this 'fear' is inherited, what are you referencing, over all anxiety, sensitization levels? Do you really know? Is it fear of a specific thing or general arousal levels of an animal when gestated in an aroused mother? Or have you totally derived your conclusion from what? Epigenetics?

As ever I await patiently for your response.

 

[Dancing David]

Already posted it TWICE. You guys don't look at what I post and then demand evidence?
Thats a nice form of debating you got there.
You can never lose.

No it's not Lamarckism it is epigentics.

Let's try this again.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19150054

Maybe you should be more careful in what you say, that study does not say what you said.

 

[Dancing David]

They simulated maltreatment and early childhood trauma which effected genetic transcription in the animals and THEN IT WAS PASSED ON TO ITS OFFSPRING.
Perhaps I should have used the word "stress" instead of fear to be more technically correct.

The whole point being, we have discovered that an outside influence can change the way our genes express themselves and it can be PASSED ON TO OFFSPRING.

Even if we didn't have that, the statement, "there is no biological mechanism that effects a mindset" is so mind numbingly false I can't believe it was not pointed out by everyone on here how wrong it was.

"The whole point being, we have discovered that an outside influence can change the way our some genes express themselves and it can be PASSED ON TO OFFSPRING."

And the correct quote of mine is "there is at this time no biological mechanisms that leads to a certain mindset."


Now overall aorusal levels, yes, overall energy levels, yes, overall 'mood' yes, but 'mindset' as a characteristc way of responding to situations, no.

 

[Dancing David]

If alcoholics are defined by their genetic predisposition to become addicted to alcohol... which they are.... then all you need is to realize that some people are born that way.

I don't get the problem with this.

That should be some people with alcohol addiction, You keep referencing the set of alcoholics with a predisposition as the set of all alcoholics.

 

[Dancing David]

I addressed that by stating that it could be possible that some people are not alcoholics but are classified that way.
I think it's a hard line to draw.

So a True Scotsman if ever I saw one! And no it is not a hard line to draw, read the criteria again.

 

[Dancing David]

This is a Thread about Alcoholism, Addiction, and the various Conceptual models that can be used to define them. So I'll make this response as brief as possible so as not to continue your derail.

No it is not, it is specifically "Is alcoholism a disease", would you please refrain from the religious argument or at least confine it to the topic.

 

[Dancing David]

Are we really going back to this sad, tired, overused, abused, question AGAIN?!?

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/156/1/34

"In this first population-based study of male twins from the United States, it was found that genetic factors played a major role in the development of alcoholism among males, with similar influence for alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence. Prior findings implicating the influence of common environment may be attributable to sampling strategy; in this population-based sample, environmental factors shared by family members appear to have had little influence on the development of alcoholism in males."

Didn't even need to wake up my fictitious wife, who appears in some of my youtube videos and which you can actually watch playing in the snow and riding her scooter ...yet she is fictitious... sigh... in order to answer that.

And that study does not show that ALL alcoholics have a genetic predisposition, it shows that in the 1700 twin pairs that are in the sample (and by the way have a higher than average rate of alcohol problem) that there is a 'proportion' of .63, but you will also not the sample issue with the sample of monozygotes and dyzygotes. I will have read it again to get what the proportion actually means.
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/156/1/34

They do not say from a cursory reading.

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

No it is not, it is specifically "Is alcoholism a disease", would you please refrain from the religious argument or at least confine it to the topic.

May I respectfully remind you, the full title of this thread is: "Is Alcoholism a Disease or Something Else?"

That opens the thread up discussing ALL models of Alcoholism, and Addiction in general as it is impossible to discuss Alcoholism without discussing its definitions.

The Religious Derail wasn't my doing, I was responding to Jiggeryqua, and I made it abundantly clear that it was a derail and that any further discussion should take place on the appropriate threads.

GB

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Zerospeaks, I think the biggest problem people on this thread are having, is the indiscriminate usage of terms like "All", or "Every" in regards to who or how one is defined as an Alcoholic.

And Dancing David is correct insofar as pointing out that in terms of discussing epigenetic factors, one can really only discuss how they affect behaviours rather than than unmeasurable things such as consciousness.

Again, I see the main problem here as being the language you use to express your ideas, which may or may not give people the wrong impression of what your ideas actually are.

GB

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Oy vey.
You do get that my username is as relevant to the question as your opinion (or AA's, for that matter), right ...?
Diseases aren't usually defined by consensus of laypeople on messageboards.
I think that's good.

You're absolutely right of course.

Diseases are usually defined by consensus of medical professionals. However, not all medical professionals agree with the general consensus.

And a consensus by medical professionals in one country, may or may not be the same as the consensus of medical professionals in other countries.

And, it is in the interest of advancing empiricism to look at all the socio-economic/political factors that affect how a consensus of medical professionals is arrived at.

As to the snark, it was a deserved response to your rather belligerently and inappropriately Authoritative remark: "Therefore it is one until further notice. Get it, will you?"

GB

 

[MikeSun5]

I posted a study that backed my claim, and then showed my "fictitious" wife to be real.... then I get ignored...
When did the JREF forums get taken over by people such as this?

When people such as YOU began posting. Every link you have posted has been shown to say something OTHER than what you thought it did. You've provided nothing but constant failure, dude. Also, youtube videos don't prove that your wife is an "expert on alcoholism" like you claimed. Fail, fail, fail. It's quite tiresome.

Maybe you should be more careful in what you say, that study does not say what you said.

Hey, maybe he won't ignore it when someone else says it...

You are, at best, mis-informed.

Some here appear to be afflicted by one or more of those defects I bolded.

Well then, sir... please inform us. Please explain how people who have chosen to follow this path to stop drinking have NOT accepted relgion.
(this ought to be good )

 

[Gandalfs Beard]

Well then, sir... please inform us. Please explain how people who have chosen to follow this path to stop drinking have NOT accepted relgion.
(this ought to be good )

If you want to see how well AlBell "explains" it, check out this thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=180683

GB

 

[AlBell]

Well then, sir... please inform us. Please explain how people who have chosen to follow this path to stop drinking have NOT accepted relgion.
(this ought to be good )

In my case, my higher power (the subconscious "me") provided Good Orderly Direction (god as I understand him). The conscious me uses prayerful requests to the subconscious "me" for GoodOrderlyDirection. It's worked fine now for many many days of sobriety, one day at a time.

No religion required.

 

[zerospeaks]

Also, youtube videos don't prove that your wife is an "expert on alcoholism" like you claimed

.

That is 6 claims you have made that I have made and I didn't.
If you would stop putting words in my mouth for a second maybe you could hear something I actually say.

 

[Dancing David]

.

That is 6 claims you have made that I have made and I didn't.
If you would stop putting words in my mouth for a second maybe you could hear something I actually say.

The links still did not address the point you were trying to make, you stated a general that 'alcoholism' with no qualifiers, was a genetically based disorder. Even when directly confronted with your mis-statement, that 'some alcoholism' has a biological predisposition, you did not correct yourself.

"I think an alcoholic is defined genetically from birth and probably alcoholism is the wrong term and we will discover it is really more like "addictionism" ." (This was about the eigth time you made that statement, even making a True Scotman fallacy)

These are only a small sample of your mis-statements
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6449795&postcount=133

My point was, you MAY not be an alcoholic. You could have been a social drinker with a very high tolerance. Who enjoyed drinking.. but could drop it when he wanted.
And alcoholic can not...

Oh nevermind.
I will just get my wife to give me 20 studies that prove you wrong after the football game.

BUT IS IT A DISEASE? That is the debate.
Animal Research points to yes... according to pretty much every research institution.

What FattyCatty and my wife (the expert on this subject) is TRYING to tell you is that there is NO argument on this subject.
Not in science.

I wonder, do you also think there is an argument over creationism? Flat-earthism?

thank you, now can we close this tread and agree that CURRENTLY science views alcoholism as a disease?

OP you have been answered.

This came after you arrogantly (rather aggressive , rude and demeaning, using ridicule and derision to those who did not treat you that way) made this kind of statement repeatedly and just posted a bunch of links that did not say what you said, your retraction was rather brief and funny compared to your pile of original mis-statements.

"Some ARE alcoholics genetically, and some aren't..... therefore..."

And then you immediately went back to foolish postings...

 

[bigred]

Pardon for not reading all the replies, but my offhand .02:

Disease or not, we can all agree that alcoholism is a serious problem. The idea that alcoholism is a disease was largely popularized by Alcoholics Anonymous, to my understanding. Many doctors and alcohol/drug addiction specialists agree that alcoholism is a disease.

...proving once again that just because someone is a so-called "expert" doesn't automatically mean they know what they're talking about in any given instance.

Good grief. I shake my head and roll my eyes every time this comes up. OF COURSE it's not a disease. Malaria, cancer, ebola....those are diseases. CHOOSING to repeatedly grab bottles of booze and pour them down your throat is exactly that: a choice, a behavior - not a disease. Also water is wet. But thanks to the bizarre and idiotic trend of trying to label everything under the sun a "disease" or "condition" (etc), this is the silliness we get.

If one is "more genetically inclined" such that they have an inability to control it, here's an idea: don't do it.

 

[zerospeaks]

OF COURSE it's not a disease. Malaria, cancer, ebola....those are diseases. CHOOSING to repeatedly grab bottles of booze and pour them down your throat is exactly that: a choice, a behavior - not a disease.

Good lord, this entire thread was for naught.

 

[bigred]

So you'll be leaving then?

 

[Skeptical Greg]

He already has.... Several times..