Re: Addiction: Why do we drink: Peele
Ted L.
Gary <yex...@sbell.net> wrote:
> http://www.peele.net/lib/addexp.html
Gary -- have you read Gerald May's "Addiction and Grace"? (I'm pretty
sure I've mentioned it here before.) While you may disagree with his
conclusion that the only way out is divine intervention, I think he does
a very good job of describing the process of addiction. As I recall,
his argument is that addiction is the result of an instinctive mechanism
doing its job under inappropriate circumstances. That mechanism is
homeostatis -- the organism's inbuilt drive to maintain the status quo.
Consuming the addictive substance over time *changes* the status quo to
a new status quo -- rewiring the brain even -- and the homeostatic
mechanism, which involves a large part of the mental apparatus
(especially subconscious) works very hard to maintain that new status
quo -- the one where the addictive substance is present.
Interestingly, he also has a nice discussion of what I call "negative
addictions" (I forget what he calls them, possibly aversions.) An
extreme example of that is a phobia. There, the homeostatic mechanism
goes into overdrive to make sure some situation or ingredient is *not*
present.
--
Ted L.
Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.
jimbo
> 4. Addiction is the inability to choose not to do something.
(big snip)
I had the opportunity to meet Peele f2f and found him very
interesting. He is not anti AA but is anti the folks who claim AA as a
cure-all.
He is a social psychologist and his model of addiction is a social
psychology model. I have a paper in my files that compares all of the
different models to the AA model. Very interesting. I'll see if I can
find it.
Jim
F.H.
> In article <2009111820252775249-yexxxx@sbellnet>,
> Gary <yex...@sbell.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.peele.net/lib/addexp.html
>
> Gary -- have you read Gerald May's "Addiction and Grace"? (I'm pretty
> sure I've mentioned it here before.) While you may disagree with his
> conclusion that the only way out is divine intervention, I think he does
> a very good job of describing the process of addiction. As I recall,
> his argument is that addiction is the result of an instinctive mechanism
> doing its job under inappropriate circumstances. That mechanism is
> homeostatis -- the organism's inbuilt drive to maintain the status quo.
> Consuming the addictive substance over time *changes* the status quo to
> a new status quo -- rewiring the brain even -- and the homeostatic
> mechanism, which involves a large part of the mental apparatus
> (especially subconscious) works very hard to maintain that new status
> quo -- the one where the addictive substance is present.
This makes perfect sense to me on an intuitive level. Is Gerald May a
doctor of neuroscience?
> Interestingly, he also has a nice discussion of what I call "negative
> addictions" (I forget what he calls them, possibly aversions.) An
> extreme example of that is a phobia. There, the homeostatic mechanism
> goes into overdrive to make sure some situation or ingredient is *not*
> present.
Processing our environment via evolutionary processes?
F.H.
I like to read it. Its pretty much a no brainer that a psychologist
would zero in on something emotional as opposed to physiological: ("the
euphoria of a sudden releasing of cares")
Peele:
"This suggests another major criterion for an addiction-whether a person
derives pleasure from an involvement or whether it's turned to simply
out of pain, fear, habit, and the avoidance of other things." [end quotes]
In addition to the possibility of a physiologically based craving,
addictive behavior could involve /all/ or the above.
Peele:
"Addiction is the inability to choose not to do something." [end quote]
Ironic that this 'inability' is rampant among the so called most
intelligent species on earth. Certainly not confined to alcohol and drugs.
Charlie M. 1958
> I like to read it. Its pretty much a no brainer that a psychologist
> would zero in on something emotional as opposed to physiological: ("the
> euphoria of a sudden releasing of cares")
>
> Peele:
> "This suggests another major criterion for an addiction-whether a person
> derives pleasure from an involvement or whether it's turned to simply
> out of pain, fear, habit, and the avoidance of other things." [end quotes]
>
> In addition to the possibility of a physiologically based craving,
> addictive behavior could involve /all/ or the above.
>
> Peele:
> "Addiction is the inability to choose not to do something." [end quote]
>
> Ironic that this 'inability' is rampant among the so called most
> intelligent species on earth. Certainly not confined to alcohol and drugs.
As I read Gary's original post of Peele, it struck me that there is
something just a little too black and white about calling addiction an
"inability" to choose. It's more like a thumb on the scale as we weigh
our options.
In my own experience, it's not like one day I could choose not to drink,
and the next day I couldn't. Early on, I would only drink at
"appropriate" times, and I could abstain or limit my intake if there was
some reason to (although that was always unpleasant). But over time,
whenever the question of "to drink or not to drink" arose, the reasons
to /not/ drink carried less and less weight, while the compulsion /to/
drink became stronger.
Ultimately, we all /chose/ to quit. No one gave us a magic pill. AA,
treatment centers, religion... are all just methods to help us stick
with our choice not to drink (unless of course you believe in divine
intervention).
IIRC, Peele pretty much totally dismisses the possibility of a physical
component. It seems to me that if there /was/ a physical component in
some alcohol abusers, it would help explain why some people are able to
moderate their drinking or quit at a relatively early stage, while
others cannot.
F.H.
Had me curious right away: "Addicts turn to it out of negative
motivations-fear, anxiety, guilt, discomfort-which the substance or
involvement serves to lessen for a time."
If by addicts I presume he is referring to alcoholics also, it sounds
like he's talking about early drinking here. Aside from the
psychologist bias of leaning toward just /feelings/ to analyze addiction
is he seems to be referring to early stages. What about all the people
that drink normally? Do they start out with /different/ "feelings"
about alcohol? Life?
Since due to my fathers drinking, I had vowed to never drink, when I
think back to my first drinking, it was peer pressure, not fear etc..
And as you pointed out, for a long time it was fun and didn't involve
prolonged of daily drinking.
Ted L.
"F.H." <connec...@verizon.net> wrote:
> This makes perfect sense to me on an intuitive level. Is Gerald May a
> doctor of neuroscience?
He is (was -- apparently he died in 2005) an M.D. psychiatrist, later
became a spiritual director at the Shalem Institute.
Charlie M. 1958
>
> Had me curious right away: "Addicts turn to it out of negative
> motivations-fear, anxiety, guilt, discomfort-which the substance or
> involvement serves to lessen for a time."
>
> If by addicts I presume he is referring to alcoholics also, it sounds
> like he's talking about early drinking here. Aside from the
> psychologist bias of leaning toward just /feelings/ to analyze addiction
> is he seems to be referring to early stages. What about all the people
> that drink normally? Do they start out with /different/ "feelings"
> about alcohol? Life?
>
> Since due to my fathers drinking, I had vowed to never drink, when I
> think back to my first drinking, it was peer pressure, not fear etc..
> And as you pointed out, for a long time it was fun and didn't involve
> prolonged of daily drinking.
>
Yeah. I can understand how one might buy into the negative motivation
aspect for those whose childhood was particularly unhappy or traumatic,
but it just doesn't ring true for me. My early years could have been
snipped straight out of "Leave it to Beaver." Sure, puberty is tough.
Every adolescent experiences a certain level of anxiety, but mine was
nothing out of the ordinary as far as I can tell.
So why is it that the first time I got drunk.... blitzed, puking,
falling down shit-faced at the age of 13... I woke up the next morning
and said to myself "Wow, I can't wait to do that again!"?
RonG
"Charlie M. 1958" <alw...@impatient.com> wrote in message
news:he3r01$jnm$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> So why is it that the first time I got drunk.... blitzed, puking,
> falling down shit-faced at the age of 13... I woke up the next
> morning and said to myself "Wow, I can't wait to do that again!"?
For me it had everything to do with what I thought it meant to be a man.
I grew up in western PA and many of the men, including my father, worked
in the factories and coal mines during the 40's. These men worked hard
and hard drinking was part of their life as I saw it though my young
eyes. They would end their shifts and on paydays, it was not uncommon
for them to gather at one of the local bars, drink shooters, tell
stories, laugh and seem to really enjoy the comradery that revolved
around drinking.
When I first started to drink and found I couldn't drink very much
without getting sick or having blackouts, I just thought I had not
"learned" how to drink like a man, yet. As I saw it, a man could hold
his liquor, and my early drinking did not live up to that image. So I
suffered through the puking, blackouts, & hangovers, all the while
thinking that I would be able to drink like those men as soon as I got
the hang of it.
RonG
Charlie M. 1958
As much as I loved the feeling of that first drunk, I didn't
particularly enjoy the puking part. :-) After a year or so of puking
pretty regularly when I drank, I finally got the hang of knowing when to
stop so it wouldn't happen. For me, it was at the first sign of the room
spinning. If I quit drinking as soon as the merry-go-round started, I
would be okay. Miserable, maybe, but not throwing up.
It seems funny now, but for years I rationalized that my ability to stop
before I started barfing was proof that I was /not/ an alcoholic. An
alcoholic, I believed, was someone who couldn't quit until they passed out.
F.H.
Early on, the unseen peril is in the "progressive" part of drinking. I
saw /my/ drinking as quite different than that of my fathers. As long
as I was working, bringing home a paycheck, etc., there was no 'alcohol'
problem except for the /occasional/ overdoing it. Then one day I was
sitting in a bar on my 44th birthday (the age my father died) looking at
myself in the mirror behind the bar and thinking..., "I have become my
father."
When I reached the point where I recognized the subtle negative impacts
booze had been having on my life (if you can call divorce subtle) over
the years it was startling to say the least. That to me is another
important area that is generally ignored in discussions, the emotional
growth factor.
I very much agree with the notion that emotional growth is impaired with
alcohol and the impairment begins when the drinking begins. I can think
of many couples that never argued until one or the other was half in the
bag and of course, under those conditions, nothing is solved so whatever
the beef was about is still gonna be there the next day.
I *never* reached the point where I "craved" a drink but in my case I am
convinced that the more I drank the more hypoglycemic I became and
alcohol, (until I got sober) relieved the symptoms of low blood sugar.
Unfortunately, it became the /only/ way I relieved the symptoms. These
days I relieve the symptoms with a sweet treat of some sort. I don't
ever crave ice cream but sometimes it seemed like a really *good* idea. :)
Charlie M. 1958
These
> days I relieve the symptoms with a sweet treat of some sort. I don't
> ever crave ice cream but sometimes it seemed like a really *good* idea. :)
I can identify.
I'm about 10 pounds over what I'd like to be, and I'm constantly telling
myself I could lose it if I just cut out the late night snacking. Every
morning I look in the mirror before I get dressed and think "No cookies
or ice cream tonight." Then 9:00 pm rolls around and I'm in the fridge
giving myself 100 reasons why I /deserve/ three scoops of Blue Bell vanilla.
There is something eerily familiar about that pattern. ;-)
Tex
wrote:
>Then one day I was
>sitting in a bar on my 44th birthday (the age my father died) looking at
>myself in the mirror behind the bar and thinking..., "I have become my
>father."
I remember sitting there looking around .... I saw you (not really
you) and a few others (all the 44+ crowd) and thought to myself I'm
fucked, totally fucked!
I wasn't so much concerned I had become you nor was I too concerned
that I was a drunk (or even an alcoholic) ....DWI's & PI's, knots on
the head, and busted teeth were just acts in the big play.
What got my attention and bothered me about the whole deal... was the
idea I had done run out of bad luck, didn't have any left to get me to
the permanent exit! I sat there, 22/23 years of age and I fit in, I
was accepted, in hindsight it was more a slick tire mascot then
acceptance, at times I would argue with one of the old bastirds about
how brilliant I really was (compared to them). How I had reached the
point they had without having to wear myself out breaking my back at
nowhere/nothing jobs, sufferening divorces and child support, no taxes
or mortagages for me! The replies would center around 'potential',
'future', and 'youth'.
I heard the spins on all three more times than I care to remember.
Back to looking around ...What grabbed my nuts and twisted my eyes
until they crossed was a vision or better yet before I ever heard it
put forth ... A Moment of Clarity! FEAR! Not of being a drunk, not of
being a nowhere man going nowhere that had already arrived! No fear in
all the different acts in the Play....Nope ... it was the fear I'd
live! Live another 30/40 years! Be a Star and leading man in the play
until I was old Walt, hunched over his glass of whiskey & milk, down
at the end of the bar. Looking up every now n' then looking for
someone to explain how life had turned on him...how he had to drink
fuckin' milk in his whiskey to get it down and to keep it down!
Of course ... like most moments of clarity I just tilted my empty
glass and nodded the give me another nod and continued drinking until
clarity turned to fog.
Charlie M. 1958
In terms of alcoholism or addiction, however,
> many times a problem can't be addressed well is not because the answers
> don't make perfect sense, it's because the wrong questions are asked.
> Make sense?
>
The answers always make perfect sense when you've got the right
questions. Ever watch "Jeopardy"? :-)
Charlie M. 1958
> On 2009-11-19 10:16:02 -0600, "Charlie M. 1958" <alw...@impatient.com>
>
That all comes down to the pesky problem of defining an alcoholic. I do
strongly /suspect/ that I was born with a physical difference that made
my experience of alcohol different from that of the average person.
As a young adult in my mid to late twenties, when my friends and
acquaintances had largely grown out of the teenage partying phase of
life, I clearly remember being unable to comprehend why other people
didn't seem to want to drink at every opportunity the way I wanted to.
My life was good... I was happy. But getting that buzz just felt so
damned good. I can only equate it to sex. What virile young man, given a
beautiful, willing, and skillful partner, would /not/ want to avail
himself of the opportunity on a daily basis?
I don't think having a physical difference (if, indeed, that is the
case) left me hopelessly destined to become a chronic, addicted, abuser
of alcohol. But I think it upped the odds considerably, and made
quitting a lot more difficult. I think people can become alcohol abusers
for many reasons. But the key question to me is why can some cut back or
stop on their own, while others seem to be unable to quit even in the
face of dire consequences?
In the end, absent of absolute proof, I think we are all prejudiced
towards whatever theory of alcoholism fits best with our own experience.
The physical difference theory just happens to be mine.
F.H.
You have described my average evening to a T. I hope you shop for
specials, thats one of my rationalizations, "hey, the Rocky Road is two
for $4.00 with my Vons card"). :)
Eerily indeed, you say its only late night? A certain time of the day?
Heh, I now have a Sanyo mini-fridge in my room so I can hide my supply.
That reminds me..., wait..., better not, its a little early. :)
jimbo
> Eerily indeed, you say its only late night?
I haven't touched ice cream for 7 months but I was eyeing the frozen
yogurt the past few days:-)
Jim
Charlie L.
Ice cream is one of the *forbidden* fruits. If you hadn't caved in and
ever tasted it in the first damn place, you wouldn't be missing 'r
hankering for it. ;-)
CC
F.H.
I was thinking today about what Ted posted regarding the ideas of Gerald
May: addiction is the result of an instinctive mechanism doing its job
under inappropriate circumstances. That mechanism is homeostasis (not
homeostatis) the organism's inbuilt drive to maintain the status quo:
n. The ability or tendency of an organism or cell to maintain internal
equilibrium by adjusting its physiological processes.
Maybe the body is rebelling against a life of 'quiet desperation.' I'm
only /half/ kidding. At some point in our not too distant history we
seem to have had a great deal more peace and calm in our daily living
environment. Maybe its an unconscious reaching for /that/ equilibrium.
Not talking alcohol*ism* just the original pull, the escape, the glow.
Does the stress of daily living in a competitive culture throw the
'physiological processes' out of whack and /create/ the need for a mood
modifier?
Look at the proliferation of prescription drugs.
F.H.
Great pictures. Brought back a lot of memories. My 'fear' was similar.
After the "44" experience, it would be 3 more years before I would
act, step out of my fathers mold and go out into real world with sober
people. But my fear, as I recall it, wasn't of /becoming/ "old Walt"
it was dying "old Walt" with friends, family, and loved ones trying to
make excuses for the late great Frank.
mikewestvale
Frozen yogurt is the near beer of ice cream. Its like masturbation in
a sense, your just fucking yourself.
Tex
wrote:
> But my fear, as I recall it, wasn't of /becoming/ "old Walt"
>it was dying "old Walt" with friends, family, and loved ones trying to
>make excuses for the late great Frank.
Guess the difference is the 22/44 ... when it comes to the living and
dying. Living all those years, going thru what it took to get there
... that was bad at 22 ....now at 61 ... sober longer than I was at
the age of 'fear' ... I now have 1st hand experience, drunk or sober,
life brings about lots of good stuff and lots of bad stuff ... in fact
my sober log probably is filled with much of Walt's drunkalog
......hell I don't have to put milk in my whiskey... all I have to do
is watch the spicy shit, watch out for the sugar, suppose to go light
on the salt etc. etc. ...still ain't sure if I do any of it to live or
to put off dying or if it even matters at this point.
mikewestvale
Ahhhhhh
The sacred sacrament of recovery. What restorative powers it holds in
its chilling demeanor.
Come to me my pretty vanilla and I will love thee forever. Soothe my
tongue and gullet for you hold the answers of the universe.
This usually occurs at this address somewhere between 2 and 3 am.
Peanuts, chocolates or potato chips cannot claim this following among
we, the literati.
Children of the snack
Charlie L.
> On 2009-11-19 09:51:17 -0600, "F.H." <connec...@verizon.net> said:
>
>> Had me curious right away: "Addicts turn to it out of negative
>> motivations-fear, anxiety, guilt, discomfort-which the substance or
>> involvement serves to lessen for a time."
>>
>> If by addicts I presume he is referring to alcoholics also, it sounds
>> like he's talking about early drinking here. Aside from the
>> psychologist bias of leaning toward just /feelings/ to analyze
>> addiction is he seems to be referring to early stages. What about all
>> the people that drink normally? Do they start out with /different/
>> "feelings" about alcohol? Life?
>>
>> Since due to my fathers drinking, I had vowed to never drink, when I
>> think back to my first drinking, it was peer pressure, not fear etc..
>> And as you pointed out, for a long time it was fun and didn't involve
>> prolonged of daily drinking.
>
> drinking?
Well, Gary, I think it's a scientifically proven fact, or so I've been
taught, that there is not one single tissue in the human body, or for
that matter any organism that is *not* permeable to alcohol and if
sufficient alcohol is injected, ingested, inhaled, absorbed, etc. into
the human body that it over rides the body or organisms natural tendency
and ability to discharge or neutralize the *toxin* and pass it out of
the organisms system, then it is going to, at some point enter into the
brain cells or nerve or neural system and if large enough quantities of
it gets into the cell and the internal organelles, often enough for long
enough it is either going to modify or destroy all or part of the cell,
so yes, the brain is going to be changed. Also, yes, the brain or human
organism has some ability to adapt as you say in the case of the stroke
victim or in most cases, and we are even now discovering ways that
certain tissue such as nerve or neural can under certain conditions or
with medical help, that we had thought in the past that once gone were
gone forever with no chance for healing or repair, so yes, there is
plasticity or adaptability. So one might deduce that if the drinking of
the *sufficient* *quantities* previously mentioned were stopped,
reduced, moderated, that the plasticity or adaptability might overcome
or even *keep* up for a period of time, or delay the damage done or
being done. But if not, i. e. the drinking of sufficient quantities over
a prolonged period of time in excess of the ability to over come....
Well....then...thus...
A good example of the manifestations of such might be seen in...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wernicke-Korsakoff_syndrome
KISS ;-)
CC
(Theoretically and now with some data, the brain has
> plasticity....that is, it will change itself to adapt to whatever and
> even if damaged, will reallocate another part of the brain to the lost
> functionality in many cases. If the brain can, on its own, (and with
> practice) regain speech ability that was lost to a stroke, then does it,
> on its own, acquire a dependency (addiction) on alcohol?) It would vary
> with the person somewhat, but if you drank enough. (Note: More than a
> few people get drunk on their first few tries with alcohol because they
> don't immediately feel it and don't have the experience of what is
> 'enough'). Throwing up? Alcohol, after all, is a toxin.
>
> Gary
>
F.H.
> On 2009-11-19 18:04:25 -0600, "F.H." <connec...@verizon.net> said:
>
>>
>> Not talking alcohol*ism* just the original pull, the escape, the glow.
>> Does the stress of daily living in a competitive culture throw the
>> 'physiological processes' out of whack and /create/ the need for a
>> mood modifier?
>>
>
> alcohol than whites and more of them become drunks, even today. Or
> Japanese who are also reputed to be less tolerant.
> How does that work in?
Not sure but with American Indian I /suspect/ that like most alcoholics
they have an /above/ average tolerance to begin with, which, it turns
out is part of the problem. Japanese have less tolerance for alcohol (I
forget the medical details) but they tend to get sick before they get
much of a buzz. Smaller livers?
Charlie L.
I believe this is one case where both genetics and evolution of species
come into play. Like you I can't off the top of my head expound on what
I was taught as far as *some* of the orientals, but I do recall a
*physical* difference or anomaly as far as an inability to handle or
tolerate alcohol by the Oriental compared to most so called Caucasian.
In the other case, the European or Caucasian strains pretty much as a
whole had alcohol as a societal factor and possible influence in their
evolutionary development, where for some reason alcohol usage among the
American Indian seemed unheard of until introduced by the Europeans.
Dietary habits may have played some role also.
We (Caucasian or Western) to a great extent, used to look at Orientals
as a race of long torso, short in stature, possibly bow legged people.
Changes in dietary habits, life style, environment, in even my short
life span seem to be changing that. Even in the early to mid seventies
on my last visit to Japan and Korea the scenery down in and along the
Ginza or Shinjuku, or in Seoul, particularly of the feminine variety had
changed...
Well... Magnificently, compared to the short span of fifteen years or so
and the difference didn't have damn thing to do with my lecherous old
eyes. Them gals was as tall, lissome and long legged as I, 'nd they
weren't White Russian neither. They be home grown Josans 'r Musames. ;-)
But... All things must be considered as being contributing factors as to
what the hell, too damn much, too damn often, too damn long primary
causative factor pertaining to alcoholism. ;-)
Hope you looked at the linking of the glucose factor in the
Wernicke-Korsakoff linking I made earlier.
CC
F.H.
> On 2009-11-19 09:51:17 -0600, "F.H." <connec...@verizon.net> said:
>
>> Had me curious right away: "Addicts turn to it out of negative
>> motivations-fear, anxiety, guilt, discomfort-which the substance or
>> involvement serves to lessen for a time."
>>
>> If by addicts I presume he is referring to alcoholics also, it sounds
>> like he's talking about early drinking here. Aside from the
>> psychologist bias of leaning toward just /feelings/ to analyze
>> addiction is he seems to be referring to early stages. What about all
>> the people that drink normally? Do they start out with /different/
>> "feelings" about alcohol? Life?
>>
>> Since due to my fathers drinking, I had vowed to never drink, when I
>> think back to my first drinking, it was peer pressure, not fear etc..
>> And as you pointed out, for a long time it was fun and didn't involve
>> prolonged of daily drinking.
>
> Do you think drinking changes your brain or that your brain changes your
> drinking?
I don't think as much about the brain by itself. Clearly, in my case,
beside all the role model, peer pressure, immaturity and other
psychological stuff, the proper processing of sugar molecules was a
problem from the beginning so now we have diet and the pancreas. On the
other hand......the brain runs on oxygen and glucose. Vicious circle?
> (Theoretically and now with some data, the brain has
> plasticity....that is, it will change itself to adapt to whatever and
> even if damaged, will reallocate another part of the brain to the lost
> functionality in many cases. If the brain can, on its own, (and with
> practice) regain speech ability that was lost to a stroke, then does it,
> on its own, acquire a dependency (addiction) on alcohol?)
IMO, no. I still see it as primarily a garbage in, garbage out deal.
The brain just tries to keep functioning on what is has to work with.
If anything, I would see it as adjusting to the less than desirable
nutrients, trying to keep functioning. The 'regaining' you mention
strikes me as something good for alcoholics to remember as they move
into sobriety. I'm speaking here of drinkers like myself and those I've
drank with not those who go so far down that they cause permanent brain
damage.
F.H.
Coded it to come back to, TIA.
Charlie M. 1958
> Gary wrote:
>> (Theoretically and now with some data, the brain has
>> plasticity....that is, it will change itself to adapt to whatever and
>> even if damaged, will reallocate another part of the brain to the lost
>> functionality in many cases. If the brain can, on its own, (and with
>> practice) regain speech ability that was lost to a stroke, then does
>> it, on its own, acquire a dependency (addiction) on alcohol?)
>
> IMO, no. I still see it as primarily a garbage in, garbage out deal.
> The brain just tries to keep functioning on what is has to work with. If
> anything, I would see it as adjusting to the less than desirable
> nutrients, trying to keep functioning. The 'regaining' you mention
> strikes me as something good for alcoholics to remember as they move
> into sobriety. I'm speaking here of drinkers like myself and those I've
> drank with not those who go so far down that they cause permanent brain
> damage.
Isn't what Gary describes the process of physical addiction to alcohol?
The same process that causes withdrawal symptoms when the alcohol is
removed? Surely you're not saying /that/ doesn't exist.
F.H.
> Hope you looked at the linking of the glucose factor in the
> Wernicke-Korsakoff linking I made earlier.
There's an empty bottle on my dresser by the door. Its was my B-12
complex. Somehow I wound up with twice the "C" as "B" and have been
waiting for weeks to run out of "C" before I refill the "B."
Given my difficulty with memory of late (and this little refresher
course) I think I'll go ahead and refill /all/ my vitamins tomorrow.
F.H.
Not that it doesn't exist, just that it is a /whole/ body experience as
opposed to primarily a brain reaction.
Charlie L.
As kind of an aside, but kind of still topical along with some of the
things touched on here on the group tonight.
I only wish the human brain were as simple as even the most complex of
computers as man has been able to devise or build. ;-)
The literally millions of various interactions, chemical, enzymatic,
purely physical, electrical, neurological, even the ecological such as
gravitational, possibly even universal or galactic influences which play
a part from as far out or up as we've been able to see or reach down to
the sub-atomic particles and even farther below the smallest increments
of what we know of DNA and everything else, known and unknown to us,
making up the various cells, tissues and systems of the brain, I think
is probably far beyond our present ability to comprehend. Even as
*hopefully* the owners of our own brains. I think today, we as ordinary
human beings would be literally astounded at a glimpse of what, when and
if man doesn't destroy himself, man is capable or will be capable of
doing when and if he or we, can learn how to harness and put to use even
an nth of what man is, possibly destined or capable of becoming or doing.
We are only at the crawling stage compared to what I think man or we are
capable of and has the potential to be and become, if and when he/we
ever gits full grown, educated and mature along with wizened
sufficiently to harness and make use of all our abilities and
facilities. ;-)
We ain't much baby, but...
If we can hang in there... Shit! We jest might amount to something one of
these days.
Now don't let thet go giving yew the *big* head thar Frank. Yew neither
Gary. ;-)
CC
jimbo
> I believe this is one case where both genetics and evolution of species
> come into play.
Peoples with a short history of alcohol use in their culture exhibit a
phenomenon known as "flushing" in which the blood pressure rises.
Their metabolism has not evolved to deal with alcohol as has most
Caucasians.
Also, groups which used to only use alcohol for religious ceremony and
who now drink for pleasure will sometimes exhibit this phenomenon.
The best example of this I ever saw was while working in Trinidad. We
were a sub to a Japanese firm that had a contract to do sewer and
water and one night they had a big dinner/meeting with the big shots
from the home office. The dinner/meeting was very subdued with the men
extremely polite and just toasts offered up.
When the big shots left, out came the scotch and coke and I swear I've
never seen a bigger bunch of pukers in my life. I, a drinking
alcoholic was disgusted.
Jim
Sharx35
"mikewestvale" <mikewe...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:737daa97-22ca-408b...@h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
Sadly, most tasty foods are evil for anyone on a weight management program.
SIGH.
mikewestvale
> "mikewestvale" <mikewestv...@gmail.com> wrote in message
I manage to a trim 100 lbs overweight. I swear I could be lots more if
not for the food nazi I am married to.
Sharx35
Well, the charts suggest 185 for me, rather than the 240 I am at. Food is my
only vice. Really.
Ted L.
Gary <yex...@sbell.net> wrote:
> Ted - No I haven't and likely won't because I really can't bring myself
> to put even a suspicous type of credibility to 'divine intervention'.
You can skip those chapter(s) (near the end of the book, if I remember)
and still see if his description of the process of addiction makes sense.
--
Ted L.
Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini.
Ted L.
"Charlie L." <c...@chronocidal-charlie.me> wrote:
> I believe this is one case where both genetics and evolution of species
> come into play. Like you I can't off the top of my head expound on what
> I was taught as far as *some* of the orientals, but I do recall a
> *physical* difference or anomaly as far as an inability to handle or
> tolerate alcohol by the Oriental compared to most so called Caucasian.
As I recall, it is that the oriental (some only?) genetic makeup lacks a
gene involved in the production of some enzyme needed for the processing
of some intermediate toxin produced in the metabolism of alcohol.
Charlie M. 1958
> (primarily) in the brain?
>
I'm not sure I would buy into there being such a thing as a physical
condition or experience which does not involve /both/ brain and body.
Ted L.
Gary <yex...@sbell.net> wrote:
> My hands sweated.
Part of what May talks about ... physical withdrawal symptoms can happen
with *any* kind of addiction. (Identifying your normal way of going to
work as an addiction ... harmless, but an addiction never-the-less.)
F.H.
> Hmmm. I think that all things in the universe are connected is some
> way. I think our connection resides (temporarily) in our brain. The
> evolution goes something like this: consciousness to self consciouness
> to universal consciousness. Universal consciousness would understand
> the connection with all else in the universe and preclude anything from
> being 'other'.
This, IMO, is getting at the wisest, most beneficial, practical way of
looking at the big picture of how things work. In the pursuit of
'knowing peace,' wrapping ones mind around this cognitively is a big
first step. After that I think it has to evolve into a practice of some
sort and the ability to /live/ (in "peace") while surrounded by chaos,
taking comfort in the notion of universal consciousness, living in the
/now/ and 'accepting what is.'
> That includes what might be referred to as God. One might even consider
> that what Jesus was teaching was universal consciousness and if one read
> the gospels (John in particular) as a mystical text rather than a literal
> one, one might see the focus on universal consciousness exemplified by
> the stories which are not literal but symbolic.
"The ultimate leave-taking is the leaving of God for God."
Meister Eckhart.
Gar, this interview has so many goodies I couldn't just pluck a couple.
I've read it before and it always resonated but it seems the more I
play around with these topics the more I appreciate it. Its a keeper, IMO.
http://www.whidbey.com/parrott/toms.htm
> The literal reading makes the story of Jesus quite absurd
> in violation of many laws of nature but taken as mystical teachings
> about universal consciouness and the connection of all to the totality
> of the universe......mystics achieve enlightenment while the rest of us,
> who reside in the dark, go around killing each other not understanding
> we are also killing ourselves in our self conscious state. Imagine.
> (John Lennon)
Clearly it is very difficult for the average guy/gal to get past the
literal interpretation of mythology and into the best part, the true
meaning, the metaphors behind mythology. Ultimately, we must decide for
ourselves and move on.
Tommy
news:2009111919483050073-yexxxx@sbellnet...
> On 2009-11-19 18:04:25 -0600, "F.H." <connec...@verizon.net>
> said:
>
>>
>> Not talking alcohol*ism* just the original pull, the escape, the
>> glow. Does the stress of daily living in a competitive culture
>> throw the 'physiological processes' out of whack and /create/ the
>> need for a mood modifier?
>>
>
> Somewhere..somewhere...I read that American Indians are less
> tolerant of alcohol than whites and more of them become drunks, even
> today. Or Japanese who are also reputed to be less tolerant.
> How does that work in?
Gary, heres a small segment of the Flushing syndrome (ALDH)
This is sometimes referred to as 'oriental flushing syndrome'.
Approximately 50% of Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans are deficient in
ALDH, and this has been reported to be protective against the
development of alcoholism.
Most foods consumed need to be broken down and metabolised by enzymes
once in our body. While some are digested in the stomach and small
intestine before entering our blood system to be carried to their
appropriate location, others are easily absorbed into the blood via
the gastro intestinal track.
Alcohol is readily absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, however,
alcohol is a toxic compound and cannot be stored and therefore, the
body must oxidize it to get rid of it. Alcohol can only be oxidized
in the liver, where enzymes are found to initiate the process. The
enzyme Aldehyde Dehydrogenase (ALDH) metabolises alcohol into acetic
acid (vinegar) a product from which the body can obtain some energy.
Some people have an alteration, called a polymorphism, in the ALDH
gene which renders the enzyme inactive and makes it impossible for
them to convert alcohol into acetic acid. Such persons should avoid
alcohol, although they can enjoy the benefit of the antioxidants found
in non-alcoholic red wine.
The consumption of alcohol can provide histamine and aids in the
release of histamine. Alcohol prevents the breakdown of histamine.
Moreover, histamine shares the same ALDH for its metabolism, hence an
impaired ALDH enzyme will amplify the problem after the ingestion of
alcohol which leads to excess histamine in the system. This leads to
allergy-like symptoms including most notably nasal congestion and mild
flushing of the skin within minutes of ingesting alcohol. Other
side-effects include fluttering of the heart (palpitations,
tachycardia), sensation of heat, headache, abdominal discomfort or a
drop in blood pressure (hypotension) are related to high blood
acetaldehyde levels.
The commonest abnormal reaction to alcohol is seen in persons from an
oriental background, who get flushing, increased heart rate, and
symptoms of reduced blood pressure. This is sometimes referred to as
'oriental flushing syndrome'. Approximately 50% of Chinese, Japanese,
and Koreans are deficient in ALDH, and this has been reported to be
protective against the development of alcoholism.
(I remember doing studies years ago and I'm working from memory here,
but it made sense when I heard it - the water tables in Europe have or
had an effect on our systems aeons ago when we were 'forming' as
humans ???
This water table, I dunno, clean or crystallised water didn't allow us
or did allow us to produce histamines (stinging nettles, and bug bites
come to mind). All very vague so I'll have to chase it down. Now to
you who are more used to seeing indians, they mighn't /appear/ to
have the same features as I see - to me they have a definite Asian
appearence. Finns have it too, Innuit and Sth Americans also, to some
extent. Explanations are what I don't have ??
I met a family in McDonalds earlier today, they were ever so slightly
dark, fully Asiatic, but were from the borders of Bolivia - jet black
oily hair, broad slanted forehead and looked totally Chinese. Very
genteel and timid. They were refugees. None too willing to tell how
the flipping hell they got from Peru to a little Island in the Nth
Atlantic. They threw me - I never would have placed them from Sth
America. What I mean is what do I know :-)
Cheers
Tommy
Tommy
news:TaOdnZ0YX-B9lpvW...@giganews.com...
> damage.
Can't find the part of the thread now where flushing syndrome comes
into it -
But I had stated that it had a bit to do with water - which it had,
but not the way I'd remembered :-)
People who'd lived in cities had no access to fresh or clean water, so
they processed what was available and drank a certain amount of
alcoholic beverages. This evolved into acceptance and tolerance of
alcohol toxins. Those outside the cities had spring and clean river
water, little access to alcohol so they had no experiece of needing
enzymes to break down what they didn't intake. Hence they were devoid
of ALDH to break down the toxins.
Or was it the other way around ie, switch city dwellers to countryside
dwellers
Cheers
Tommy