Alcoholism: Disease or Behavior

chevydriver1123 said:

So those of us who follow baseball have seen Detroit Tiger's First Basemen Miguel Cabrera's latest drinking **** up. Whenever the subject is brought up in the media, they always refer to it as a disease. I don't buy into the disease theory, in my opinion it's a behavior because you can stop being an alcoholic without medication by just simply putting down the bottle. I believe the disease theory is just to rationalize and cover the social stigma that is associated with being addicted to the sauce.

Click to expand...

It's both. For many alcoholics, it's not as easy as "simply putting down the bottle." I'm sure that many of them would love to be able to do that. Addictive personalities are at least partially genetically inherited. Those who don't have those particular genes (or those who do, but were able to overcome it) often have trouble understanding what alcoholics or drug addicts or smokers are going through.

Its both. ..

I think some people are born with genes that make them prone to addiction, so I voted Disease, however I think both are involved.

I like cheese.

Alcoholism is a disease of choice. Like lung cancer, aids, and heart disease, etc.

Funny though how the "disease" is curable through abstinence. Hmm, ain't that strange.

Alcohol is to disease, as food is to fat.

Ed Gein said:

I like cheese.

Alcoholism is a disease of choice. Like lung cancer, aids, and heart disease, etc.

Funny though how the "disease" is curable through abstinence. Hmm, ain't that strange.

Alcohol is to disease, as food is to fat.

Click to expand...

Sure, but there are some people who binge drink all throughout college and into their 20s, and never become addicted. Others are hooked after drinking just a few times. So it's a disease in the sense that it affects some people more than others. Yes, it's a behavior, but it's a compulsion caused - at least in part - by one's genes.

Kandahar said:

Sure, but there are some people who binge drink all throughout college and into their 20s, and never become addicted. Others are hooked after drinking just a few times. So it's a disease in the sense that it affects some people more than others. Yes, it's a behavior, but it's a compulsion caused - at least in part - by one's genes.

Click to expand...

I have the gene. At some point we all make a choice on which path to take. I could have easily gone down the gutter in my youth. I recognized that and made my choices.

We all make choices on every moment of life. Yes, some people have to work harder to stay afloat but it is a disservice to the addict to call it a disease, because that removes the lion's share of the responsibility from the person choosing to imbibe.

chevydriver1123 said:

So those of us who follow baseball have seen Detroit Tiger's First Basemen Miguel Cabrera's latest drinking **** up. Whenever the subject is brought up in the media, they always refer to it as a disease. I don't buy into the disease theory, in my opinion it's a behavior because you can stop being an alcoholic without medication by just simply putting down the bottle. I believe the disease theory is just to rationalize and cover the social stigma that is associated with being addicted to the sauce.

Click to expand...

It is an addiction and a disease. If you think you can just stop, you've never been addicted to anything. There are actual physical symptoms that happen when a person stops drinking. There is also evidence that some people have a genetic predisposition for addiction. However, all that being said, I've seen people get their act together a lot quicker than many celebrities do. I don't know why that is.

Alcoholism and drug abuse... these begin as behaviors, and for some people end up being addictions. Each of us has a choice in the beginning... to drink or not drink, to take drugs or not take drugs. Not everyone who indulges in these things becomes an addict, however. For some people... people with what has been called addictive personalities... the behavior leads to a compulsion, and a physical need so intense that the body reacts violently when deprived. These people are addicts, addicts with a disease. Science believes that the addictive personality is genetic. Not everyone with the genetic propensity toward addiction will actually become addicts, but addiction seems to runs very heavily in some families.

Addicts cannot just put down their liquor or their drugs and walk away. Their bodies will attack them if they do that. People can die during cold turkey withdrawals, so it's extremely rare for a true addict/alcoholic to be able to free themselves on their own. Nearly all will need professional help.

My mother was an alcoholic. She had been since I was a young child watching her fill up her coffee mug with vodka every morning. She drank her entire life, drank until her grown children kept her grandchildren away so they would not see grandma slurring her words and bumping into furniture, nor smell the stench of her breath. Also, she was not a nice person. She lived a very long life, never admitted she had a drinking problem, never made the slightest attempt to quit, and died drunk.

If someone in your family has an addiction, there is nothing anyone can do to help them until they are ready and willing to help themselves. That usually does not occur until they hit rock bottom. When your addicted family member finally asks for help, please give it to them immediately, and support them through the grueling process that lies ahead. They can be saved as soon as they want to be saved.

Cephus said:

No, it's not going to be easy, but it certainly is possible with the right treatment and especially with the right mindset of the addict. Far too many addicts, however, use the excuse that it's a disease to continue being addicted. If you don't want to be a non-addict, you're not going to be.

Click to expand...

Or once you face the fact that it is a disease, you can stop beating yourself up about it. It's a disease that can be fought and won. One day at a time. All you need to do is not pick up a drink for that one day.
I'm an alcoholic who has been sober for 1 yr. 8 mo. and 24 days.
I'll never be able to just have a few beers, because it is a disease. I would eventually end up getting drunk all the time again. If I didn't think I was an alcoholic or that I was cured of the disease, I would probably go buy a twelve pack right now.
I envy those who are not alcoholic's and can drink once in a while. Some of us just can't.

Ed Gein said:

I like cheese.

Alcoholism is a disease of choice. Like lung cancer, aids, and heart disease, etc.

Funny though how the "disease" is curable through abstinence. Hmm, ain't that strange.

Alcohol is to disease, as food is to fat.

Click to expand...

Not really. You can live without drinking.

You have to eat.

An alcoholic cannot put the drink down once they pick it up.

If people were to be addicted to food, I would guess they'd have the same problem with putting the food down.

Barbbtx said:

I envy those who are not alcoholic's and can drink once in a while. Some of us just can't.

Click to expand...

The reason I've never become addicted to anything is that I literally can't. The reward centers of my brain don't function normally, so nothing I do feels good enough that I could risk becoming addicted to it; aside from the effects of physical dependency, quitting anything is a simple matter of not wanting to do it anymore. On the other hand, I'm also quite incapable of feeling the kind of bliss that leads to addiction in the first place. I like the taste of some alcoholic drinks, but having more than a few just gives me a headache and an upset stomach. I even tried cocaine a few times, and I enjoyed it, but it wasn't anything like the powerful euphoria that other people have described. I stopped when it became inconvenient to keep going.

I suppose it's good that I can't get trapped into that kind of self-destructive lifestyle, but at the same time I'd give nearly anything to experience pleasure on the level that normal people appear to.

Viktyr Korimir said:

The reason I've never become addicted to anything is that I literally can't. The reward centers of my brain don't function normally, so nothing I do feels good enough that I could risk becoming addicted to it; aside from the effects of physical dependency, quitting anything is a simple matter of not wanting to do it anymore. On the other hand, I'm also quite incapable of feeling the kind of bliss that leads to addiction in the first place. I like the taste of some alcoholic drinks, but having more than a few just gives me a headache and an upset stomach. I even tried cocaine a few times, and I enjoyed it, but it wasn't anything like the powerful euphoria that other people have described. I stopped when it became inconvenient to keep going.

I suppose it's good that I can't get trapped into that kind of self-destructive lifestyle, but at the same time I'd give nearly anything to experience pleasure on the level that normal people appear to.

Click to expand...

I smoked marijuana for years and daily. Finally, I got to the point I no longer enjoyed it and just stopped. I've used other drugs that I did very much enjoy, but thank God I never got addicted for some reason. Being an alcoholic, I am also around drug addicts trying to stay clean. They seem to have a harder time, at least in my opinion.

Ed Gein said:

I have the gene. At some point we all make a choice on which path to take. I could have easily gone down the gutter in my youth. I recognized that and made my choices.

We all make choices on every moment of life. Yes, some people have to work harder to stay afloat but it is a disservice to the addict to call it a disease, because that removes the lion's share of the responsibility from the person choosing to imbibe.

Click to expand...

It does not absolve anyone of responsibility. It does, however, give them the tools to take responsibility effectively.

Barbbtx said:

I smoked marijuana for years and daily. Finally, I got to the point I no longer enjoyed it and just stopped. I've used other drugs that I did very much enjoy, but thank God I never got addicted for some reason. Being an alcoholic, I am also around drug addicts trying to stay clean. They seem to have a harder time, at least in my opinion.

Click to expand...

People who drink socially are more tolerant of people choosing not to drink. Whether this is a matter of cultural values or drug abusers feeling the need to affirm their own decisions is a matter for more educated minds than my own.

Aunt Spiker said:

I have to ask 'which ones?'

Click to expand...

Anyone who makes the claim that alcoholism is just a behavior. It speaks to that person's lack of knowledge about the mechanisms of alcoholism and the difference between a state and a behavior. For example, one can be an alcoholic and not drink.

CaptainCourtesy said:

Anyone who makes the claim that alcoholism is just a behavior.

Click to expand...

It scars you forever.

You feel it in your soul.

No such feeling comes from a behavior.

And anyone who thinks otherwise simply doesn't understand.

I treat people with addiction, present and lecture on the topic, and have done program development around addiction treatment. It is absurd and ignorant to look at alcoholism as nothing but a behavior. Genetic research has identified genes that contribute to the susceptiblity of becoming addicted, part of why some are more prone to it than others. Understanding that alcoholism is a disease does not create a victim. It frees the individual from being a slave to whatever they are addicted to. The choice that someone has... as they do with any disease, is whether they treat their disease or not.

CaptainCourtesy said:

Anyone who makes the claim that alcoholism is just a behavior. It speaks to that person's lack of knowledge about the mechanisms of alcoholism and the difference between a state and a behavior. For example, one can be an alcoholic and not drink.

Click to expand...

That reminds me of how alcoholics and addicts who are sober refer to themselves: as "recovering" and not "cured." Because an addict is never cured. Because "cured" denotes an assumption that they go back and use whatever they were addicted to and not get addicted again. Which is false.

So when someone becomes an addict, they will always be an addict. All that will change is whether they are abusing their addiction or staying sober.

CaptainCourtesy said:

I treat people with addiction, present and lecture on the topic, and have done program development around addiction treatment. It is absurd and ignorant to look at alcoholism as nothing but a behavior. Genetic research has identified genes that contribute to the susceptiblity of becoming addicted, part of why some are more prone to it than others. Understanding that alcoholism is a disease does not create a victim. It frees the individual from being a slave to whatever they are addicted to. The choice that someone has... as they do with any disease, is whether they treat their disease or not.

Click to expand...

Are smokers predisposed to have a 'disease' as well? How about heroine addicts?

If my younger brother is genetically predisposed to becoming an alcoholic - what happened to my sister and I? Why can we drink in moderation and he cannot? All three of us started underage drinking, difference is, her and I did it socially and minimally. My brother chose to drink his 'problems' away. I have a very hard time understanding it to be a disease that is somehow out of someone's control, when there are others who may come from the same genetic makeup and never have a problem with it.

I'm still curious as to what other addictions are considered 'diseases'? I am positive that once a person is an addict they will always be an addict - whether that is to cigarettes, alcohol or hard drugs... but how many of these things are also labeled a disease and if that's the case - why won't health insurance help pay for treatment of these diseases?

The disease is really a genetic lack of dopamine receptors in the brain. Or possibly that the dopamine triggers don't function like those in the non-alcoholic, non-addictive brain. Alcoholics aren't happy when they are sober and they only kid themselves that they are happy when they're drinking. There will be some satisfaction experienced by the recovering alcoholic, due to being able to interact with family and friends, and even to remember those good times. It's sad to maintenance drink and never get off, only to keep sickness at bay.

The mind altering "party on" people spend all of their time chasing that which is unachievable; happiness.

Edit: I have found that I can trigger my dopamine by eating extremely hot peppers.

CaptainCourtesy said:

Anyone who makes the claim that alcoholism is just a behavior. It speaks to that person's lack of knowledge about the mechanisms of alcoholism and the difference between a state and a behavior. For example, one can be an alcoholic and not drink.

Click to expand...

Alcoholism is a behavior that leads to disease. It may be classified as a mental disease, but alcoholism isn't a physical disease. There may be a brain issue where their chemicals may make them have a more addictive personality, but it still isn't a physical disease.

TheGirlNextDoor said:

Are smokers predisposed to have a 'disease' as well? How about heroine addicts?

If my younger brother is genetically predisposed to becoming an alcoholic - what happened to my sister and I? Why can we drink in moderation and he cannot? All three of us started underage drinking, difference is, her and I did it socially and minimally. My brother chose to drink his 'problems' away. I have a very hard time understanding it to be a disease that is somehow out of someone's control, when there are others who may come from the same genetic makeup and never have a problem with it.

I'm still curious as to what other addictions are considered 'diseases'? I am positive that once a person is an addict they will always be an addict - whether that is to cigarettes, alcohol or hard drugs... but how many of these things are also labeled a disease and if that's the case - why won't health insurance help pay for treatment of these diseases?

Click to expand...

You don't have all the same genes as your alcoholic sibling, lucky you. I am in the same situation. My sibling is an alcoholic, while I am not. I have deen a "drinker"for 20 years without it becoming an issue, while my sister cannot drink again, because of the inevitability of where that would go. She also has other genetic based diseases which I do not have. Do your siblings have the same hair and eye color as you? Mine don't.

It is quite possible that those other things you mention might also be diseases with with their own genetic commonalities.

Insurance doesn't pay for several reasons, none of which have to do with facts about the nature of alcoholism. The basic reason is that insurance doesn't pay for anything society doesn't insist it should pay for.

chevydriver1123 said:

So those of us who follow baseball have seen Detroit Tiger's First Basemen Miguel Cabrera's latest drinking **** up. Whenever the subject is brought up in the media, they always refer to it as a disease. I don't buy into the disease theory, in my opinion it's a behavior because you can stop being an alcoholic without medication by just simply putting down the bottle. I believe the disease theory is just to rationalize and cover the social stigma that is associated with being addicted to the sauce.

Click to expand...

then you don't understand addiction very well.

oh dear. people need to educate themselves.

TheGirlNextDoor said:

Are smokers predisposed to have a 'disease' as well? How about heroine addicts?

If my younger brother is genetically predisposed to becoming an alcoholic - what happened to my sister and I? Why can we drink in moderation and he cannot? All three of us started underage drinking, difference is, her and I did it socially and minimally. My brother chose to drink his 'problems' away. I have a very hard time understanding it to be a disease that is somehow out of someone's control, when there are others who may come from the same genetic makeup and never have a problem with it.

I'm still curious as to what other addictions are considered 'diseases'? I am positive that once a person is an addict they will always be an addict - whether that is to cigarettes, alcohol or hard drugs... but how many of these things are also labeled a disease and if that's the case - why won't health insurance help pay for treatment of these diseases?

Click to expand...

Is your brother older or younger then you?

It's difficult to say exactly how it works...

For example, am I more pre-disposed to addiction because when I was 3 years old, I stole an entire can of beer and drank it. Or as it was back in the day you dipped your babies pacifier in wine or beer and gave it to them to soothe them.

I know the younger you drink the more likely it is you can develop alcoholism.

But also my moms dad was an alcoholic (Not a violent or dysfunctional one, he had a good job, he was a good man, he never did anything wrong he just happened to drink alot) but as far as I know, niether my mom, or her 2 young brothers developed alcoholism... but I, I suppose somehow did.

Again, it's difficult to say how these things work, as John McCain once said "I'm not an expert on some of this stuff"