N3p3nth3

Just came across this NPR story and thought I'd share. Thoughts?

Moderate Drinker Or Alcoholic? Many Americans Fall In Between : The Salt : NPR

b086

when it became clear to me that i had a problem with drinking, i did not experience withdrawal symptoms from abstinence, and my tolerance to alcohol was strictly normal -- not higher than it had been. i know that the article mentions that there are other criteria to consider, but i don't need to go that far. whether or not i am an alcoholic is actually not that important to me -- the label itself, in other words, is not that important.

i have learned, through painful experience, that my desire to drink is oriented around a desire to escape from life, and/or to make it more exciting and pleasant. i want to use alcohol and drugs because they give me the opportunity to change my mental state in an instant. and the problem is that i came to want that mental state nearly all the time -- in response to boredom, sadness, frustration, agitation; even happiness and relief were "improved" by drugs and alcohol. and what goes up must come down. it was a terrible bargain, in the end. it cost me tons of money, my dignity and self-worth, my health; i became reclusive and frightened and resentful of everyone and everything.

so, my "solution for living" became a problem from which i needed relief. i no longer want to drink, haven't had a drink in over two years. i have something much, much better now -- freedom from the need to improve or escape from this moment by picking up a drink or drugs.

frankly i don't think there's anything controversial or surprising in this article. people are gonna go on talking and arguing about what addiction is, what alcoholism is. i have found that i do not and cannot profit from the "debating society." this might be naive but my i think intuition will always be the best guide for whether one has a drinking problem or not. that doesn't mean that denial can't be involved in an intuitive understanding -- but denial will also make use of scientific studies and argue about definitions. i once heard someone say in a meeting that if you are looking over your shoulder while you're doing something, to see if someone is watching, then you know the difference between right and wrong. to me, understanding whether or not i have a drinking problem is exactly the same. and i found that once i was able to let go of my pride just a little bit, in order to reach out and ask for help, that willingness was returned in the form of serenity and freedom from the need to drink, a day at a time.

not sure if this response is what you had in mind...i'm not making an assumptions or presumptions about your situation (haven't read any of your other posts). just chipping in my $.02

MythOfSisyphus

I read that a few days ago. I think it's spot-on and not really controversial at all. We live in a culture (in the West) that celebrates drinking and partying, especially as a rite of passage for young people. "Normal" people can drink too much for years in that kind of social situation, but then they get jobs, have kids etc and dial it back. Other people that work in jobs/industries like mine (chef) drink a lot overall. Again, normal people drink in social situations and to cope with stress, but when they leave that situation their consumption drops.

Those of us at SR are generally in the 10% that have tried time and time again to moderate without success. Lots of people that drink too much and/or abuse alcohol probably aren't technically alkies. But I think we all know people in that 10% that are.

Gottalife

Mm. 90% of excessive drinkers are not alcoholic. That sounds about right to me.

FreeOwl

When I read these kind of 'scientific' conclusions I can't help thinking how many times over the years I fooled myself, friends, family and on several occasions - trained professionals who were tasked with assessing whether I had a drinking problem - into believing I was 'just a heavy drinker'.

I also can't help thinking about many of my friends who number among that same class.... And how - given what I have learned through personal experience in recovery - being 'just a heavy drinker' can be a perceptual hair's breadth away from 'an alcoholic'.

I agree with what was said above.... 'Alcoholic' is in the experience and acceptance of the individual. For many years I defended myself from that title. Heck, I still don't really like it. But from over 10 months of recovery I can see that the label doesn't matter and that even when was 'just a heavy drinker' I was suffering and my life was held hostage by alcohol.

advbike

I pretty much agree with the article, however I think it oversimplifies things to imply that only those who are "alcohol dependent", or physically addicted are alcoholic. I wasn't alcohol dependent, or physically addicted, but I sure had an emotional addiction to it, lol. Most people, like myself, drink to fill an emotional void, or cope with anxiety or other mental problems. Alcoholic or not, quitting did me a world of good. I have my life back again.

LBrain

If you want to stop and need to stop for whatever reason, and you are here seeking help, don't be concerned with the other 90%.

IOAA2

From AA literature that may be considered experts on the topic.

Within AA membership may be found men
and women of all ages and many different social,
economic, and cultural backgrounds. Some of us
drank for many years before coming to the realization
we could not handle alcohol. Others were
fortunate enough to appreciate, early in life or in
their drinking careers, that alcohol had become
unmanageable.
The consequences of our alcoholic drinking
have also varied. A few of us had become derelicts
before turning for help. Some had
lost family, possessions, and self-respect. We had
been on skid row in many cities. Some of us had
been hospitalized or jailed times without number.
We had committed grave offenses — against society,
our families, our employers, and ourselves.
Others among us have never been jailed or
hospitalized. Nor had we lost jobs or families
through drinking. But we finally came to a point
where we realized that alcohol was interfering
with normal living. When we discovered that we
could not live without alcohol.
All the great faiths are represented in our
Fellowship, and many religious leaders have
encouraged our growth. There are also atheists
and agnostics among us. Belief in, or adherence to,
a formal creed is not a condition of membership.
We are united by our common problem, alcohol.
Meeting and talking and helping other alcoholics
together, we are somehow able to stay sober
and to lose the compulsion to drink, once a dominant
force in our lives.
We do not think we are the only people who
have the answer to problem drinking. We know
that the A.A. program works for us, and we have
seen it work for every newcomer, almost without
exception, who honestly and sincerely wanted to
quit drinking. For us, sobriety must always come first.

BernieE

This. When I realized I was losing half of every weekend to a hangover, that I was never getting good sleep, that the brain fog wasn't caused by age, and all areas of my life were below par. Alcoholic or not doesn't matter, it's all. About quality of life.

LexieCat

Exactly. It isn't all about the QUANTITY you drink, it's what alcohol DOES for you, and how you FEEL about it that really IDs the alcoholic, I think.

An awful lot of non-alcoholics get drunk pretty easily because they haven't built up the tolerance for it and they don't need it to function. A lot of people consider them excessive drinkers because they show it when they drink.

trachemys

Alcoholic or abuser, meh. Semantics.

Almost every bad thing in my life has been related to alcohol. That's enough.

trachemys

Alcoholic or abuser, meh. Semantics.

Almost every bad thing in my life has been related to alcohol. That's enough.

bunnezjp

Good article. All I know is that at the end of the day, I don't drink.


Bunnez

N3p3nth3

Nice reading your thoughts!

This exactly what I found to be (slightly) controversial. If I had listened to this earlier in my drinking years-- before I decided that I had a problem-- I would have used it as a justification. I would have told myself "Well... lots of people drink too much and aren't alcoholics. Same for me."

We also often here that alcohol is progressive, which makes me wonder how much of that 90% are on the road to bigger problems, yet here they get the message that that's probably not the case.

Also a bit surprising to me is the notion that you're only an alcoholic if you are dependent. That makes it sound as if you're no longer an alcoholic after being in recovery, or not an alcoholic earlier on. The disease model that we often hear would suggest otherwise-- that you're an alcoholic before and after being in a dependence stage. (I'm not taking a stance here-- just saying that the article seems to go against much of what we here about alcoholism.)

I do agree entirely with other comments-- that at the end of the day all that matters is recognizing you're better off without it and the title doesn't matter so much. Yet there still seems something a little risky about sending the message "you probably don't have that big a problem." And that's what someone will here when they want to hear it.

Just my thoughts. Even with my reservations about the article, I'm glad to see alcohol abuse being talked about openly.

Kero

That's a great point. Definitely reflects my life. I drank for 2 decades. I'd usually be the guy at the party drinking just a few more than most.

I don't know when I crossed the line, but alcohol has been an issue for me for most of my life. It didn't just happen overnight. I had a very gentle downward slide that took years and years.

Nuudawn

Interesting..
Although a bit surprised it wasn't about alcoholism in the National Pro Rodeo circuit

(First thing I thought of when I say NPR)

Fly N Buy

Isn't this the same governmental organization ( CDC ) that decided it really wasn't important to send people to Texas in order to make certain Ebola protocol's were understood??

Love my country, fear my government - especially in these pa tat o / po tot o discussions.

I am 100% sure that 90% of my free time involved beverages that were at least 40% alcohol 70% of the week.

EndGameNYC

Seems to me that this "study" is rigged.

“Excessive alcohol consumption, according to the CDC, is responsible for 88,000 deaths per year and costs the U.S. more than $200 billion.”

I’ve read snippets of this study on a couple of sights and with the little information I was able to gather, it seems that the study is skewed to favor certain results based on the definitions the CDC uses for both “excessive drinking” and “binge drinking.” Added to this, and this is based on my recall of what I’ve read, it’s mostly people between the ages of 18 -24 who fit into these categories. (As I recall, vehicular accidents and deaths due to drinking are also highest among those who are between ages sixteen and twenty four.) Yet the CDC has previously reported that the highest rates of excessive drinking and binge drinking also occur between 18 and 24, an that the overall financial burden on the economy is attributed to drinking during this time. This age group is then naturally overrepresented in the current study. As the CDC and many people report, the rates for both excessive drinking and binge drinking decrease after the age of 24.

With that, the study is flawed to the extent that their conclusions are easily predicted by the definitions that they’re using. It’s not a perfect analogy, but if the norm for caloric intake were say ~1,000calories/day, then most of us would be "excessive eaters" by definition, since anything over 1,000/day could increase medical risks. It’s a kind of circular or narrow reasoning that doesn’t take into account things like exercise, what we’re actually eating and, inexplicably, overall health and well being despite being over the established limit. Most teenage boys would then suddenly have serious eating disorders bordering on food addiction.

“The reality of the situation is that most adults who drink, they're drinking maybe a couple drinks during week and then typically drinking [larger] amounts on weekends,” says Robert Brewer, an epidemiologist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and co-author of a new study published in Preventing Chronic Disease.

So then, every man who has about two drinks per night, and every woman who drinks one drink per night is classified as an “excessive drinker,” Even if drinking doesn’t interfere with significant role obligations or lead to medical problems. Hmm. So a guy who has five drinks with friends after work, a total of four drinks with, before and after dinner on Saturday night, and then six drinks on football Sundays, between 1:00 PM and 7:00 PM to 11:00 PM is a “binge drinker.” A woman who has four drinks after work on Friday nights and then four drinks on Saturday nights is also a binge drinker. But if at the same level of drinking both men and women experience cravings, have withdrawal symptoms and suffer in their major role obligations, then they have an "alcohol use disorder."

The patterns of drinking described by the CDC are neither classified as excessive nor as binge drinking because of cravings, an inability to control their drinking, serious interference with major life functions, tolerance, or because of obvious withdrawal symptoms, but because the amounts these people are drinking can lead to medical problems. Huh.

I could analyze the research further, but I quickly get a pounding headache when I read studies that are poorly done. In this case, it’s possible that the way the study has been portrayed by the media has made the conclusions more alarming or seem as though they are telling us something more or different than they are, but I’m not interested in chasing wild geese.

Venecia

Interesting observations, EndGameNYC.

I'd be interested in what the researchers think about the progressive nature of alcohol abuse. By the standards they describe, I fit into the excessive category before I think it launched into full-blown alcoholism. Probably 15-17 years ago. If I'd known 20-25 years ago what I know now ... sigh.

It's also interesting that the age group studied is 18-24. As I reflect on my life -- and try to avoid drowning in regret -- I think a lot of the seeds were sown in college. The drinking scene at my alma mater -- like many, I suspect -- was off the charts. It seems like things have worsened to some degree, perhaps with regard to binges. Within the last 10 to 15 years, there have been increasing reports of college students in my region literally drinking themselves to death, including the horrific "21 shots on the 21st birthday" trend. I don't recall that from my college days, though there were a couple accidental deaths during my years in school that were "alcohol-related."

All in all, for me anyway, a good reminder that I cannot take back the past, only move forward in sobriety and recovery.

HenryKrinkle

Here's the WaPo article about this same study:

Vast majority of Americans who drink excessively are not alcoholics, new CDC study shows - The Washington Post

This makes perfect sense to me. They're taking a nuanced approach to the problem instead of using a board brush to paint all types of drinking problems the same, as some recovery groups tend to like to do.