esinger

To me I see it as the point of physical addiction. I drank daily for years and went on occasional heavy drinking binges. Did well at my job, never got arrested, didn't have to drink to function. It did cause me occasional embarrassment minor issues.
Then came the point where my life took a downward turn and I turned to booze to sooth my depression and anxiety. My tolerance went way up and I soon got to the point where I was physically sick until I got a couple of shots of my "medicine" in me.
The ideal thing would have been to slow down or quit before the addiction set in. I think the majority of people probably do.
The study also says that 29% of people drink too much and 88,000 die every year. Of them 90% are not addicted. Addicted or not still a problem.
Government studies usually have ulterior motives. Raise taxes on spirits to save people from themselves maybe. With the Obamacare mandate that insurance cover substance abuse treatment, it might mean a more stringent process to getting help.

I guess the common sense approach is that if it causes you problems, don't do it.

anattaboy

Okay, I'm a problem drinker that learned abstinence is best through lots of trial and error research.

foolsgold66

Methodology? Research? Did you read the article? You need not be well-versed in science to know that tallying self-reported data is not science. It's taking a poll. 5-year olds can take a poll. I'm all for actual research, but this isn't.

Can you imagine the Internal Revenue Service doing a study involving self-reported data? Headline: 99.9% of taxpayers don't cheat on their taxes!

Sigh. Sorry, I don't see how this crap helps anyone.

wpainterw

P.S. As I see it the study places a lot of emphasis on what you call it. If you are an "alcoholic" then you have big problems and should quit. If you are merely a "heavy drinker" then you can do some drinking but you should ease up a bit. "Let us help you do that!" So it's a set up. Folks with drinking problems are motivated to put themselves into the "heavy drinker" slot. But, as the years go by, the body ages and the drinking continues, the shadow looking over their backs grows darker. Despite what's left of the rational brain, the body and the "lizard" part of the brain have their own agenda. And it's also that way with the body chemistry. I've heard that story so many times, both with others and with myself, "I'm merely a heavy drinker. I should ease up. I can control it but if I can't I can get "counseling".
Just an an aside about one of the post's mention of Stalin's drinking parties. I've read that, as the drinking went on into the night and early morning, "Uncle Joe" would insist that various members of the Politburo commence dancing and make fools of themselves. Khrushchev was forced to do this. If a person refused he could easily end up with a one way ticket to Siberia.

W.

AdmimalBlueEyes

For sure a alcoholic can't " slow down " for any length of time , maybe ?/ a heavy drinker can, I'm not sure because I'm a alcoholic
botom line is heavy drinking , binge drinking , moderate drinking and chronic drinking , if nothing else are hell on the body !!! I would guess that 95% of the people on this site have a drinking issue that can only be solved with abstinence , or. There here to help cope with a loved ones alcohol abuse

Notmyrealname

I think there's a strong component of self-reporting in the study in question, and I know for most of my drinking career I would have told you that I have it under control and that it wasn't negatively impacting my life, which was perhaps not an accurate assessment of the facts, in hindsight. So maybe all these 8-15 drinks a day people who are "handling it just fine, thank you!" are suffering from a certain distortion of perception.

EndGameNYC

I think this is a bit harsh. The person you responded to was expressing her thoughts on the article, on your comments and on this thread. She acknowledged from the start that she is "not well-versed enough to know whether this particular study was good."

Though it has its limitations, survey methodology is among several legitimate research methods that are commonly used, and those studies are often undertaken as a prelude to studies based on experimental design. Surveys often provide important data that are based on a range of variables, and they generally result in a good overview of what we wish to study in a more comprehensive way. Large samples help to avoid some of the pitfalls of survey research, and the number of participants in the relevant study is 138,100.

Methods
Data were analyzed from the 138,100 adults who responded to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Drinking patterns (ie, past-year drinking, excessive drinking, and binge drinking) were assessed by sociodemographic characteristics and alcohol dependence (assessed through self-reported survey responses and defined as meeting ≥3 of 7 criteria for dependence in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition).

When conducting studies on alcohol use disorders, a more comprehensive interview is given (typically, the SCID), either in-person or remotely, which is also based on self-report and which is the keystone of virtually all psychiatric research. Research is not a perfect science, but there are ways to limit the influence of such things as false responses or confounding variables.

People who aren't "well-versed in science" shouldn't be persuaded to remain mute simply based on their lack of experience in a field of study that garners a great deal of conflict, confusion and misunderstading even among its most competent members.

Aellyce

glad I did not have to review (critique) any parts of this study or whatever everyone here calls it...

Pondlady

I found it disturbing how alcohol dependent people were described as low income, while binge drinkers were high income. I don't believe that, and know plenty of high income people who are alcohol dependent. It makes it seem like the old image of a poor drunk is accurate.....when we know it isn't.

wpainterw

I am not an expert in statistical surveys but, from a strictly pedestrian and perhaps naive perspective would doubt any "study" which did not first identify a group of so called "heavy drinkers" and then take samples of this group of same individuals over a considerable time period, such as fifteen or twenty years. This would mean following the progress, or lack of progress, of the same persons in this group over time. How did they make out with "moderate" drinking? How many deteriorated, later became "alcoholics" ?
In any case, from personal experience I suspect the "moderate drinking for heavy drinkers" protocol and fear that it may be a trap for the unwary. All I know for sure is that it's no longer a trap for me and I'm so thankful that i no longer fall for it as I did periodically for forty years. Something to be thankful for at Thanksgiving!

W.

DefconOne

IMHO...Heavy drinkers who can't stop at one drink are alcoholics who usually have an operational safety net (money, enabler, health) that keeps them from hitting bottom. Every time they fall off the high wire the net catches them, they sober up for awhile, then climb back up to get on the wire..its a vicious cycle for the heavy drinker. Its just a matter of time before some aspect of the safety net breaks and they go 24/7 with the drinking....and then they hit the bottom hard...

esinger

High income people aren't effected as bad. They can usually buy there way out of trouble and have more resources to keep their head out of water.
Low income people who are living on the edge are the ones that end up in the street and suffer much more adversity to their addictions. I think this would account for much of this part of the study. IMHO

AdmimalBlueEyes

For me personally ( imake about 2-2.5k a week) while I'm drinking its hell and the money in my acount serves only to enable me, alcoholism just plain sucks regardless of income, even though I've been sober this time for only 12 days, if a year from now I hit the lottery , first thing I would do is check into rehab

esinger

Not saying people with money aren't drunks. Just saying it's more publically visible for the poor. And that's what's probably showing up in their data. I was making plenty enough money when I crashed.

serious

that's fine now, it's better to die from heavy drinking than alcoholism
i guess, at least you'll die healthier...

does it really matter what label/title is slapped on the drinker? the damage is the same.
you can call me "tomato", but if i start drinking i'll be on a proper binge similar to the one that an alcoholic goes on.

Gottalife

The heavy drinkers I knew were pretty happy with their lot. When they died, I doubt they were any healthier than an alcoholic, but they were happier. True they were in a rut ( a grave with the ends knocked out) and alcohol severely damaged their health, but they were content with their lot.

Misery is the lot of the drinking alcoholic. Terror, bewilderment, frustration and despair are constant companions, sometimes even of the (for the moment) dry alcoholic. They may even drink less than the heavy drinker, but the action of alcohol on their mind, body and spirit is much more severe.

foolsgold66

Perhaps. Sorry, V. I have a bit of bias against these type of analyses.

EndGameNYC

"The prevalence of alcohol dependence was significantly higher among excessive drinkers and binge drinkers than among non-binge drinkers across all sociodemographic groups."

"Consistent with previous studies, binge drinking was most common among men, those aged 18 to 24, non-Hispanics whites, those with some college education, and those with an annual family income $75,000 or more (16). In contrast, alcohol dependence was most common among American Indians or Alaskan Natives, those having less than a high school education, and those with an annual family income of less than $25,000. These findings may reflect the known impact of alcohol dependence on many areas in the drinker’s life, including their ability to work and their productivity in the workplace. Reduced workplace productivity is the single largest contributor to alcohol-attributable economic costs in the United States."

Preventing Chronic Disease | Prevalence of Alcohol Dependence Among US Adult Drinkers, 2009?2011 - CDC

EndGameNYC

Hey FG.

For the untrained eye, survey studies -- by virtue of the word 'survey' alone -- are taken as makeshift enterprises that involve little effort and therefore provide little in return. This study is nothing of the sort. I read the original manuscript in its entirety, and I was impressed by how well it was done. As often happens, the investigators seemed to have done a good job in controlling or accounting for such things as participants' under-reporting their use of alcohol.

Most studies are extremely limited in their scope, and simply cannot provide all the information we may want them to. From what I read, the methodology is sound, and the analyses are thorough, within the confines of this particular study. The authors also provide a section on the limitations of the study in the Discussion Section.

Preventing Chronic Disease | Prevalence of Alcohol Dependence Among US Adult Drinkers, 2009?2011 - CDC

Vandermast

I ain't no heavy drinker I a drunk period