alcoholism-disease or not

[BlaqueKatt]

ok lets look at the dictionary definition of disease-

a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.


the only thing that would be "malfunctioning" in an alcoholic is the same malfunction as any drug addict(any other drug addiction is not considered a disease*)-the brain which would make it a mental illness.


and to go further into the subject-it was first "classified" as a disease in 1784, wow I believe they were still doing bloodletting back then.

AA pushed to keep it classified as a disease(most health insurance won't cover drug addiction treatment-or mental health issues)-it's listed in the DSM-IV as "alcohol dependence syndrome"-which makes it a mental illness.

In his 1989 book, Diseasing of America, social psychologist Stanton Peele, Ph.D., argues that AA and for-profit alcohol treatment centers promote the "myth" of alcoholism as a lifelong disease. He contends that the disease concept "excuses alcoholics for their past, present, and future irresponsibility" and points out that most people can overcome addiction on their own.

A recent Gallop poll found that almost 90 percent of Americans believe that alcoholism is a disease. In contrast, physicians’ views of alcoholism were reviewed at an August 1997 conference held by the International Doctors of Alcoholics Anonymous (IDAA). A survey of physicians reported at that conference found that 80 percent of responding doctors perceived alcoholism as simply bad behavior.


so the general public is right and the medical professionals are wrong? The writer of the article thinks that simply more education is needed for physicians


*"the medical profession’s and the public’s acceptance of smoking as an addictive disease has resulted in reducing nicotine use in the United States." -Thomas R. Hobbs, Ph.D., M.D



So if you accept alcoholism as a disease-so is any drug addiction-including smoking.....

[the_std]

I completely and utterly believe that alcoholism is not a disease. Yes, there are patterns in your family, upbringing and brain chemistry that make you more likely to engage in alcoholic behaviour, but that is all that alcoholism is. Behaviour that becomes addiction.

That's not to say that it's any less detrimental than disease. But the difference is that disease is not a choice, whereas alcoholism starts with choosing to drink.

I also agree that alcoholism gets labelled a disease to try to let people who are alcoholics be absolved of responsibility for their actions. And that really pisses me off.

[MystyGlyttyr]

By that sort of definition, emphysema isn't a disease since it can and is usually caused by smoking. And cancer isn't a disease since it can be caused by exposure to certain chemicals or things like that.

I could be an alcoholic and not know it because I've never drank. There are certain diseases which are triggered by something a person does or that is caused. Fibromyalgia frequently is triggered by a hard impact like a car crash. Some diseases, tossing out there fibrodysplasia ossificans progressiva, while already existing in the body, is made much worse from outside occurances. Or like I said, emphysema or cancer.

People can get heart disease from bad living. That doesn't make their condition any less a disease because they might have done it to themself.

Also, plenty of people who are alcoholics very freely admit that even if they were born with the genes for it, they performed the behaviors that triggered the worst symptoms. It's not an end-all be-all "excuse" any more than Aspergers or autism is for that subset of behavior. It's just that too many people have appropriated it as an excuse to try and escape responsibility or having to try and get along in society.

[the_std]

But Mysty, the difference there is that all of those real diseases can be caused by other things. You can get cancer or emphysema without smoking, cirrohsis without drinking, fibromyalgia without the car crash, and all without instigation. You can get all of these diseases without doing anything to bring it on yourself.

Whereas the only way you can get "alcoholism" is by putting the drink to your mouth and ingesting it. The only way it can happen is through a choice.

[MystyGlyttyr]

But Mysty, the difference there is that all of those real diseases can be caused by other things. You can get cancer or emphysema without smoking, cirrohsis without drinking, fibromyalgia without the car crash, and all without instigation. You can get all of these diseases without doing anything to bring it on yourself.

Whereas the only way you can get "alcoholism" is by putting the drink to your mouth and ingesting it. The only way it can happen is through a choice.

I'll grant you that you have to make that choice. But that doesn't make it not a disease. Even the dictionary defintion states "a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment."

Nowhere in the definition does it state that just because something is caused by the person, it's not a disease.

[DesignFox]

Everything is considered a disease or disorder, anymore.

Just because it's considered a disease, doesn't absolve a person from any responsibility in my opinion.

I still can't believe smoking has been classified as a disease...

[Sylvia727]

Alcoholism is an addiction like any other addiction. Whether addictions are diseases, or whether certain people have "diseased" brains that make them more susceptible to addiction, I don't know. One alcoholic I knew up close and personal was also addicted to nicotene, vicodin (and later heroin), gambling, compulsive shopping, and sex. He was basically a compulsive addict, who happened to fixate primarily on alcohol. FYI, he's dead now: alcohol and heroin overdose. Another alcoholic I know has recovered, and is now dependent on AA meetings. She structures her entire life around them, even though it's been eight? ten? years since her last drink. She and her husband are now in therapy for her addictiveness and his enabling.

I'm not sure why the terminology matters; would an addiction by any other name cut as deep?

[MystyGlyttyr]

That's because the disease is less alcoholism per se and more addiction, whether it's alcohol, drugs, cigarettes, or bad food.

There's a big difference between some drunk bastard who doesn't want to get better and calls themself an alcoholic for sympathy, and someone who's made bad decisions and is sweating and struggling and working to get better and having more trouble at it than someone else.

Some people don't get addicted. My mom can buy a pack of cigarettes, smoke them in a day, and then go months without any more without feeling a thing. This is a woman who smoked two or three packs a week (and occasionally up to a pack a day) for a solid five or six years, and enjoyed it, but pretty much decided one day she didn't feel like paying for it anymore and stopped, with absolutely no side effects. She smokes once in a great while just because she does enjoy it, but if she can't have them, it's no big deal.

Meanwhile, her cousin has tried everything to quit smoking, but the side effects for her are so severe and painful that she can't carry through. She's tried everything-patches, gum, pills, acupuncture-up to and including three different hypnotists. She started at the same time as my mother and smoked almost exactly the same amount. These women share nearly identical backgrounds and home lives and even a certain degree of genetics, and yet they're completely different in how they can handle the same thing.

And they are NOT abnormal in that. There are people who can be hooked literally within a week of trying something new. I'm sorry but there has to be a reason for something like that. The genetic aberration theory makes more sense than anything else. A weakness caused by your genes is a disease, as per the given definition. Whether or not it's triggered by a behavior you chose to perform doesn't matter. Just because a disease isn't "activated" doesn't mean it's not there.

And just for the record, we do not ALL use our very real problems for an EXCUSE, regardless of how many band-wagon-jumping people claim to be something they're not and get the media all whipped into a frenzy over it.

[lupo pazzesco]

ok lets look at the dictionary definition of disease-

a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.

Actually, in 2004 (I think) scientists DID identify the alcoholism gene, CREB. I'm a little fuzzy on the research, since it's been a while since I've read it, but the gene itself is tied into the central amygdala of the brain, which triggers high anxiety and withdrawal symptoms. So, there's the genetic link, according to the definition. Mysty covered poison pretty well.

unfavorable environmental factors? Socioeconomic status polls and studies indicate that there is a higher likelihood of alcoholism among the lower classes, and that families where parents are alcoholics tend to breed children who in turn drink when they get older. If you want to get really technical, I'm from a family where every generation is an alcoholic. My father is. My grandfather, before he died, was almost 40 years sober as an alcoholic. Technically, that gives me over a 90% chance of becomign an alcoholic myself.

So, is it a disease? Going by the definition you posted, yes. There are genetic markers. Environmental factors influence, and it can be a form of poison or toxicity.

I, personally, think it's a combination of behavior and disease. Yes, the choice is ultimately yours on whether you take that drink. But when you're brain goes haywire and physically affects you in an adverse manner unless you drink, then that is a genetically influenced "disease", in one definition of the word.

Design Fox is right. Even if it is a disease, it doesn't mean a person doesn't have responsibility. After all, cancer has treatment, emphysema has treatment. So, too, does alcoholism, even if it is unpleasant.

Just my two cents.

[AFPheonix]

I don't think that all cases of alcoholism are disease states, but there are definitely some that do.

There is a genetic link towards the propensity to become an alcoholic. It doesn't guarantee that a person with those genetics will become an alcoholic, but those people are statistically more likely to become one than someone without. Further, alcoholics with those genetics handle alcohol in a much different way than someone without those genes.
For example, I don't come from a family with substance abuse potential. We don't have a prevalence of alcoholics. I am also a very cheap date. Just a few drinks and I am puking my brains out.
My husband, however, does have a history of alcoholics on his father's side, including his father and brother. My husband reacts much differently to alcohol than I do, he can not only consume far more than I do, his behavior when drunk is much different from mine. He has also noticed that and does not allow himself to partake much for fear of ending up like his father and brother.
The people that fall under that umbrella could be considered to have a disease state of substance abuse.

Not all substance abusers fall under that umbrella, however. Some sex, drug, or alcohol addicts are that way because of events that happened to them when they were younger, or perhaps other reasons. I suspect these people have an easier time coming off of those substances with counselling and are able to eventually use more moderately.

[Boozy]

The disease of alcoholism isn't the act of drinking. It's the propensity towards becoming addicted to alcohol very quickly, and being unable to stop after just one drink. You don't choose to have this propensity; you have it or you don't.

An alcoholic can stop drinking, and can be clean for decades, but he is still an alcoholic. He's one drink away from relapse. Just as some people can have very well-controlled and symptom-free diabetes....as long as they adhere to a certain lifestyle. An alcoholic can choose to treat his alcoholism by not drinking, but he can't cure himself. He'll never be able to have a glass of wine with dinner, like I can, and leave it at that.

Not all so-called "alcoholics" actually suffer from alcoholism. Some people just suffer from poor impulse control and decision-making. That's a personality defect, not a disease.

[DesignFox]

Not all so-called "alcoholics" actually suffer from alcoholism. Some people just suffer from poor impulse control and decision-making. That's a personality defect, not a disease.

And I respect people that know the difference and choose to deal with it accordingly.

I don't respect anyone who uses the excuse of a disease for whatever poor behavior they are exhibiting at the moment.

[Seshat]

For me, having the label of 'fibromyalgia' means that I can access the facilities society has available for treating it: such as a pain clinic, pain specialist doctors, the body of research on what works for other people with my symptoms...

My best friends' medical labels are for the same reason. She gets to see her psychiatrist, she gets the drugs, the 'mental tricks', and the emergency management she needs to be as functional as her mind lets her be.


For that purpose, I do think alcoholism should be considered a disease state. Or more precisely, a family of disease states. Cause I see multiple types of alcoholism.

- the genetic predisposition type that Boozy so clearly defined.
- the post-traumatic who is dealing with the trauma by running away from it, hiding in the bottle, whose alcoholism can best be treated by helping them deal with the trauma.
- the neurochemically or neuro-anatomically broken, who (often) can't afford psychiatric meds or can't get themselves stable enough to seek proper medical care. They turn to alcohol to silence the voices in their heads (or whatever their symptoms are). Treat the underlying problem, and the alcoholism becomes treatable. Ignore the underlying problem, and it isn't.
- The socially anxious or outright social phobic who uses alcohol to depress the anxiety/phobia. Again, treat the problem, and the symptom can go away.
- the 'traumatised' who aren't bad enough to be clinically PTSD, but still bad enough need help, who aren't getting help, and find alcohol helps them forget their stresses for a time. This covers a wide range of life problems.
- .... and a whole bunch of others who get drunk to chase the bad stuff away, rather than getting drunk because they actually enjoy getting drunk.

And then, of course, the last category. Those who get drunk because they actually enjoy getting drunk. I don't know how to help those ones. To be honest, I've never yet met an alcoholic who fits in this category. I only include it because I -presume- it might exist.



If labelling alcoholism as a disease gets these people treated, then by all means, label it a disease! Because all but the last category are in desperate need of help. And for the most part, the help they are getting is stretched way too thin to actually meet the level of social need that exists.

[tropicsgoddess]

I completely and utterly believe that alcoholism is not a disease. Yes, there are patterns in your family, upbringing and brain chemistry that make you more likely to engage in alcoholic behaviour, but that is all that alcoholism is. Behaviour that becomes addiction.

That's not to say that it's any less detrimental than disease. But the difference is that disease is not a choice, whereas alcoholism starts with choosing to drink.

I also agree that alcoholism gets labelled a disease to try to let people who are alcoholics be absolved of responsibility for their actions. And that really pisses me off.

I agree. To me, diabetes, cancer, tuberculosis are diseases NOT an addiction. a disease is something you have no control over to completely rid yourself of it. An addiction you have control over it: it's called WILL POWER.

[the_std]

An addiction you have control over it: it's called WILL POWER.

Unfortunately, it isn't that easy. Once you've made the choice that starts it, a terrible chain reaction can occur that leaves you simply unable to function without alcohol. It's not as easy as saying "I can overcome this", because, a lot of the time, you actually cannot be a person without alcohol.

Saying it's just about will-power is a way of saying those alcoholics are lazy and simply choose to indulge rather than leave their lifestyle and reform to become better human beings. And that is just simply not how it works in the grand majority of the time.