what does "alcoholism" really look like?

Dadfan wrote:

For what it's worth, I've been sober for thirty years and around alcoholics for every one of them. The best definition of I've heard of alcoholism (and this really rankles some people) is that if you've got to control it, your drinking is out of control. The idea being that if you're a casual drinker, you don't have to count drinks or set limits.

Exactly. After two or three beers, I had to drink anything and everything. There was no stopping it. It's hard to explain the physical craving to casual drinkers. Even 20 years after drying out, I get that craving, and it becomes all-consuming.

There are two aspects to alcoholism. One is the social debility - in that case what is relevant is what this poster says. The other is the health problems - in that case what is relevant is the medical notion - the metabolic dependence. Drinking as little as one beer a day is associated with increased likelihood of all manner of medical issues. The first kind of alcoholism is socially relevant - those alcoholics sometimes bother other people - the second is also, but in a different way, - the medical costs of those alcohol dependents are born, albeit indirectly, by everyone else, in the form of higher costs for medical coverage.

Dadfan wrote:

For what it's worth, I've been sober for thirty years and around alcoholics for every one of them. The best definition of I've heard of alcoholism (and this really rankles some people) is that if you've got to control it, your drinking is out of control. The idea being that if you're a casual drinker, you don't have to count drinks or set limits.

This is ridiculous, I'm sorry. I understand you are sober now and I congratulate you. But there are MANY things in life that people try to control or set limits and they aren't addicted. Think about food: if I start eating cookies, and I go boy I shouldn't have any more, I don't think you should come out and say LOOK AT YOU, YOU ARE ADDICTED TO COOKIES.

You are setting way too low of a bar, or need to clarify what you said.

You're proving their point. You don't have to control your cookie intake because you are't addicted to them. You have a few and you are satisfied, so you stop. Someone who is addicted to cookies would compulsively eat the entire box and then search for more. This is how an alcoholics brain works. The point of being satisfied does not exist, ever, there is no "off switch", hence the need to put controls on what you do.

My French friends are big drinkers, but are never really drunk. They will have a glass of wine or two with lunch. A cocktail or beer after work. Two to three glasses of wine with dinner and then an aperitif with desert. 4-5 drinks a day is pretty common. But it is spaced out over 8-10 hours and mostly with meals.

By contrast, a lot of people I work with do not drink a drop through dinner and then go to a bar and drink 2-3 beers and 2-3 shots in about 2 hours, only eating some popcorn or nachos. They are pretty well lit up by the end of the evening.

So, drink count can be a bit arbitrary. My French friends would never want to give up drinking, but that is more like how they would not want to give up fresh baguette with their morning coffee.They would be healthier if they replaced alcohol with water. But they do not need to go to AA to accomplish that.

Beyond drink count, the simplest test for alcoholism is an emotional dependency on getting drunk. Alcoholics do not feel right until they are drunk. Some may need to be drunk all day others just at night and some just on weekends. But they do not have a choice. They have to drink to feel right and if they do not get drunk there are strong emotional consequences.

You're wrong. Longevity studies have shown, time and again, that those who drink moderately, AND consistently, live the longest. Whether that is because those who are already the healthiest can sustain moderate consumption over long periods of time, or whether the moderate and consistent alcohol consumption is somehow protective, is up for debate. What is NOT up for debate is that the traditional teetotaler, moralist arguments about even a drink a day somehow being beyond the norm are wrong, wrong, wrong. The data does not back up your arguments, nor is it somehow better, truer, more good in any moral sense to abstain from alcohol.That some are unable to manage alcohol consumption over their lives has nothing to do with consumption for the rest of us. I wish for the AA, teetotaler, moralists to stay the hell out of the commentary business when it comes to consumption by normal non-addicted, non-addictive populations.

back woods wrote:

yasss wrote:

this is the only person in this thread who seems to get it.

There are two aspects to alcoholism. One is the social debility - in that case what is relevant is what this poster says. The other is the health problems - in that case what is relevant is the medical notion - the metabolic dependence. Drinking as little as one beer a day is associated with increased likelihood of all manner of medical issues. The first kind of alcoholism is socially relevant - those alcoholics sometimes bother other people - the second is also, but in a different way, - the medical costs of those alcohol dependents are born, albeit indirectly, by everyone else, in the form of higher costs for medical coverage.

Jose the Plumber wrote:

https://www.boredpanda.com/before-after-sobriety-photos/

Just like the skin rejuvenation products...........just change the lighting!

I'd consider at least half the people I know in NYC to be functioning alcoholics. Sadly they'll never know because everyone around them drinks too. Plus, many alcoholics' first wake up call is when they get a DUI or when they find themselves sneaking drinks to get through the day. In NYC none of those things matter as you never need to drive and getting drinks with lunch isn't all that frowned upon. If you're concerned, just set some rules for yourself, like no drinking alone or no drinks on school nights. If you find yourself breaking whatever rules you set, then take a month off from drinking.

Before I ever drank alcohol I said that I should never drink alcohol because of how much I enjoy drinking cold drinks. Even though I quit drinking alcohol I am still a very avid drinker of cold drinks. And now that I think of it my favorite thing to drink is lightly flavored club soda in clear glasses with no ice. It's the carbonated, non-alcoholic version of the American-style light lagers I used to pound!

Anyway, I'm glad I stopped drinking.

Yeah the drinking culture in NYC is fairly insane.

That said a very moderate amount of drinking certain types of drinks (namely wine and beer) has been shown to have health benefits in terms of heart health and diabetes. So the guy earlier with the unequivocal "less is better" statement is wrong imo.

For me I *wish* I could drink more but running interferes so much. Can't drink, gotta run! So I hardly ever drink anymore. I wish I could since I'm not addicted to it and I think life is more fun when you get tipsy every once in awhile (but just like 3-4 beers at once every couple of weeks).

I'm a licensed mental health therapist who has had experience performing substance abuse and chemical dependence evaluations. There are two types of substance use diagnoses:

1. Substance Abuse (Alcohol Abuse)

2. Substance Dependence (Alcohol Dependence)

These can be applied not only to alcohol, but to other substances as well. Honestly, to be diagonsed as someone with "alcohol abuse", it doesn't take much. If you're out binge drinking 1-2 times a week, you could very well be diagnosed as being someone that abuses alcohol. The average college kid who drinks and parties on a regular basis would fit this diagnosis. I could probably diagnose myself as someone with "alcohol abuse", depending on when an evaluation was done on me.

When abuse turns into dependence, this is when it becomes more worrisome. As I saw in previous posts, someone explained what a functioning alcoholic looks like. They described that person as someone who is able to go through life, funciton normally, and form relationships, etc. despite that individual's alcohol use. I have counseled many people that fit that label.

Alcohol or substance dependence can be defined as someone who regularly relies on regularly using alcohol or drug/substance for an extended period of time. That period being 6 months or more. You also have to take other factors into consideration. Those factors being legal issues, relationship issues, career or job issues, physical health, mental health, emotional health, withdrawl issues, etc. If even some of those are what we as therapists would define as being inhibited or problematic, then that individual could be diagnosed as being someone with alcohol or substance use dependence.

For that person to not be labeled as someone with alcohol or substance use dependence, they have to have at least 6 months of complete sobriety. In a substance use evaluation, you can even diagnose someone that would be classified as "alcohol dependence" if it was something in their past. You would just diagnose it and classify it as something that could or was diagnosed in the past. If you want to get more technical, sometimes it can be diagnosed as "alcohol use disorder". That's more broad as it doesn't classify abuse or dependence as I had mentioned before.

It's really up to the clinician to diagnose what they think is appropriate, but following the guidelines in the DSM-V, doing a thorough evaluation consisting of past history (physical, mental, substance use, education, family, etc.), and using evidenced based assessments like the "SASSI" and other alcohol assements can also add to the ability to diagnose and allow for more evidence/reliablity on why you're diagnosing an individual with a certain disorder. Sometimes diagnosing someone can be subjective, depending on the individual. But, if you use what you know about the patient, proper assessment tools, and do a thorough evaluation, it's much easier to obtain a proper diagnosis.

I hope this helps and answers all your questions!

I don't know what the line is but I walk it pretty close at times. But if it was a choice of cold beer or running, I wouldn't touch another drink.

it's not about you wrote:

Thay being said, I will have nights with friends where everyone drinks way more than 5 drinks each. It’s good fun. They are all good people with good jobs and good families. Sorry about your family, but you need to learn to take a step back from it. Alcohol is not for everyone, but for other people it’s meaningless.

What's your point? His post, and this thread have absolutely nothing to do with you.[/quote]

Jack M. made a blanket judgement of all people who drank more than 5 drinks per week - he would "not want a close relationship with" them. Your bias guy was pretty fairly saying how not everyone who drinks 5 drinks per week is a bad person. Jack M. sounds like a messed up judgemental dick with a shit family and a worse attitude toward them. Bias sounds like a well adjusted guy with good friends. You are an idiot who can't follow simple things.

Glad I could explain.

east coast wrote:

CDC guidelines err on the side of caution and have a pretty conservative (in absolute terms) definition of "problem drinking" at 14 drinks/week for men - or 4 drinks in any one sitting.

I'd take these finding with a grain of salt. Most people I know are knocking back at least that many drinks per week. A couple friends polish off a bottle of wine per night. but most stories I read about true alcoholics tend to describe drinking way beyond that scale - 2 pints of vodka per day, a case of beer per day, 3 bottles of wine per day, etc.

I skeptical. I drink, on average, between 5-10 drinks per week. Partially because of the guidelines. But Who knows.

What does alcoholism look like? Many pics to show the look, but if you want to know the brain inside the alcoholic, read Charles Bukowski.

This is my definition:

You are an alcoholic if you are physically and/or emotionally addicted to it.

Meaning once you start it's hard/impossible to stop. When you are not drinking, you are counting down until you can do it again - at best. At worst, you just do it again as soon as you wake up (or shortly there after).

Many people abuse alcohol, but are not alcoholics. They like to have fun, and when the occasion arises, they have 4,5,6,7...12 drinks. They might have a rip, roaring hang over, but once they are better they can have a drink or two and stop just fine. Not every drinking occasion turns into a party.

Likewise, there are those who may never drink more than 5 or 6 drinks, but they HAVE to do it every day. Or at least every time they drink one, it turns into 5 or 6. And every day they don't drink, they are having to make a decision about it. I'm not drinking today - even if they really want to, and they always really want to.

I was drinking 5-12 drinks/day, with binges of 20-30 on weekends. I quit because I knew I'd die and it quitting would not get any easier.

I had a good paying job. Never missed a day and never fucked up (Wall street trading).

I stopped and a lot of colleagues kept going. Some are now dead. A few are in AA. A few are like me and just stopped.

It sounds like you are aware of the issue, which is the best you can do. Alcohol is the drug of choice in most sub-cultures, and it is legal almost everywhere. So just be careful.

The costs to ones health are enormous vs say THC

Jack M. wrote:

Regardless of what anyone tells you, alcohol is poison and is absolutely not good for you. How bad it is for you will vary depending largely on how your specific body metabolizes acetaldehyde, but it doesn't change the fact alcohol is bad for you. Everyone can make up their own decision as to how much they want to consume, but less is going to be better, and personally, I would not want to have a close relationship with anyone who drank more than ~5 drinks per week.

Thanks for your humble opinion. However, you're wrong. Those who drink Alcohol in moderation, an avg of 1-2 drinks a night, have been proven, over, and over and OVER again to live longer on average than those who don't drink at all. Is that how a poison usually works? Yes, drinking excessively is bad for you. Yes, LOTS of people drink too much and it has a very negative impact on their lives. But alcohol in moderation, for most people, is not a problem, and even potentially has health benefits, and is enjoyable.

Is water a poison, or is necessary for life? Drink excessive amounts of water, and you will die, about as quickly as you will from drinking too much alcohol.

Is the sun a poisonous thing, or essential to life on earth? Get too much sun, and you will die.

Is food poison, or essential to life? Eat excessively, and you will slowly die.

Bakk atcha wrote:

Who are you? The arbiter of LRC? How about you phukk the phukk off, teetotaler. Posters can speak for themselves phukk stick limploper.

HardLoper wrote:

There is nothing "douchey" about his post. Calm down dude.

I thought you first post was very reasonable. I agreed with it.

But truthfully your second post made it sound like you are drunk.

I'm amazed how bitter some moderate drinkers are about this thread... if you like alcohol and it's not a problem, congrats, you're normal. This topic is not for us. We don't have to justify it with the mostly unrepeatable studies about how a glass of wine per day is good for you, etc, that's just silly rationalization.