Is Alcoholism a disease?

jackie1974

Galway K9 wrote: »

well ****ing said!!! well said! some intellectl

Yes it would be 'some intellect' if it was true but it has been scientifically proven that many species eat particular plants for their intoxicating benefits, so not only humans like to get high

Alcoholism is a disease, it is there as sure as the colour of your eyes. It is an extremely selfish disease, but a disease no less. I think people just see the person as a fool acting the bollox after drink and how can I have a drink and act fine but they have a drink and act like XXX

To anybody that thinks alcoholism is a choice, do you really think that anybody would choose a pint over the wife they adore or the children they love more than life itself, or that they would intentionally hurt those people over and over. I think love is extremely strong, but for people that suffer from addiction that addiction is stronger. So for people to belittle that, shame on you.

woodoo

Chuck Stone wrote: »

As I said before it's a bit like claiming you have 'swollen face disease' because you keep punching yourself in the head.

No comparison. How would you become physically addicted to punching yourself in the face. You won't experience withdrawal symptoms from that.

Chuck Stone

woodoo wrote: »

No comparison. How would you become physically addicted to punching yourself in the face. You won't experience withdrawal symptoms from that.

I guess what I'm saying is that it's not really a disease when a large part of that disease comprises of walking to the off licence, buying drink and then consuming it.

It must be a little irksome for people who have real diseases.

I mean is it reasonable to call smoking cigarettes a disease and if it isn't why?

mattjack

woodoo wrote: »

No comparison. How would you become physically addicted to punching yourself in the face. You won't experience withdrawal symptoms from that.

I' m waiting to see the answer to your question.

Chuck Stone

jackie1974 wrote: »

Alcoholism is a disease, it is there as sure as the colour of your eyes.

No it's not.

It's not an observable disease such as AIDS or Cancer or diabetes.

You can't take a sample of someones blood and say 'ah yes - this man has the alcoholism disease'.

This is a circular argument because ultimately it comes down to what you think the word 'disease' means - for me it is an internally observable condition, ergo, alcohol addicts need not apply.

Chuck Stone

mattjack wrote: »

I' m waiting to see the answer to your question.

I could make the argument that face puncher becomes addicted to the endorphins released by inflicting pain.

Seachmall

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I guess what I'm saying is that it's not really a disease when a large part of that disease comprises of walking to the off licence, buying drink and then consuming it.

Nobody is saying the disease is drinking alcohol, they're saying the disease is the craving for alcohol.

You wouldn't say a diabetic doesn't have a disease "when a large part of that disease comprises of walking to the chemist, buying insulin and then consuming it".

You can't define a disease by the symptoms or the consequences.

[Not saying it is a disease but the point quoted is flawed]

It's not an observable disease such as AIDS or Cancer or diabetes.

You can't take a sample of someones blood and say 'ah yes - this man has the alcoholism disease'.

Well everything you do and think is defined by chemical and electrical signals in the brain. Alcoholism isn't some abstract form of dualism.

Sunnyisland

Chuck Stone wrote: »

No it's not.

It's not an observable disease such as AIDS or Cancer or diabetes.

-You can't take a sample of someones blood and say 'ah yes this man has the alcoholism disease'.

This is a circular argument because ultimately it comes down to what you think the word 'disease' means - for me it is an internally observable condition, ergo, alcohol addicts need not apply.

Your doctor can check for liver damage by testing three liver enzymes (AST, ALT, GGT). These enzymes normally occur inside your liver cells. When your liver is damaged, the enzymes are released into your blood stream and show up on a blood test. Therefore the higher the enzyme count the greater the liver damage. The most accurate of these test for alcohol liver damage is GGT and following on from that you can be diagnosed

jackie1974

mattjack wrote: »

I' m waiting to see the answer to your question.

Have you ever punched yourself in the face ?? With an addiction you feel an elation, do you feel elated punching yourself in the face ? If you do, you need a psychiatrist.

Chuck Stone

Seachmall wrote: »

You wouldn't say a diabetic doesn't have a disease "when a large part of that disease comprises of walking to the chemist, buying insulin and then consuming it".

This analogy doesn't work.

A diabetic has an observable condition whether he takes insulin or not.

If abusing alcohol is a disease then why isn't abusing:

food
heroin
cocaine
weed
cigarettes
petrol sniffing
glue sniffin
self-cutting

a disease?

Alcoholism is a result of abusing alcohol.

Consuming alcohol is not as a result of having the 'disease' 'Alcoholism'.

woodoo

Seachmall wrote: »

Nobody is saying the disease is drinking alcohol, they're saying the disease is the craving for alcohol.]

Yes and the process of becoming physically addicted. Withdraw symptoms upon stopping etc. What has changed in the body of an alcoholic that results in this.

Chuck Stone

woodoo wrote: »

Yes and the process of becoming physically addicted. Withdraw symptoms upon stopping etc. What has changed in the body of an alcoholic that results in this.

There are withdrawal symptoms from stopping smoking and even stopping drinking coffee.

Should they be considered 'diseases' too?

Chuck Stone

realies wrote: »

Your doctor can check for liver damage by testing three liver enzymes (AST, ALT, GGT). These enzymes normally occur inside your liver cells. When your liver is damaged, the enzymes are released into your blood stream and show up on a blood test. Therefore the higher the enzyme count the greater the liver damage. The most accurate of these test for alcohol liver damage is GGT and following on from that you can be diagnosed

That is observing the damage done by alcohol rather than the presence of a 'disease'.

Seachmall

Chuck Stone wrote: »

This analogy doesn't work.

A diabetic has an observable condition whether he takes insulin or not.

If abusing alcohol is a disease then why isn't abusing:

It's not an argument for why alcohol is a disease, it's comparison showing the quoted point doesn't work. I.e. You can't dismiss alcoholism as a disease because the "sufferer" drinks alcohol like you can't dismiss diabetics because the sufferer injects insulin.

Alcoholism is a result of abusing alcohol.

Consuming alcohol is not as a result of having the 'disease' 'Alcoholism'.

I never said anything different.

Sunnyisland

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That is observing the damage done by alcohol rather than the presence of a 'disease'.

At the outset yes but not when you follow through with more tests.

woodoo

Chuck Stone wrote: »

There are withdrawal symptoms from stopping smoking and even stopping drinking coffee.

Should they be considered 'diseases' too?

Like I've said before i prefer to use the term addiction. I'm open to the research on the disease theory but the jury is still out for me.

We would need a very good understanding of the biochemistry involved to say for sure. I don't have that.

Chuck Stone

Seachmall wrote: »

I.e. You can't dismiss alcoholism as a disease because the "sufferer" drinks alcohol like you can't dismiss diabetics because the sufferer injects insulin.

But alcohol is the voluntarily introduced pathogen which leads to the 'disease' 'alcoholism' whereas insulin is the treatment of the condition diabetes.

No?

jackie1974

Chuck Stone wrote: »

This analogy doesn't work.

A diabetic has an observable condition whether he takes insulin or not.

If abusing alcohol is a disease then why isn't abusing:

food
heroin
cocaine
weed
cigarettes
petrol sniffing
glue sniffin
self-cutting

a disease?

Alcoholism is a result of abusing alcohol.

Consuming alcohol is not as a result of having the 'disease' 'Alcoholism'.

IMO they are, Addiction is the disease, it is not just about alcohol it is about the feeling/craving. That is why a lot of addicts give up alcohol and take up gambling for instance, the alcohol is gone but the addiction is still present. It is not about whats in the glass, it's about the feelings involved.

Chuck Stone

woodoo wrote: »

We would need a very good understanding of the biochemistry involved to say for sure. I don't have that.

Niether do the people who claim alcoholism is a disease AFAIK.

Chuck Stone

jackie1974 wrote: »

It is not about whats in the glass, it's about the feelings involved.

So would you conceed that having feelings is not a disease?

Sunnyisland

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Neither do the people who claim alcoholism is a disease AFAIK.

As well as other sources i have posted already


Addiction is a neurologically based disease. For many years recovery specialists have compared alcoholism or addictions to a physical disease: like diabetes. In reality addictions are more closely related to a neurological disorder like Tourette's Syndrome* than they are to diabetes.
If the problems you suffer stem from severe alcoholism or addiction, you must accept that these problems are not primarily mental or free will issues. Addictions are not about will power. The problems facing addicts, alcoholics, and their families are miserable, disgusting, and infuriating. They are often hopelessly discouraging. But to imagine that an addict "could change if he wanted to" is a serious misunderstanding of the long term dynamic of addictive disorder. The fact is precisely that an addict cannot change in the long run even if he wants to! That is the definition of addiction: "the loss of control over the use of a substance." It is important to understand that this loss of control is manifested not in terms of days or weeks, but in longer term behaviors: terms of months and years. The reason addicts have lost control is because they have suffered permanent physical neurological changes based in their brains and nervous systems. The disorder manifests in long term obsessive-compulsive behaviors outside the realm of the addicts own control. It is true enough that the use of chemicals begins with chosen behavior. But if alcoholism or addiction develops, the problem has moved outside the realm of free choice. It has developed into a long term mental and physical neurological disorder. All the emotional 'feelings' involved in drug or alcohol seeking are based in neurology. Addiction is based in physical dependency created by altered neurotransmitter balances, and driven by millions upon millions of new living, functioning active neurological pathways which have been established to sustain the condition in the addicts brain. The new neurological pathways are permanently established, and they will not just disappear. The primary neurological disorder is only complicated by physical dependence on the substances. The physical dependence on the substances is secondary! Physical drug withdrawal does not change the underlying neurological addictive disorder. After drug withdrawal, long term overpowering cravings are predictable. These cravings are, in reality, spontaneous nerve impulses. Even in the longer term, overwhelming cravings are outside the addicts control.

fonecrusher1

Nah its not a disease. In fact i don't recognise the term 'alcoholic'.... Its a cop out. Oh im alcoholic....nah your just weak willed, learn to moderate you child.

woodoo

realies wrote: »

As well as other sources i have posted already


Addiction is a neurologically based disease. For many years recovery specialists have compared alcoholism or addictions to a physical disease: like diabetes. In reality addictions are more closely related to a neurological disorder like Tourette's Syndrome* than they are to diabetes.
If the problems you suffer stem from severe alcoholism or addiction, you must accept that these problems are not primarily mental or free will issues. Addictions are not about will power. The problems facing addicts, alcoholics, and their families are miserable, disgusting, and infuriating. They are often hopelessly discouraging. But to imagine that an addict "could change if he wanted to" is a serious misunderstanding of the long term dynamic of addictive disorder. The fact is precisely that an addict cannot change in the long run even if he wants to! That is the definition of addiction: "the loss of control over the use of a substance." It is important to understand that this loss of control is manifested not in terms of days or weeks, but in longer term behaviors: terms of months and years. The reason addicts have lost control is because they have suffered permanent physical neurological changes based in their brains and nervous systems. The disorder manifests in long term obsessive-compulsive behaviors outside the realm of the addicts own control. It is true enough that the use of chemicals begins with chosen behavior. But if alcoholism or addiction develops, the problem has moved outside the realm of free choice. It has developed into a long term mental and physical neurological disorder. All the emotional 'feelings' involved in drug or alcohol seeking are based in neurology. Addiction is based in physical dependency created by altered neurotransmitter balances, and driven by millions upon millions of new living, functioning active neurological pathways which have been established to sustain the condition in the addicts brain. The new neurological pathways are permanently established, and they will not just disappear. The primary neurological disorder is only complicated by physical dependence on the substances. The physical dependence on the substances is secondary! Physical drug withdrawal does not change the underlying neurological addictive disorder. After drug withdrawal, long term overpowering cravings are predictable. These cravings are, in reality, spontaneous nerve impulses. Even in the longer term, overwhelming cravings are outside the addicts control.

Thats a good explanation.

woodoo

its funny that fonecrusher1's drivel is sandwiched between a good explanation above.

fonecrusher1

woodoo wrote: »

its funny that fonecrusher1's drivel is sandwiched between a good explanation above.

Did i touch a nerve sweetheart?:)

nacho libre

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Nah its not a disease. In fact i don't recognise the term 'alcoholic'.... Its a cop out. Oh im alcoholic....nah your just weak willed, learn to moderate you child.

Do you genuinely believe this, or is it that you bored of a Sunday morning and looking for a reaction?

Chuck Stone

realies wrote: »

As well as other sources i have posted already

In reality addictions are more closely related to a neurological disorder like Tourette's Syndrome* than they are to diabetes.

i.e. a compulsion.

If the problems you suffer stem from severe alcoholism or addiction, you must accept that these problems are not primarily mental or free will issues. Addictions are not about will power. The problems facing addicts, alcoholics, and their families are miserable, disgusting, and infuriating. They are often hopelessly discouraging.

I reject the term 'alcoholic' as it's meaningless. I seriously doubt the quality of this piece because it uses a wish wash term like 'alcoholic'.

But to imagine that an addict "could change if he wanted to" is a serious misunderstanding of the long term dynamic of addictive disorder.

Notice how the language changes from 'disease' to 'addictive disorder'.

The fact is precisely that an addict cannot change in the long run even if he wants to!

Absolute patronizing rubbish.

The reason addicts have lost control is because they have suffered permanent physical neurological changes based in their brains and nervous systems.

Rubbish. The damage is as a result of substance abuse rather than the cause of it.

But if alcoholism or addiction develops, the problem has moved outside the realm of free choice.

Bullshit.

All the emotional 'feelings' involved in drug or alcohol seeking are based in neurology.

Emotions and feelings are not diseases.

Addiction is based in physical dependency created by altered neurotransmitter balances,

Proof please.

The primary neurological disorder is only complicated by physical dependence on the substances. The physical dependence on the substances is secondary!

What is a neurological disorder?

This is a very poor piece of 'science'. Even I can see this and I'm half pissed tbh.

4leto

realies wrote: »

As well as other sources i have posted already


Addiction is a neurologically based disease. For many years recovery specialists have compared alcoholism or addictions to a physical disease: like diabetes. In reality addictions are more closely related to a neurological disorder like Tourette's Syndrome* than they are to diabetes.
If the problems you suffer stem from severe alcoholism or addiction, you must accept that these problems are not primarily mental or free will issues. Addictions are not about will power. The problems facing addicts, alcoholics, and their families are miserable, disgusting, and infuriating. They are often hopelessly discouraging. But to imagine that an addict "could change if he wanted to" is a serious misunderstanding of the long term dynamic of addictive disorder. The fact is precisely that an addict cannot change in the long run even if he wants to! That is the definition of addiction: "the loss of control over the use of a substance." It is important to understand that this loss of control is manifested not in terms of days or weeks, but in longer term behaviors: terms of months and years. The reason addicts have lost control is because they have suffered permanent physical neurological changes based in their brains and nervous systems. The disorder manifests in long term obsessive-compulsive behaviors outside the realm of the addicts own control. It is true enough that the use of chemicals begins with chosen behavior. But if alcoholism or addiction develops, the problem has moved outside the realm of free choice. It has developed into a long term mental and physical neurological disorder. All the emotional 'feelings' involved in drug or alcohol seeking are based in neurology. Addiction is based in physical dependency created by altered neurotransmitter balances, and driven by millions upon millions of new living, functioning active neurological pathways which have been established to sustain the condition in the addicts brain. The new neurological pathways are permanently established, and they will not just disappear. The primary neurological disorder is only complicated by physical dependence on the substances. The physical dependence on the substances is secondary! Physical drug withdrawal does not change the underlying neurological addictive disorder. After drug withdrawal, long term overpowering cravings are predictable. These cravings are, in reality, spontaneous nerve impulses. Even in the longer term, overwhelming cravings are outside the addicts control.

But would it be fair to say addiction changes the structure of the brain. I was a nicotine addict, although I have stopped I still am.

But anyone can become a nicotine addict, it a very addictive drug. But it is only when they start abusing the drug which they do very quickly, then the structure of the brain changes to crave it.

I wouldn't class myself as an alcoholic, but give me enough money, no responsibilities and an iron constitution I would quite willingly and quite quickly become one.

woodoo

fonecrusher1 wrote: »

Did i touch a nerve sweetheart?:)

No not at all. I'm well used to that view. Comes back to bite many a child though. Good luck in the future

Chuck Stone

woodoo wrote: »

its funny that fonecrusher1's drivel is sandwiched between a good explanation above.

In fairness 'alcoholic' is a meaningless word bandied about by charlatans.