Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > The Ridge Creek School / Hidden Lake Academy
Funny article
Anonymous:
the facts about genetic disposition to alchohol are wildly misconstrued. The genetic disposition has nothing to do with your ability to choose not to drink over drinking.
Certain groups of people [e.g. native americans] have a higher incidence of a gene which impedes the digestion of alchohol. their bodies are simply not as good at processing alchohol in comparison to for example southern europeans. there is a good reason, and it has everything to do with evolution. europeans, along with some africans and central asians have been drinking ever since civilization popped up, therefore we have had time over hundreds of generations to evolve a level of alchohol tolerance. [most] native americans on the other hand, were introduced to alchohol only a few centuries ago. they are about as good as a european toddler at processing alchohol. What does this mean? well it means native americans get drunker faster, and their brains and livers are affected by constant consuption much much faster. this is very simmilar to the cocaine/crack cocaine thing. snorted cocaine is addictive, but no where near to the degree of crack, becouse the high comes on slower, is less intense, and doesnt affect you as much, as addictive as it is people dont have anywhere near as much trouble quitting it than crack, becouse the high is more intense, even though technically it's the [nearly] same substance. same thing with native americans and alchohol, it's the same substance but the way it passes through their bodies makes the alchohol affect them more.
am i making sense or should i dig up references?
also keep in mind there is more than one guest....could be 50+ regular posters staying anon
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: ""Guest"" ---the facts about genetic disposition to alchohol are wildly misconstrued. The genetic disposition has nothing to do with your ability to choose not to drink over drinking.
Certain groups of people [e.g. native americans] have a higher incidence of a gene which impedes the digestion of alchohol. their bodies are simply not as good at processing alchohol in comparison to for example southern europeans. there is a good reason, and it has everything to do with evolution. europeans, along with some africans and central asians have been drinking ever since civilization popped up, therefore we have had time over hundreds of generations to evolve a level of alchohol tolerance. [most] native americans on the other hand, were introduced to alchohol only a few centuries ago. they are about as good as a european toddler at processing alchohol. What does this mean? well it means native americans get drunker faster, and their brains and livers are affected by constant consuption much much faster. this is very simmilar to the cocaine/crack cocaine thing. snorted cocaine is addictive, but no where near to the degree of crack, becouse the high comes on slower, is less intense, and doesnt affect you as much, as addictive as it is people dont have anywhere near as much trouble quitting it than crack, becouse the high is more intense, even though technically it's the [nearly] same substance. same thing with native americans and alchohol, it's the same substance but the way it passes through their bodies makes the alchohol affect them more.
am i making sense or should i dig up references?
also keep in mind there is more than one guest....could be 50+ regular posters staying anon
--- End quote ---
I did reference it. I posted the link and the text which SHH has chosen to ignore. I don't know what more I can say. The piece I linked to specifically addressed those Native Americans she speaks of.
Is it me?
Anonymous:
--- Quote from: ""SH"" ---My mother lives next door to a Cherokee Indian Reservation. She has seen first hand the number of alcoholics in proportion to the rest of the population, in comparison to european americans. I am sure your comments you copied and posted will fall on deaf ears to those who live with alcoholism on the reservation. What do you propose? That these Cherokee peoples just want to drink themselves to death? I don't think so.
--- End quote ---
Again, you must have a problem with reading for comprehension. I propose the following:
1. Personal Responsibility
2. http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-addmonst.html
3. A release from the Dogma that is AA and it's kin
4. Parenting (Personal Responsibility)
Been drinking tonight? You're not paying attention.
Deborah:
--- Quote from: ""SH"" ---The last time I checked the clinical field does consider addiction as a disease. Of course, one has a choice to pick up the bottle or snort the cocaine or pop the pills, but, they consider it a disease because an addict is not capable or does not have the normal ability to say no. Their body thinks it cannot live without the drug/alcohol/nicotine/etc. I have never felt the urge to do something so overwhelming that I couldn't quit, but I have friends who have had to seek professional help, and I can tell you that they don't feel they had a "choice". They felt the addiction consumed them. The statement in the post several posts back about addiction not being a disease is false.
--- End quote ---
All bullshit.
Diseases are medical conditions.
I don't mean to minimize how hard it is for some to use moderation, or the difficulty some experience who try to stop altering their reality, but the misuse of mind altering substances is NOT A DISEASE. There is no genetic link.
They were classified as "disease" so "helpers" could be paid by insurance companies for their "addiction services".
Honestly, How many kids who attend HLA are ADDICTS? How many have/had a "real" drug/alcohol problem?
I'm guessing none, or a very few. They aren't equiped to deal with a truely addicted person. How many are rushed to the hospital for withdrawal symptoms? How many are on Methadone?
I happen to know a person who had smoked pot and abused alcohol on a daily basis for several years. Zero physical withdrawal symptoms except the emotions that he was attempting to avoid dealing with. He did report that those on 'hard' drugs and true alcoholics had a rough time detoxing. Physically ill and were never left alone during detox in case there was an emergency.
Substance abuse and detoxing are NOT DISEASES.
Given that, should what they offer at HLA be called "Addiction" treatment? How about "AA groups offered for pot/drug/alcohol use"?
"Addiction" fits better with the fear mongering agenda. And, by golly, allows HLAs service to be paid by insurance.
They probably don't feel their people need to be certified, or their program licensed because they're basically running an AA group with some good ol new-agey CEDU group confrontation thrown in. Appears that damn near anyone's qualified to do that.
How many go right back to their "habits" when they leave? How many leave and try all the drugs they learned about in HLA? That's what the discerning parent wants to know. What are they spending $100k+ on? A miracle. Sorry to say.... ain't gonna happen. Read MySpace.
Anonymous:
The opinion which you share with us here and the post you copied and pasted (I didnt read EVERY line of each link, sorry I dont have that kind of time on my hands), is one opinion out of many who study addiction. Here are a few links to what I have been trying to get across on here:
http://www.indiana.edu/~rcapub/v17n3/p18.html
http://www.guilford.edu/original/Academ ... gwalt.html
http://vltakaliseji.tripod.com/Vtlakaliseji/id20.html
http://tinyurl.com/2bahxz
I am not trying to say that these studies are infallible. Neither is the other side of the debate infallible. But, leave it open to the possibility that genetics play a role in whether or not a person has a predisposition to become an alcoholic. I am not convinced that some alcoholics are just lazy and could put down the bottle if they wanted to. Some would love nothing better, but, lack the ability to whether it be psychological or biological.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version