G.T. Now

[Anonymous]

I would really like to know the reasoning for your obsession to disprove alcoholism as a disease concept.  I know what you will say, that its all about money.  Do you not have a shred of non-cynical reasoning capabilities that you would allow this to sink in?  I mean really, it doesn't affect you so why do you hold on so tightly?  Apparently you are not addicts and you feel you were abused (some 30 years ago), but that does not give you a very good reason for such an inflammed opinion.

[Helena Handbasket]

On 2005-02-02 08:24:00, Anonymous wrote:

"I would really like to know the reasoning for your obsession to disprove alcoholism as a disease concept.  I know what you will say, that its all about money.  Do you not have a shred of non-cynical reasoning capabilities that you would allow this to sink in?  I mean really, it doesn't affect you so why do you hold on so tightly?  Apparently you are not addicts and you feel you were abused (some 30 years ago), but that does not give you a very good reason for such an inflammed opinion."

I'm just obsessed with the truth... and the fact that I have to pay taxes to pay for "treatment" that doesn't work.

[GregFL]

You could make any statement you want anon, and then again, I know this is a foreign concept, but the burden of proof is on you.

Science does not support the disease theory of addiction. I don't believe it. I think it is a dangerous social vehicle for forced treatment.

When real science comes along and can conclusively show it to be true, I will admit I'm wrong.

That good enough for you? In the meanwhile...chew on this.

"The results of this research do not provide ready support for the disease theory of alcoholism. Dr. Vaillant finds that more than half of the alcoholics in the inner city group evolved out of their drinking problems, generally without the assistance of treatment. He finds strong evidence in the inner city group for sociocultural causality in alcoholism. For example, Irish American subjects were seven times more likely to manifest alcohol dependence than subjects of Mediterranean descent. Dr. Vaillant also finds alcoholism running in families, which he uses as evidence of genetic causality, although he concedes that he cannot separate environmental and genetic factors in family similarities. Indeed, he specifically rebuts the idea that those with alcoholic relatives manifest drinking problems at an earlier age, as genetic theories have predicted, saying, "At the present time, a conservative view of the role of genetic factors in alcoholism seems appropriate." However, since Dr. Vaillant reports twice at other points that "genetic factors play a significant role in alcoholism," he creates an impression that is at odds with his own research.Dr. Vaillant can be quoted to good effect on both sides of other issues in alcoholism, including the inflammatory question of controlled drinking. He says, "There appeared to be a point of no return beyond which efforts to return to social drinking became analogous to driving a car without a spare tire. Disaster was simply a matter of time." Yet he uncovers a substantial minority of alcohol abusers who returned to moderate drinking. (Dr. Vaillant actually reports two somewhat different figures for a return to moderate drinking among the inner city group and never gives a figure for the college population.) Alcohol abuse is not the same thing as alcoholism; Dr. Vaillant makes clear that only some alcohol abusers are alcoholics, but he also demonstrates that shadings between these categories are gradual and not well defined. Even so, one-fifth of the returned-to-moderate drinkers Dr. Vaillant finds in his study had been categorized as alcoholic according to psychiatric definitions.... Dr. Vaillant reports that 95 percent of the patients treated at his clinic, where A.A. attendance was compulsory, relapsed following treatment. After two and eight years, they showed no greater progress than comparable groups of untreated alcoholics. In acknowledging this, Dr. Vaillant confronts the dilemma of how to justify his faith in the efficacy of therapy. His resolution is to encourage the therapist not to interfere with the natural healing process."

http://www.peele.net/lib/vaillant.html

[Anonymous]

Truth???  You can't handle the TRUTH!

Sorry Greg, good try, the burdon of proof is on YOU.  You cannot prove that alcoholism is NOT a disease.  All you provide are opinions.

[GregFL]

And here is suggested reading for you..however one word of caution...it is probably not on the "arrpoved book" list of GT.


http://www.peele.net/lib/diseasing.html

comments on the book

"Commonly accepted ideas about alcoholism and other addictions are almost entirely without scientific basis. ?Neil A. Kurtzman, M.D., Arnett Professor of Medicine, and Chairman, Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center.

"Peele makes it abundantly clear that the disease model of addiction, the ideology that currently reigns over the American addiction treatment industry, is basically an emperor without clothes. By placing addictive behaviors in the context of other problems of living, Peele emphasizes personal responsibility for one's habits. His views, well documented with timely references to new scientific data, contrasts sharply with the biological determinism of the disease model, ?G. Alan Marlatt, Ph.D., Director, Addictive Behaviors Research Center,


"A courageous indictment of the destructive mindset that all deviant behavior is a disease. Peele offers mindful alternatives to those suffering from addictions and to professionals seeking to help them."
?Ellen Langer, Ph.D., professor of psychology, Harvard University, and author of Mindfulness

"Stanton Peele is the latest in a long and worthy line of American contrarians unwilling to accept the status quo, especially when it is the product of wishful thinking, not empirical research. In this book, Peele challenges us to examine our most fervently held beliefs on the causes and cures of the addictive disorders?and urges us to modify them, when the impelling logic of the data demands."
?Peter E. Nathan, Ph.D., Starr Professor and Director, Center of Alcohol Studies, Rutgers University.

"Peele's is a voice of sanity on a topic where confusion and false doctrine reign today. His book addresses a subject of urgent importance in America. Peele brings to the task many years of expertise, as well as plenty of common-sense insight. It should have a major influence in redefining America's views on alcoholism and addiction generally."
?Herbert Fingarette, Ph.D., professor of philosophy, University of California

[GregFL]

On 2005-02-02 08:36:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Truth???  You can't handle the TRUTH!



Sorry Greg, good try, the burdon of proof is on YOU.  You cannot prove that alcoholism is NOT a disease.  All you provide are opinions."

Hehehe...you really believe that is the way things work, you make a claim and then if it can't be disproved, it is true?

Okay using your logic. I will make a statement and put the burden on you to disprove it. If you can't, than its true.

"an invisible monster lives on Venus and eats rocks".

Go ahead, disprove it or its true!

[Anonymous]

why didn't you disclose the forward of the origional article you posted?  Does not support your expert?

"Foreword (1996) - Stanton's review of George Vaillant's "The Natural History of Alcoholism" revealed that the emperor was naked, and that the book was intellectually dishonest. Vaillant systematically created summaries that disputed his own data, while citing cases selectively to try to support what he perceived to be the safe positions to take. As a result of Stanton's review, Dr. Vaillant has for over a dozen years systematically attacked Stanton in speeches and workshops he gives around the nation, trying to square the circle by compulsively reinterpreting his (Vaillant's) data to show that alcoholics never resume controlled drinking."

What was that, "intellectially dishonest"?

[Helena Handbasket]

On 2005-02-02 08:36:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Truth???  You can't handle the TRUTH!



Sorry Greg, good try, the burdon of proof is on YOU.  You cannot prove that alcoholism is NOT a disease.  All you provide are opinions."

This is getting ridiculous.  You've been given actual science performed by professional researchers, and it's YOU who refuse to believe.

You expect everyone else to have an open mind, yet you rebut everything with a personal attack.

It's a free country, guy.  If you want to live your life in a virtual prison of being told how to live, unable to make your own choices, that's fine by me.

You have the info.  Do with it what you will.

[GregFL]

On 2005-02-02 08:41:00, Anonymous wrote:

"why didn't you disclose the forward of the origional article you posted?  Does not support your expert?



"Foreword (1996) - Stanton's review of George Vaillant's "The Natural History of Alcoholism" revealed that the emperor was naked, and that the book was intellectually dishonest. Vaillant systematically created summaries that disputed his own data, while citing cases selectively to try to support what he perceived to be the safe positions to take. As a result of Stanton's review, Dr. Vaillant has for over a dozen years systematically attacked Stanton in speeches and workshops he gives around the nation, trying to square the circle by compulsively reinterpreting his (Vaillant's) data to show that alcoholics never resume controlled drinking."



What was that, "intellectially dishonest"?



"

You are joking, right?  That further proves my point.

Do you have a problem with comprehension? So far, you are you own worst enemy in this debate.

 :grin:

[Anonymous]

Show me the "scientific research" that you talk about.  You have only shown me opinions.  Not one hard fact that disproves the claim of disease, not one.
Yes I find it ridiculous as well.  I have a personal stake in this, you just have an axe to grind.

[Anonymous]

Greg, you are wrong...again!

[Helena Handbasket]

On 2005-02-02 08:46:00, Anonymous wrote:

"Show me the "scientific research" that you talk about.  You have only shown me opinions.  Not one hard fact that disproves the claim of disease, not one.

Yes I find it ridiculous as well.  I have a personal stake in this, you just have an axe to grind."

Did you miss something?  I gave you this:
http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?to ... t=20#80022

And Greg gave you stuff from Peele and others.

[Anonymous]

You want proof?  Here it is!

http://my.webmd.com/content/article/87/99592.htm

[Helena Handbasket]

On 2005-02-02 08:52:00, Anonymous wrote:

"You want proof?  Here it is!



http://my.webmd.com/content/article/87/99592.htm"

This proves a LINK to an alcohol PREFERENCE.

If you drink, and you get drunk, and it's making it so you can't function - PUT THE GODDAMNED BOTTLE DOWN!  Christ, is that so hard!?

I hate to think that you're kid is in GT because YOU had problems with booze, and you're hoping for some kind of vaccine.

[Anonymous]

What Is Alcoholism?

Alcoholism, also known as ?alcohol dependence,? is a disease that includes four symptoms:

? Craving: A strong need, or compulsion, to drink.

? Loss of control: The inability to limit one?s drinking on any given occasion.

? Physical dependence: Withdrawal symptoms, such as nausea, sweating, shakiness, and anxiety, occur when alcohol use is stopped after a period of heavy drinking.

? Tolerance: The need to drink greater amounts of alcohol in order to ?get high.?

People who are not alcoholic sometimes do not understand why an alcoholic can?t just ?use a little willpower? to stop drinking. However, alcoholism has little to do with willpower. Alcoholics are in the grip of a powerful ?craving,? or uncontrollable need, for alcohol that overrides their ability to stop drinking. This need can be as strong as the need for food or water.

Although some people are able to recover from alcoholism without help, the majority of alcoholics need assistance. With treatment and support, many individuals are able to stop drinking and rebuild their lives.

Many people wonder why some individuals can use alcohol without problems but others cannot. One important reason has to do with genetics. Scientists have found that having an alcoholic family member makes it more likely that if you choose to drink you too may develop alcoholism. Genes, however, are not the whole story. In fact, scientists now believe that certain factors in a person?s environment influence whether a person with a genetic risk for alcoholism ever develops the disease. A person?s risk for developing alcoholism can increase based on the person?s environment, including where and how he or she lives; family, friends, and culture; peer pressure; and even how easy it is to get alcohol.