Alcoholism Is Not a Disease

Alcoholism Is Not a Disease

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Alcoholism
• Is
• Not
• Disease
• aa
• na
• alcoholics
• narcotics
• anonymous

[11visionary11]

@JunkmanJim

I agree with any treatment that helps an addict get clean, but the only way to become an addict and to stop is choice. Not a pill.

[JunkmanJim]

@11visionary11

Never said it was a disease, it is more accurately a syndrome. There are FDA approved medications that have been proven to help people quit drinking, Naltrexone, Nalmefene, Antabuse, Campral, Topiramate and others awaiting approval, also some cognitive therapies that have a scientific basis. This does not include the common issue of co-occurring mental illness that once treated reduces alcohol abuse. It is a choice but once addiction sets in, we need harm reduction strategies.

[11visionary11]

@JunkmanJim Even if you have a "predisposition" towards alcohol or addictions in general doesnt mean you will be an alcoholic...its a choice. As for ppl having trouble quitting, its not an issue for society other than when tax payers have to pay for ppls bad choices. Everyone has issues with something. There is no evidence alcoholism is a disease, there are no symptoms other than choosing to drink, no pill or treatment other than to stop drinking, and you cant be an alcoholic without drinking.

[11visionary11]

Anyone who thinks alcoholism is a disease is just trying to get out of personal responsibility.

[prschuster]

I think the argument about whether there are genetic markers or biochemical changes is nothing but a diversion. It doesn't matter whether these claims are ever confirmed. The disease theory is really all about calling behavior a disease. It's a bait & switch where we are told to look at the alleged neurological evidence and at the organic damage caused by abuse. Then words like "denial" & "relapse" are brought into the mix to make it look like a brain disease causes addictive behavior.

[Hammersley1967]

"you know nothing about scientific skepticism to not know Dr Novella"

No, it's patently obvious that YOU know nothing about scientific methodology and scientific skepticism if you believe that skepticism and scientific validity are based on the "knowing" of some neurologist.

Scientific skepticism DEMANDS sensory verifiable evidence - not staring star struck at an "expert's" degree on the wall.

You are now officially off the credibility register...

How can YOU call yourself a skeptic?

[Hammersley1967]

"Obviously you know nothing about scientific skepticism to not know Dr. Novella. He is affiliated with the James Randi Foundation, Jame Randi is a frequent guest on the SGU podcast"

Who gives a shit Junkman!

I don't care if the ENTIRE world is populated with 7 billion neurologists all claiming that alcoholism is a congenital disease.

WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE!!?

THAT IS SCIENTIFIC SKEPTICISM!!!

Your ENTIRE line of reasoning is a baseless argument from authority.

Don't you see that?

[Hammersley1967]

"I am also not making the argument that chemical dependency is a disease"

If there's a biogenetic etiology for alcoholism (as you asert) then it qualifies for disease classification.

(This is not to say that every disease is biogenetic in origin, but a PHYSIOLOGICAL etiology is required [eg virus].)

There is no biogenetic causality (known yet) thus it DOES NOT qualify for disease classification.

You assert syndrome but also claim biogenetic causality.

You can't have it both ways.

[JunkmanJim]

isegoria made a statement that DTs are not fatal and I was addressing that. I am also not making the argument that chemical dependency is a disease. Illness or syndrome is more accurate to my mind but essentially we are referring to the causes and consequences of alcohol abuse. A phenomenon exists where some people abuse alcohol and do great damage to themselves and have difficulties managing or stopping the consumption. I believe we are discussing the reasons why this phenomenon occurs.

[isegoria1]

I like how you use science selectively to meet your desperate need for alcoholism to be some sort of disease. Really I do, it gives me a great belly laugh.

The disease model and supposed genetics is no better than Uri Geller claims. You are right science will prevail eventually, just not the way you anticipate it to.

Alcoholism is an act of volition

[JunkmanJim]

Mysterious? Obviously you know nothing about scientific skepticism to not know Dr. Novella. He is affiliated with the James Randi Foundation, Jame Randi is a frequent guest on the SGU podcast . The number 1 podcast for scientific skepticism. He is an important speaker at TAM (I hope you know what that is). A teaching neurologist at Yale, important figure in going after the anti vaccine movement, aids deniers, homeopathy, acupuncture, etc. How can you not know this and call yourself a skeptic?

[Hammersley1967]

"My various searches indicate plenty of information supporting a biological component involving the propensity to abuse alcohol and evidence that it is an inherited trait."

OK, LET'S SEE THE EVIDENCE!!!

Don't post a link - YOU cite the genetic etiology and YOU explain the chain of causal links that lead to the behaviour...

GO TO IT JUNKY!!!

[Hammersley1967]

"I can ask world famous skeptic & neurologist Dr. Novella for help on the matter if you like unless he is in on the conspiracy, lol."

In ALL seriousness Junky, PLEASE ask "Dr. Novella" for some peer reviewed evidence supporting what I've challenged you (3 times now) to demonstrate...

I would be GENUINELY interested...

In fact, I CHALLENGE you to contact this mysterious "Dr Novella" and ask him to provide peer reviewed evidence that proves the genetic disease theory of alcoholism.

[Hammersley1967]

"I can ask world famous skeptic & neurologist Dr. Novella for help on the matter if you like unless he is in on the conspiracy, lol."

Conspiracy?

What the HELL are you dribbling about?

EVIDENCE Junky - EVIDENCE!!!

Show me the evidence of a causal biogenetic mutation and the consequent organic complications that lead to the behaviour.

That's all I ask...

That's the way SCIENCE works - did you know that?

Conspiracy? Pffft!

[Hammersley1967]

[b]

You can drone on about all the "various searches" you've done, and you can make all the erroneous analogies with unrelated anomalies such as "cancer" and "mental illness" you like, but until you come up with a SKERIC of evidence, your HYPOTHESIS is sheer conjecture - nothing more.

NB: As a PhD candidate, I have THOROUGHLY researched the disease theory/ies of addiction for over three years now and I have found NO definitive or conclusive evidence that supports a biogenetic causality...

[Hammersley1967]

[a]

"My various searches indicate plenty of information supporting a biological component involving the propensity to abuse alcohol and evidence that it is an inherited trait."

"Inherited traits" are biogenetic heritable characteristics - right?

I repeat, show me the genetic mutation/s and the organic consequences thereof that lead to the aberrant behavioural pattern known as "alcoholism".

"Denier" has NOTHING to do with it - SCIENTIFIC skepticism has EVERTHING to do with it.

[JunkmanJim]

Are you being a denier or are you really interested in the evidence?

Can you show me the genes for mental illness? Or do you believe that is not a biological derived phenomenon as well?

My various searches indicate plenty of information supporting a biological component involving the propensity to abuse alcohol and evidence that it is an inherited trait. I can ask world famous skeptic & neurologist Dr. Novella for help on the matter if you like unless he is in on the conspiracy, lol.

[Hammersley1967]

"the results are overwhelming, the page has peer reviewed articles all over it."

Classic argument from authority.

So what if "the page has articles all over it"?

All that means is that biomedical researchers have been investigating whether or not alcoholism has a genetic etiology.

So... do any of these peer reviewed articles demonstrate a genetic causal basis for alcoholism? If so, what are the mutations and what are the secondary and tertiary causal links that lead to the behaviour?

[Hammersley1967]

[2]

Now THATS a genetic disease with a PROVEN, yet extremely complex, genetic etiology.

You are asserting that an aberrant behavioural pattern such as alcoholism is biogenetic in nature without a shred of evidence.

I challenge you to demonstrate the genetic etiology of alcoholism - starting from the genetic mutation/s and smoothly proceeding through the chain of intermediate organic causal links.

I just did it with CF (yes I can explain the sodium insufficiency). Lets see watcha got.

[Hammersley1967]

[1]

"show me the gene sequence for cancer"

Sequence? What the HELL are you talking about?

My wife has cystic fibrosis. How 'bout I show you the genetic MUTATIONS for cystic fibrosis?

It is a very complex genetic anomaly that occurs anywhere throughout the CFTR gene located on the long (q) arm of chromosome 7 at position 31.2, from base pair 116,907,253 to base pair 117,095,955. More than 1000 mutant combinations can occur - the most common of which is the ΔF508 mutation complex.

[Hammersley1967]

"Google "heritability of alcoholism adoption studies" the results are overwhelming,"

Overwhelming?

WEAK correlation more like...

Very UNDERwhelming...

[Hammersley1967]

"The mortality rate for delirium tremens may be as high as 35% if untreated but is less than 5% with early recognition and treatment."

So what?

Are you saying that THIS qualifies alcoholism as a disease?

For your sake, I certainly hope not...

[Hammersley1967]

"The scientific consensus is that it does have a genetic component. Twin studies best evidence"

BULLSHIT!!!

If anything the evidence is to the contrary.

The twin studies initially that you vaguely refer to were initially performed by Goodman et al in 1972. At best they show a very, very WEAK correlation.

They DO NOT, repeat DO NOT, demonstate biogenic causality.

Show me the genetic causal link between alcoholic behaviour and the human genome.

What chromosome? What base pair?

[JunkmanJim]

Yes genetics and cancer are closely related, this is the scientific consensus on the matter. It is a disease that is presented in many forms and not from a single genetic location. There is a strong epigenetic component that is just being understood that explains why one twin gets it and another doesn't. If you ever get a chance to listen to The Skeptics Guide to the Universe they often address the interplay of genetics and disease.

[isegoria1]

At least we can half way agree on something here. BTW there is a genetic link to cancer. I will leave you to research it for yourself if you like, I am sure you do not need me to hold your hand through it.