In defense of alcohol

[vicarz]

The latest headline grabber is that 30.3 percent of survey respondents said they were dependent on alcohol at some point...And just about a quarter, 24 percent, are ever treated for it...

MY PERSPECTIVE - of the people who think they had a problem with alcohol, ever, a vast majority get over it without intervention! This says to me a) they didn't have a real problem, or b) even a real problem with alcohol is not a big deal. Hate to minimize it for those who have real issues, but my problem here is with the fear-mongering abuse of statistics. It's like anti-drug hysteria - the fear of damage is hurting our country more than the actual damage we prevent.

Note - Savage ran a lot of pro and anti 'surprise marriage herpes' letters fyi
Oh, and I hate to broach a yucky topic, but the bottom of the page also contains "poo finger" solutions. What's odd is in this same column DS notes that you can predict/control when it's not a good time to go there between gay top/bottom men, and says that it's insanely inconsiderate not to inform / avoid. He doesn't raise this issue on the icky finger issue though.

Comments

[shesquint.livejournal.com]

I read an article yesterday outlining a study which decided there are five types of alcoholism. The kind where there is no recovery without treatment, according to the study, affects only about 9% of the population. I've known a couple of alcoholics for whom it was a real problem. One who got treatment came out "clean" - which is to say that he doesn't drink anymore, but can't keep his hands off any other mind-altering substances. In fact, he just lost his condo because three times he refinanced, and three times the proceeds went right up his nose. That brings up the question of whether his problem was alcohol dependency or just plain dependency, though.

There was really no point to that ramble. Sorry.

In my early 20s, I was a really heavy drinker. Know what, though? I just grew out of it. Seriously. No interventions, no hitting rock bottom, no treatment of any kind, yet I went from getting shitfaced nearly every night to not getting shitfaced ever, and eventually to not drinking at all. It was a natural progression that followed my maturity, know what I mean?

I think your perspective is a valid one, is what I'm trying to say.

[eac.livejournal.com]

MY PERSPECTIVE - of the people who think they had a problem with alcohol, ever, a vast majority get over it without intervention! This says to me a) they didn't have a real problem, or b) even a real problem with alcohol is not a big deal.

I think what people define as a problem varies hugely. I, for example, had a problem with depression in my 20s, and I medicated it with alcohol. But I was never actually addicted to alcohol, and not drinking was easy. I'll bet a LOT of those 30% would call that dependency, though...

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Agreed wholly. I wish the studies that found that certain problems and personalities are more likely to do drugs (any drugs, legal, illegal, prescribed) and stop blaming the drugs for people's behavior. Yes drugs are a problem, but a problem made worse by addressing the drug rather than people and the problems they have.

I just drink to make the pain go away. Take away my drink and I start staggering around looking for sweet juicy brains.

[minniethemoocha.livejournal.com]

People can get very touchy on the subject of alcohol as an addictive drug.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Not denying that for some people that it is, but criticizing the hysteria inherent in this lopsided view of their data. It isn't even looking at the measures or populations used...I suspect those are suspect as well.

[bentrazor.livejournal.com]

DUFFMAN sez, people with a propensity towards addiction, will always find their crutch! Alcohol is often the most common, because it's the one that's most acessible and legally available! DUFFMAN laughs when people attribute addictive qualities to inanimate substances, then, DUFFMAN cries a little, because so many pretend that's how science works! OH YEAH!

DUFFMAN!

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Hee...but it's more about the hysteria of the headlines ignoring the other possible interpretation of the data that seems so obvious. The counter-argument would be that more people would not have serious problems with earlier intervention, but I fear the one-more-illegal-drug slope likely to result from the long-term view. It's only a coincidence that pot is illegal, or that booze isn't.

[freja999.livejournal.com]

Hey off record, but can you tell me when you posted that thing about Peed plumbing? The one with the girl and the "what's in your water" ad? I have to show that to someone.

Otherwise, how are you?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I'm awful - see prior posts about bar exam :)

The peed thing is in my LJ photos

[cobwellac.livejournal.com]

I agree with you 100%. It's just a way to further demonize alcohol and allow every person who ever got drunk and did something stupid to blame it on their "addiction."

I'm not saying there aren't people with real alcohol issues, but when you read the questionnaires that help you figure out whether you're an alcoholic, you're told that you are if you went out one night and had a few too many. It's ridiculous.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I do a lot of stupid things, sometimes when I do stupid things I'm drunk, and sometimes I am stupid by getting drunk. However, I blame those actions on my "stupidity."

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

The few studies ever done on AA showed it to have a lower rate of effectiveness (and higher rate of relapse) than the no-treatment control group.

Alcoholism is the only "disease" that (for the most part) magically disappears around age 40.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, AA has proven to be extremely addictive and detrimental (in my observation). There is currently a renegade AA group in PG County which even AA is calling a cult. NA - same thing.

Never heard of those studies, would love to see some and giggle. It seems intuitive to me.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

I'll look them up for you when I get home, they're pretty damning.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

The studies are pretty old, one in 74 and one in 75, but apparently they're the only ones ever done with a control group. They were done on "habitual and chronic drunk offenders".

The 64' test was on AA vs nothing, based on alcohol related rearrests. %68 of the AA group had relapsed, %56 of the no-treatment group had. Not the best of measures, though.

The 75' test was AA, no-treatment, two Rational Behavioral Therapy groups (professional/unprofessional), and an Insight (Freudian psychotherapy) group. AA had a %68 dropout rate, which the others were all at or around %40. They had a HUGE increase in the number of post-treatment binges. The level of reported decrease in drinking post-treatment was also big...%100/92/80 for the RBT and Insight groups, %67 for AA and %50 for no-treatment.

There's lots more, but from the comments, it's preaching to the choir. This is from a Disinformation book, which is admittedly questionable, but they did source everything.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

That may be old enough to lose some cultural shift. I do remember that part of the pro-AA bias was due to their high dropout rate - so you only heard success stories, as all the not-utterly-insane people left after a meeting or two. I've been...and there are enough freaky losers there to inspire you to fix your own damn self rather than call yourself one of them. Maybe that's just me.