Alcoholism - the volitional disease

by Officer S Garry Nowak. Holden Police Department, Massachusetts

Alcoholism is not a disease with an invasive pathology, nor is it a
disease of genetics gone awry. Alcoholism has nothing to do with
irresistible impulses or uncontrollable urges. Alcoholism is a disease
of volition.

Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there is an invasive
pathology present where none exists. Calling alcoholism a disease
infers the possibility of a heritable genetic lineage with a
predetermined immutable eventuality where no such heritable genetic
link has been proven. Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there
is a medicinal cure when no amount of medicine or counseling can cure
this 'disease.'

Calling alcoholism a disease exonerates the alcoholic from all
responsibility and accountability for his/her drinking and subsequent
misbehavior(s). Calling alcoholism a disease tends to impede the
motivation and the desire to change within the alcoholic for everyone
knows that one is not responsible for possessing a disease. When one
possesses a disease everyone readily acknowledges the lack of
volitional control. Alcoholism ceases to exist when the alcoholic
volitionally chooses to stop drinking. Alcoholism ends when the
alcoholic is motivated to change his/her drinking pattern. It never
ends through force and/or coercion.

The one common prerequisite for all psycho therapeutic modalities is
for the client to possess the desire and motivation to change oneself.
Desire alone, inspires the motivation to change. Without desire and
motivation change is not possible. If rehabilitational therapeutic
modalities could force or coerce change without desire and motivation
being present within the individual, then our prison systems would
release convicts who would subsequently be honest and decent citizens.
Our schools would produce straight 'A' students and alcoholism
(addictions) would be a thing of the past. But in spite of our
best-coerced efforts, we continue to release criminals from our
prisons, students who fail, and alcoholism flourishes. Why is this?

One reason is that our legislators passed the Americans With
Disabilities Act (ADA). In so doing, their compassion has produced far
more cruelty than it has humanity. This bit of legislation was
intended to protect the blind, the deaf, and those in wheelchairs.
These intended beneficiaries never received any assistance from this
legislation. Why? Because the word 'disability' was redefined by the
courts to include: alcoholics, drug addicts, the obese, math phobic's,
etc. The ADA actually hurt those who were intended to be protected by
it.

This piece of compassionate legislation has more than likely
interfered with the natural progression of alcoholism. Alcoholics are
no longer allowed to 'hit rock bottom.' Historically, 'hitting rock
bottom' has been the common element among those who have volitionally
changed their drinking patterns. This piece of compassionate
legislation has removed that common element which has always been
considered the primary incentive required for volitional change; i.e.,
the right to fail.

What this piece of compassionate legislation did do is to bestow all
the 'benefits and rights' of the truly disabled upon those who are
merely volitionally disabled. By bestowing these benefits and rights
of the truly disabled upon alcoholics, the legislature has reinforced
the disease mentality of helplessness, powerlessness, and the
inevitability of relapse. The word 'disease' becomes forever
associated with that which is beyond one's volitional control. This
piece of legislation reinforces the disease construct that
compassionately associates perpetual failure upon the alcoholic. With
this mentality, the alcoholic is not only forever doomed to consume
alcohol, but is forgiven and exonerated for doing so. This piece of
compassionate legislation prevents the primary motivating element for
change ever to be discovered by the alcoholic on his/her own, via what
the alcoholic does best, drink alcohol.

One of the truly great ironies of alcoholism is how we treat
alcoholics. Medicine and Doctors have virtually nothing to offer an
alcohol. Doctors send alcoholics to Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), whether
they (the alcoholic) wants to go or not. The courts, our jails and
prisons, employers, conditions of parole/probation, et.al., all force
and/or coerce an alcoholic into attending AA. Why? Because AA
represents the only acceptable course of treatment for the alcoholic
in the United States. AA alone has the answer. To even consider any
other therapeutic course of treatment is laughable. So what is the
foundation upon which AA is laid?

Bill W. and Dr. Bob were the founders of AA, but Bill W. was probably
the more influential of the two. Bill W. wrote AA's The Big Book and
AA's infamous Twelve Steps after experiencing a spiritual awakening
while undergoing a hospitalized treatment for his alcoholism. Bill W.
also readily acknowledged that AA was modeled after the Oxford Group
Movement. The Oxford Group Movement was led by Dr. Frank Buchman, a
very charismatic leader, as are all cult leaders. Buchman and his
groupers were not in the business of converting heathens to
Christianity. What they did do is to subversively and deceitfully
'steal' those Christians from their own church.

Dr. Buchman was never secretive about his possessing superior
knowledge and abilities. He readily admitted, and his followers
readily acknowledged, that Buchman knew what was best for society. The
Oxford Group Movement subscribed to the 'any means justifies the end'
philosophy. Dr. Buchman once stated in an interview that the world
would be a far better place it were led by a leader such as Adolf
Hitler. Buchman was quoted: "I thank heaven for a man like Adolf
Hitler . . ." Dr. Buchman and his Oxford Group Movement were so
despised by the American public that they were forced to change their
name to the Moral Rearmament and subsequently they had to go
underground. This is the philosophical foundation of AA.

AA's infamous Twelve Steps has just as interesting a foundation. Bill
W. was hospitalized for alcoholism. During this hospitalization, he
was treated by Dr. Silkworth with Dr. Silkworth's own belladonna cure.
This was a standard treatment for alcoholism at that time. The
belladonna cure consisted of a blend of morphine, belladonna, henbane
and other hallucinogenic drugs. Any of these drugs individually are
powerful hallucinogens, let alone the synergistic effect of such a
combination. It was while under the influence of this hallucinogenic
cure that Bill W. had his white light experience.' This was his
religious epiphany. Bill W. describes this experience: "I found myself
crying out, "If there is a God, let Him show Himself! I am ready to do
anything!" Suddenly, the room lit up with a great white light . . .
All about me there was a wonderful feeling of Presence, and I thought
to myself, "So, this is the God of the Preachers." This was the
'divine' inspiration for Bill W. to write The Big Book and AA's Twelve
Steps. While writing the Twelve Steps, Bill W. arbitrarily decided to
stop at twelve steps because there were twelve apostles. This is the
scientific foundation upon which AA is premised. AA is the modality
upon which 93% of the addictive treatment programs have modeled
themselves.

The construct of disease theory alcoholism is closer to being a
religion than it is to being a disease. Why do I say this? Because in
order to believe in the different tenets of disease theory alcoholism,
similar to religion, you must have faith. None of the tenets of
disease theory alcoholism have ever been supported by scientific or
doctoral level research. It is faith alone which allows these tenets
to exist. If you support disease theory alcoholism, you have to have
faith and believe in the following:


Alcoholism can afflict anyone regardless of race, creed, religion,
etc. This is not true. Alcoholism is statistically so low in Jews,
Cantonese Chinese, and Amish that it is safe to say that alcoholism
does not exist in those cultures. Why? Because studies show that where
either a strong religious base where alcoholism is not accepted or a
cultural base where alcoholism is not accepted, alcoholism simply does
not exist. It may sound simplistic but it is true.

There are no protective factors against alcoholism - everyone is a
potential alcoholic. This is not true. As shown by Jews, Cantonese
Chinese, and Amish, a strong religious or cultural grouping that
refuses to support the tenets of disease theory alcoholism offers very
protective factors against alcoholism since alcoholism is non-existent
in those religions/cultures. Also, by definition, if alcoholism is a
heritable, genetic trait, then there will be those who do not possess
that heritable, genetic trait. Therefore, those who do not possess the
gene for alcoholism would in fact possess a protective factor against
alcoholism. This tenet contradicts other tenets of disease theory
alcoholism.

Alcoholism is genetic. Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa Indians are
considered to be genetically similar if not identical regarding
alcoholism. Why? Because both of these cultural peoples manifest a
'Chinese flush' after consuming alcohol; i.e., a reddening of the
face. If alcoholism is genetic; and if both of these cultural peoples
are genetically similar then both groups should suffer similar rates
of alcoholism. Yet, alcoholism is nonexistent within the Cantonese
Chinese while absolutely decimating the Ojibwa Indians. What is the
difference in belief systems? The Ojibwa Indians believe that alcohol
is stronger than a parent's love of his/her child while the Cantonese
Chinese believe that drunken misbehavior is a manifestation of one's
personality regardless of one's sobriety. The individual takes
responsibility for his/her behavior whether sober or inebriated.

Alcoholism is heritable. This tenet completely disregards learned
behavior; i.e., a child learns how to drink from parents, role models,
peers, etc. IF alcoholism were a 10% heritable or genetic trait, then
it would be immutable. Why? Because genetics cannot be changed
volitionally and statistically 85% of all alcoholics volitionally stop
their alcohol consumption without any outside interventions,
therapies, hospitalizations, etc. One cannot volitionally change their
eye color, hair color, or skin color volitionally, yet alcoholism has
a significantly higher success rate through volition than through any
other means. There is no research that scientifically supports
alcoholism as being heritable.

What is the possibility that alcoholism is genetic and heritable? Per
the Human Genome Project, there are 80,000 genes with approximately 3
billion different interacting combinations that exist in the human
genome (the sum total of heritable, genetic material in a human
being). Even the proponents of disease theory alcoholism have
acknowledged that finding the gene that causes alcoholism would be
like finding the gene that causes one to like basketball. The idea
that alcoholism is 100% genetic and heritable is highly unlikely by
all studies and statistics.

Loss of control. Studies have consistently shown that alcoholics drink
to achieve a certain level of intoxication that they personally find
desirable. Alcoholics will alter their drinking pattern (consume less)
if so doing benefits them. By definition, IF alcoholism were a disease
that was truly an irresistible impulse of uncontrollability then
alcoholics would consistently drink until they are unconscious or
until they overdosed on alcohol. That is simply not true.

Denial. A major tenet of disease theory alcoholism is denial. Denial
is an unconscious defense mechanism that in theory is implemented to
protect the ego from unpleasantness. If one is to believe in denial
then one has to believe that in spite of everything that is obvious
and negative in an alcoholic's life; i.e., divorce, loss of
employment, loss of family, medical problems, legal problems, etc.,
the alcoholic is incapable of associating these negatives in his/her
life with his/her consumption of alcohol. Even AA's Big Book addresses
this as conscious lying, not denial. Also, it has to be noted that a
typical alcoholic is not the stereotypical skid row type.
Statistically, alcoholics are slightly smarter than average, hold
better jobs, hold professional jobs, managerial positions, etc. Yet,
according to this tenet of alcoholism they are not smart enough to
associate the obvious negative aspects of their lives with their
consumption of alcohol.

There is a chemical imbalance of the brain. This is one of the newer
theories pertaining to disease alcoholism. It is questionable how
there can be an imbalance of the brain when there are no standards of
what a chemically balanced brain is; i.e., what chemicals comprise a
balanced brain in terms of percentages or weights, qualities,
quantities, etc. What is a normal, chemically balanced brain? It is
assumed that a brain becomes 'balanced' when drugs alleviate symptoms.
The alleviation of symptoms never includes the adverse side effects of
the prescriptive drug. Side effects may include one or any combination
of dry mouth, drooling, diarrhea, constipation, sleep disturbance,
eating disorders, sexual dysfunction just to name a few. Yet
proponents of this theoretical construct do not look at these very
serious side effects as being included as an imbalance of brain
chemistry.

Neurotransmitters. This is another new theoretical construct of
disease alcoholism. This theory proposes that neurotransmitters such
as dopamine and/or seratonin become particularly influenced towards
alcohol consumption; i.e., these neurotransmitters require alcohol in
order to trigger their function within the body. What this theory
fails to address is how a generic neurotransmitter such as dopamine
(the continuum of pleasure) or seratonin (the continuum of mood,
affect and sleep) become highly specific and targeted towards
alcoholism? There is merely associative, anecdotal evidence to support
this tenet of alcoholism. Also, this theory fails to address how
genetically similar people such as Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa
Indians can be so different in terms of the effects of alcohol and
alcoholism yet be genetically similar? This theory implies that if a
Jew becomes an alcoholic, then his neurotransmitters or brain
chemistry has spontaneously become altered. Not only is this not a
compelling theory, it tends to contradict itself.

Brain Waves or images. No similar brain waves have been found between
different alcoholics. All brain waves appear to be more similar to
fingerprints; i.e., each person's brain waves are unique unto
themselves.

Addictive Personality. Addictive personality is defined as having an
existing premorbid condition prior to the onset of alcoholism. There
are no studies that have found any existing premorbid condition prior
to the onset of alcoholism among alcoholics. Therefore, this tenet of
disease alcoholism falls flat. There does not appear to be any such
entity as an addictive personality. This is a media construct, not a
scientifically based construct.

It the first drink that gets you drunk. An AA aphorism meaning that
once an alcoholic consumes the first drink, he/she is then an
alcoholic. This is not true. This is not even supported by proponents
of disease theory alcoholism. Even the proponents of disease theory
alcoholism acknowledge that alcoholism takes at least several years to
develop. There is no scientific foundation or substantiation for this
saying.

Alcoholism is a behavior. Behaviors are not disease entities, they are
bad habits perseverated by obsessive repetition and habituation.
Habituated, substance induced behaviors cannot be reduced to a single
etiology anymore than non-substance induced behaviors can be reduced
to a single etiology. Sex, eating, gambling, computers, computer
games, and unrequited love are normative behaviors that have been
declared diseases. Sex, gambling, computers, computer games, and
unrequited love do not involve the ingestion of any substance yet
abstinence from these habituated behaviors may incite withdrawal
symptoms identical to substance withdrawal symptoms. The answer to the
eradication of alcoholism lies in our national perspective of
alcoholism. Do we want to perpetuate the myth of alcoholism being a
disease entity that is out of the realm of one's discretional,
volitional control or do we tell the truth? Do we let the dirty secret
out of the bag and tell everyone that, like Dorothy in the Wizard of
Oz, they already possess the power to hold dominion over alcoholism.

Web links:

http://www.alcoholicscandrinksafelya...newpage11.html

http://www.holdenpd.com/alcohol.html

My personal opinion is that Alcoholism is a choice and not a disease. No
one ever forced me to drink nor was drinking ever not a decision that I
made. Even when knowing the outcome, I still chose and that puts the same
entity in control of my recovery.

ME...

I am not a victim, nor am I powerless. I will not accept the disease
concept nor that I have no control over my recovery without GOD.

Penn and Teller have a show on Showtime called "BullSh*t". Watch the one on
12 step programs if you get a chance. Makes more sense to me than the 12
steps. One step:

Stop drinking or doing drugs... Yourself... You are in control and charge
of your own life.

Whatever works for you is great. Just change your life because whether you
use AA or not, you are the one that makes the difference.

Of course, this is simply my opinion...

Kirk S.
"Alcocure" <alcocure@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39516dcd.0409301148.e505e63@posting.google.co m...
> Alcoholism - the volitional disease
>
> by Officer S Garry Nowak. Holden Police Department, Massachusetts
>
> Alcoholism is not a disease with an invasive pathology, nor is it a
> disease of genetics gone awry. Alcoholism has nothing to do with
> irresistible impulses or uncontrollable urges. Alcoholism is a disease
> of volition.
>
> Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there is an invasive
> pathology present where none exists. Calling alcoholism a disease
> infers the possibility of a heritable genetic lineage with a
> predetermined immutable eventuality where no such heritable genetic
> link has been proven. Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there
> is a medicinal cure when no amount of medicine or counseling can cure
> this 'disease.'
>
> Calling alcoholism a disease exonerates the alcoholic from all
> responsibility and accountability for his/her drinking and subsequent
> misbehavior(s). Calling alcoholism a disease tends to impede the
> motivation and the desire to change within the alcoholic for everyone
> knows that one is not responsible for possessing a disease. When one
> possesses a disease everyone readily acknowledges the lack of
> volitional control. Alcoholism ceases to exist when the alcoholic
> volitionally chooses to stop drinking. Alcoholism ends when the
> alcoholic is motivated to change his/her drinking pattern. It never
> ends through force and/or coercion.
>
> The one common prerequisite for all psycho therapeutic modalities is
> for the client to possess the desire and motivation to change oneself.
> Desire alone, inspires the motivation to change. Without desire and
> motivation change is not possible. If rehabilitational therapeutic
> modalities could force or coerce change without desire and motivation
> being present within the individual, then our prison systems would
> release convicts who would subsequently be honest and decent citizens.
> Our schools would produce straight 'A' students and alcoholism
> (addictions) would be a thing of the past. But in spite of our
> best-coerced efforts, we continue to release criminals from our
> prisons, students who fail, and alcoholism flourishes. Why is this?
>
> One reason is that our legislators passed the Americans With
> Disabilities Act (ADA). In so doing, their compassion has produced far
> more cruelty than it has humanity. This bit of legislation was
> intended to protect the blind, the deaf, and those in wheelchairs.
> These intended beneficiaries never received any assistance from this
> legislation. Why? Because the word 'disability' was redefined by the
> courts to include: alcoholics, drug addicts, the obese, math phobic's,
> etc. The ADA actually hurt those who were intended to be protected by
> it.
>
> This piece of compassionate legislation has more than likely
> interfered with the natural progression of alcoholism. Alcoholics are
> no longer allowed to 'hit rock bottom.' Historically, 'hitting rock
> bottom' has been the common element among those who have volitionally
> changed their drinking patterns. This piece of compassionate
> legislation has removed that common element which has always been
> considered the primary incentive required for volitional change; i.e.,
> the right to fail.
>
> What this piece of compassionate legislation did do is to bestow all
> the 'benefits and rights' of the truly disabled upon those who are
> merely volitionally disabled. By bestowing these benefits and rights
> of the truly disabled upon alcoholics, the legislature has reinforced
> the disease mentality of helplessness, powerlessness, and the
> inevitability of relapse. The word 'disease' becomes forever
> associated with that which is beyond one's volitional control. This
> piece of legislation reinforces the disease construct that
> compassionately associates perpetual failure upon the alcoholic. With
> this mentality, the alcoholic is not only forever doomed to consume
> alcohol, but is forgiven and exonerated for doing so. This piece of
> compassionate legislation prevents the primary motivating element for
> change ever to be discovered by the alcoholic on his/her own, via what
> the alcoholic does best, drink alcohol.
>
> One of the truly great ironies of alcoholism is how we treat
> alcoholics. Medicine and Doctors have virtually nothing to offer an
> alcohol. Doctors send alcoholics to Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), whether
> they (the alcoholic) wants to go or not. The courts, our jails and
> prisons, employers, conditions of parole/probation, et.al., all force
> and/or coerce an alcoholic into attending AA. Why? Because AA
> represents the only acceptable course of treatment for the alcoholic
> in the United States. AA alone has the answer. To even consider any
> other therapeutic course of treatment is laughable. So what is the
> foundation upon which AA is laid?
>
> Bill W. and Dr. Bob were the founders of AA, but Bill W. was probably
> the more influential of the two. Bill W. wrote AA's The Big Book and
> AA's infamous Twelve Steps after experiencing a spiritual awakening
> while undergoing a hospitalized treatment for his alcoholism. Bill W.
> also readily acknowledged that AA was modeled after the Oxford Group
> Movement. The Oxford Group Movement was led by Dr. Frank Buchman, a
> very charismatic leader, as are all cult leaders. Buchman and his
> groupers were not in the business of converting heathens to
> Christianity. What they did do is to subversively and deceitfully
> 'steal' those Christians from their own church.
>
> Dr. Buchman was never secretive about his possessing superior
> knowledge and abilities. He readily admitted, and his followers
> readily acknowledged, that Buchman knew what was best for society. The
> Oxford Group Movement subscribed to the 'any means justifies the end'
> philosophy. Dr. Buchman once stated in an interview that the world
> would be a far better place it were led by a leader such as Adolf
> Hitler. Buchman was quoted: "I thank heaven for a man like Adolf
> Hitler . . ." Dr. Buchman and his Oxford Group Movement were so
> despised by the American public that they were forced to change their
> name to the Moral Rearmament and subsequently they had to go
> underground. This is the philosophical foundation of AA.
>
> AA's infamous Twelve Steps has just as interesting a foundation. Bill
> W. was hospitalized for alcoholism. During this hospitalization, he
> was treated by Dr. Silkworth with Dr. Silkworth's own belladonna cure.
> This was a standard treatment for alcoholism at that time. The
> belladonna cure consisted of a blend of morphine, belladonna, henbane
> and other hallucinogenic drugs. Any of these drugs individually are
> powerful hallucinogens, let alone the synergistic effect of such a
> combination. It was while under the influence of this hallucinogenic
> cure that Bill W. had his white light experience.' This was his
> religious epiphany. Bill W. describes this experience: "I found myself
> crying out, "If there is a God, let Him show Himself! I am ready to do
> anything!" Suddenly, the room lit up with a great white light . . .
> All about me there was a wonderful feeling of Presence, and I thought
> to myself, "So, this is the God of the Preachers." This was the
> 'divine' inspiration for Bill W. to write The Big Book and AA's Twelve
> Steps. While writing the Twelve Steps, Bill W. arbitrarily decided to
> stop at twelve steps because there were twelve apostles. This is the
> scientific foundation upon which AA is premised. AA is the modality
> upon which 93% of the addictive treatment programs have modeled
> themselves.
>
> The construct of disease theory alcoholism is closer to being a
> religion than it is to being a disease. Why do I say this? Because in
> order to believe in the different tenets of disease theory alcoholism,
> similar to religion, you must have faith. None of the tenets of
> disease theory alcoholism have ever been supported by scientific or
> doctoral level research. It is faith alone which allows these tenets
> to exist. If you support disease theory alcoholism, you have to have
> faith and believe in the following:
>
>
> Alcoholism can afflict anyone regardless of race, creed, religion,
> etc. This is not true. Alcoholism is statistically so low in Jews,
> Cantonese Chinese, and Amish that it is safe to say that alcoholism
> does not exist in those cultures. Why? Because studies show that where
> either a strong religious base where alcoholism is not accepted or a
> cultural base where alcoholism is not accepted, alcoholism simply does
> not exist. It may sound simplistic but it is true.
>
> There are no protective factors against alcoholism - everyone is a
> potential alcoholic. This is not true. As shown by Jews, Cantonese
> Chinese, and Amish, a strong religious or cultural grouping that
> refuses to support the tenets of disease theory alcoholism offers very
> protective factors against alcoholism since alcoholism is non-existent
> in those religions/cultures. Also, by definition, if alcoholism is a
> heritable, genetic trait, then there will be those who do not possess
> that heritable, genetic trait. Therefore, those who do not possess the
> gene for alcoholism would in fact possess a protective factor against
> alcoholism. This tenet contradicts other tenets of disease theory
> alcoholism.
>
> Alcoholism is genetic. Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa Indians are
> considered to be genetically similar if not identical regarding
> alcoholism. Why? Because both of these cultural peoples manifest a
> 'Chinese flush' after consuming alcohol; i.e., a reddening of the
> face. If alcoholism is genetic; and if both of these cultural peoples
> are genetically similar then both groups should suffer similar rates
> of alcoholism. Yet, alcoholism is nonexistent within the Cantonese
> Chinese while absolutely decimating the Ojibwa Indians. What is the
> difference in belief systems? The Ojibwa Indians believe that alcohol
> is stronger than a parent's love of his/her child while the Cantonese
> Chinese believe that drunken misbehavior is a manifestation of one's
> personality regardless of one's sobriety. The individual takes
> responsibility for his/her behavior whether sober or inebriated.
>
> Alcoholism is heritable. This tenet completely disregards learned
> behavior; i.e., a child learns how to drink from parents, role models,
> peers, etc. IF alcoholism were a 10% heritable or genetic trait, then
> it would be immutable. Why? Because genetics cannot be changed
> volitionally and statistically 85% of all alcoholics volitionally stop
> their alcohol consumption without any outside interventions,
> therapies, hospitalizations, etc. One cannot volitionally change their
> eye color, hair color, or skin color volitionally, yet alcoholism has
> a significantly higher success rate through volition than through any
> other means. There is no research that scientifically supports
> alcoholism as being heritable.
>
> What is the possibility that alcoholism is genetic and heritable? Per
> the Human Genome Project, there are 80,000 genes with approximately 3
> billion different interacting combinations that exist in the human
> genome (the sum total of heritable, genetic material in a human
> being). Even the proponents of disease theory alcoholism have
> acknowledged that finding the gene that causes alcoholism would be
> like finding the gene that causes one to like basketball. The idea
> that alcoholism is 100% genetic and heritable is highly unlikely by
> all studies and statistics.
>
> Loss of control. Studies have consistently shown that alcoholics drink
> to achieve a certain level of intoxication that they personally find
> desirable. Alcoholics will alter their drinking pattern (consume less)
> if so doing benefits them. By definition, IF alcoholism were a disease
> that was truly an irresistible impulse of uncontrollability then
> alcoholics would consistently drink until they are unconscious or
> until they overdosed on alcohol. That is simply not true.
>
> Denial. A major tenet of disease theory alcoholism is denial. Denial
> is an unconscious defense mechanism that in theory is implemented to
> protect the ego from unpleasantness. If one is to believe in denial
> then one has to believe that in spite of everything that is obvious
> and negative in an alcoholic's life; i.e., divorce, loss of
> employment, loss of family, medical problems, legal problems, etc.,
> the alcoholic is incapable of associating these negatives in his/her
> life with his/her consumption of alcohol. Even AA's Big Book addresses
> this as conscious lying, not denial. Also, it has to be noted that a
> typical alcoholic is not the stereotypical skid row type.
> Statistically, alcoholics are slightly smarter than average, hold
> better jobs, hold professional jobs, managerial positions, etc. Yet,
> according to this tenet of alcoholism they are not smart enough to
> associate the obvious negative aspects of their lives with their
> consumption of alcohol.
>
> There is a chemical imbalance of the brain. This is one of the newer
> theories pertaining to disease alcoholism. It is questionable how
> there can be an imbalance of the brain when there are no standards of
> what a chemically balanced brain is; i.e., what chemicals comprise a
> balanced brain in terms of percentages or weights, qualities,
> quantities, etc. What is a normal, chemically balanced brain? It is
> assumed that a brain becomes 'balanced' when drugs alleviate symptoms.
> The alleviation of symptoms never includes the adverse side effects of
> the prescriptive drug. Side effects may include one or any combination
> of dry mouth, drooling, diarrhea, constipation, sleep disturbance,
> eating disorders, sexual dysfunction just to name a few. Yet
> proponents of this theoretical construct do not look at these very
> serious side effects as being included as an imbalance of brain
> chemistry.
>
> Neurotransmitters. This is another new theoretical construct of
> disease alcoholism. This theory proposes that neurotransmitters such
> as dopamine and/or seratonin become particularly influenced towards
> alcohol consumption; i.e., these neurotransmitters require alcohol in
> order to trigger their function within the body. What this theory
> fails to address is how a generic neurotransmitter such as dopamine
> (the continuum of pleasure) or seratonin (the continuum of mood,
> affect and sleep) become highly specific and targeted towards
> alcoholism? There is merely associative, anecdotal evidence to support
> this tenet of alcoholism. Also, this theory fails to address how
> genetically similar people such as Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa
> Indians can be so different in terms of the effects of alcohol and
> alcoholism yet be genetically similar? This theory implies that if a
> Jew becomes an alcoholic, then his neurotransmitters or brain
> chemistry has spontaneously become altered. Not only is this not a
> compelling theory, it tends to contradict itself.
>
> Brain Waves or images. No similar brain waves have been found between
> different alcoholics. All brain waves appear to be more similar to
> fingerprints; i.e., each person's brain waves are unique unto
> themselves.
>
> Addictive Personality. Addictive personality is defined as having an
> existing premorbid condition prior to the onset of alcoholism. There
> are no studies that have found any existing premorbid condition prior
> to the onset of alcoholism among alcoholics. Therefore, this tenet of
> disease alcoholism falls flat. There does not appear to be any such
> entity as an addictive personality. This is a media construct, not a
> scientifically based construct.
>
> It the first drink that gets you drunk. An AA aphorism meaning that
> once an alcoholic consumes the first drink, he/she is then an
> alcoholic. This is not true. This is not even supported by proponents
> of disease theory alcoholism. Even the proponents of disease theory
> alcoholism acknowledge that alcoholism takes at least several years to
> develop. There is no scientific foundation or substantiation for this
> saying.
>
> Alcoholism is a behavior. Behaviors are not disease entities, they are
> bad habits perseverated by obsessive repetition and habituation.
> Habituated, substance induced behaviors cannot be reduced to a single
> etiology anymore than non-substance induced behaviors can be reduced
> to a single etiology. Sex, eating, gambling, computers, computer
> games, and unrequited love are normative behaviors that have been
> declared diseases. Sex, gambling, computers, computer games, and
> unrequited love do not involve the ingestion of any substance yet
> abstinence from these habituated behaviors may incite withdrawal
> symptoms identical to substance withdrawal symptoms. The answer to the
> eradication of alcoholism lies in our national perspective of
> alcoholism. Do we want to perpetuate the myth of alcoholism being a
> disease entity that is out of the realm of one's discretional,
> volitional control or do we tell the truth? Do we let the dirty secret
> out of the bag and tell everyone that, like Dorothy in the Wizard of
> Oz, they already possess the power to hold dominion over alcoholism.
>
> Web links:
>
> http://www.alcoholicscandrinksafelya...newpage11.html
>
> http://www.holdenpd.com/alcohol.html

Hi Alcocure
Could you please enlighten me if, in America, an alcoholic following your
advise and tries to drink 'under control' or 'moderately' goes through
another cycle of binging and drinking, if they can sue your company for
damages?
I will see it in a very bad light if you do not answer this question in at
least as much detail as what you are using to sell your questionable
product.
Mias

"Alcocure" <alcocure@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39516dcd.0409301148.e505e63@posting.google.co m...
> Alcoholism - the volitional disease
>
> by Officer S Garry Nowak. Holden Police Department, Massachusetts
>
> Alcoholism is not a disease with an invasive pathology, nor is it a
> disease of genetics gone awry. Alcoholism has nothing to do with
> irresistible impulses or uncontrollable urges. Alcoholism is a disease
> of volition.
>
> Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there is an invasive
> pathology present where none exists. Calling alcoholism a disease
> infers the possibility of a heritable genetic lineage with a
> predetermined immutable eventuality where no such heritable genetic
> link has been proven. Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there
> is a medicinal cure when no amount of medicine or counseling can cure
> this 'disease.'
>
> Calling alcoholism a disease exonerates the alcoholic from all
> responsibility and accountability for his/her drinking and subsequent
> misbehavior(s). Calling alcoholism a disease tends to impede the
> motivation and the desire to change within the alcoholic for everyone
> knows that one is not responsible for possessing a disease. When one
> possesses a disease everyone readily acknowledges the lack of
> volitional control. Alcoholism ceases to exist when the alcoholic
> volitionally chooses to stop drinking. Alcoholism ends when the
> alcoholic is motivated to change his/her drinking pattern. It never
> ends through force and/or coercion.
>
> The one common prerequisite for all psycho therapeutic modalities is
> for the client to possess the desire and motivation to change oneself.
> Desire alone, inspires the motivation to change. Without desire and
> motivation change is not possible. If rehabilitational therapeutic
> modalities could force or coerce change without desire and motivation
> being present within the individual, then our prison systems would
> release convicts who would subsequently be honest and decent citizens.
> Our schools would produce straight 'A' students and alcoholism
> (addictions) would be a thing of the past. But in spite of our
> best-coerced efforts, we continue to release criminals from our
> prisons, students who fail, and alcoholism flourishes. Why is this?
>
> One reason is that our legislators passed the Americans With
> Disabilities Act (ADA). In so doing, their compassion has produced far
> more cruelty than it has humanity. This bit of legislation was
> intended to protect the blind, the deaf, and those in wheelchairs.
> These intended beneficiaries never received any assistance from this
> legislation. Why? Because the word 'disability' was redefined by the
> courts to include: alcoholics, drug addicts, the obese, math phobic's,
> etc. The ADA actually hurt those who were intended to be protected by
> it.
>
> This piece of compassionate legislation has more than likely
> interfered with the natural progression of alcoholism. Alcoholics are
> no longer allowed to 'hit rock bottom.' Historically, 'hitting rock
> bottom' has been the common element among those who have volitionally
> changed their drinking patterns. This piece of compassionate
> legislation has removed that common element which has always been
> considered the primary incentive required for volitional change; i.e.,
> the right to fail.
>
> What this piece of compassionate legislation did do is to bestow all
> the 'benefits and rights' of the truly disabled upon those who are
> merely volitionally disabled. By bestowing these benefits and rights
> of the truly disabled upon alcoholics, the legislature has reinforced
> the disease mentality of helplessness, powerlessness, and the
> inevitability of relapse. The word 'disease' becomes forever
> associated with that which is beyond one's volitional control. This
> piece of legislation reinforces the disease construct that
> compassionately associates perpetual failure upon the alcoholic. With
> this mentality, the alcoholic is not only forever doomed to consume
> alcohol, but is forgiven and exonerated for doing so. This piece of
> compassionate legislation prevents the primary motivating element for
> change ever to be discovered by the alcoholic on his/her own, via what
> the alcoholic does best, drink alcohol.
>
> One of the truly great ironies of alcoholism is how we treat
> alcoholics. Medicine and Doctors have virtually nothing to offer an
> alcohol. Doctors send alcoholics to Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), whether
> they (the alcoholic) wants to go or not. The courts, our jails and
> prisons, employers, conditions of parole/probation, et.al., all force
> and/or coerce an alcoholic into attending AA. Why? Because AA
> represents the only acceptable course of treatment for the alcoholic
> in the United States. AA alone has the answer. To even consider any
> other therapeutic course of treatment is laughable. So what is the
> foundation upon which AA is laid?
>
> Bill W. and Dr. Bob were the founders of AA, but Bill W. was probably
> the more influential of the two. Bill W. wrote AA's The Big Book and
> AA's infamous Twelve Steps after experiencing a spiritual awakening
> while undergoing a hospitalized treatment for his alcoholism. Bill W.
> also readily acknowledged that AA was modeled after the Oxford Group
> Movement. The Oxford Group Movement was led by Dr. Frank Buchman, a
> very charismatic leader, as are all cult leaders. Buchman and his
> groupers were not in the business of converting heathens to
> Christianity. What they did do is to subversively and deceitfully
> 'steal' those Christians from their own church.
>
> Dr. Buchman was never secretive about his possessing superior
> knowledge and abilities. He readily admitted, and his followers
> readily acknowledged, that Buchman knew what was best for society. The
> Oxford Group Movement subscribed to the 'any means justifies the end'
> philosophy. Dr. Buchman once stated in an interview that the world
> would be a far better place it were led by a leader such as Adolf
> Hitler. Buchman was quoted: "I thank heaven for a man like Adolf
> Hitler . . ." Dr. Buchman and his Oxford Group Movement were so
> despised by the American public that they were forced to change their
> name to the Moral Rearmament and subsequently they had to go
> underground. This is the philosophical foundation of AA.
>
> AA's infamous Twelve Steps has just as interesting a foundation. Bill
> W. was hospitalized for alcoholism. During this hospitalization, he
> was treated by Dr. Silkworth with Dr. Silkworth's own belladonna cure.
> This was a standard treatment for alcoholism at that time. The
> belladonna cure consisted of a blend of morphine, belladonna, henbane
> and other hallucinogenic drugs. Any of these drugs individually are
> powerful hallucinogens, let alone the synergistic effect of such a
> combination. It was while under the influence of this hallucinogenic
> cure that Bill W. had his white light experience.' This was his
> religious epiphany. Bill W. describes this experience: "I found myself
> crying out, "If there is a God, let Him show Himself! I am ready to do
> anything!" Suddenly, the room lit up with a great white light . . .
> All about me there was a wonderful feeling of Presence, and I thought
> to myself, "So, this is the God of the Preachers." This was the
> 'divine' inspiration for Bill W. to write The Big Book and AA's Twelve
> Steps. While writing the Twelve Steps, Bill W. arbitrarily decided to
> stop at twelve steps because there were twelve apostles. This is the
> scientific foundation upon which AA is premised. AA is the modality
> upon which 93% of the addictive treatment programs have modeled
> themselves.
>
> The construct of disease theory alcoholism is closer to being a
> religion than it is to being a disease. Why do I say this? Because in
> order to believe in the different tenets of disease theory alcoholism,
> similar to religion, you must have faith. None of the tenets of
> disease theory alcoholism have ever been supported by scientific or
> doctoral level research. It is faith alone which allows these tenets
> to exist. If you support disease theory alcoholism, you have to have
> faith and believe in the following:
>
>
> Alcoholism can afflict anyone regardless of race, creed, religion,
> etc. This is not true. Alcoholism is statistically so low in Jews,
> Cantonese Chinese, and Amish that it is safe to say that alcoholism
> does not exist in those cultures. Why? Because studies show that where
> either a strong religious base where alcoholism is not accepted or a
> cultural base where alcoholism is not accepted, alcoholism simply does
> not exist. It may sound simplistic but it is true.
>
> There are no protective factors against alcoholism - everyone is a
> potential alcoholic. This is not true. As shown by Jews, Cantonese
> Chinese, and Amish, a strong religious or cultural grouping that
> refuses to support the tenets of disease theory alcoholism offers very
> protective factors against alcoholism since alcoholism is non-existent
> in those religions/cultures. Also, by definition, if alcoholism is a
> heritable, genetic trait, then there will be those who do not possess
> that heritable, genetic trait. Therefore, those who do not possess the
> gene for alcoholism would in fact possess a protective factor against
> alcoholism. This tenet contradicts other tenets of disease theory
> alcoholism.
>
> Alcoholism is genetic. Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa Indians are
> considered to be genetically similar if not identical regarding
> alcoholism. Why? Because both of these cultural peoples manifest a
> 'Chinese flush' after consuming alcohol; i.e., a reddening of the
> face. If alcoholism is genetic; and if both of these cultural peoples
> are genetically similar then both groups should suffer similar rates
> of alcoholism. Yet, alcoholism is nonexistent within the Cantonese
> Chinese while absolutely decimating the Ojibwa Indians. What is the
> difference in belief systems? The Ojibwa Indians believe that alcohol
> is stronger than a parent's love of his/her child while the Cantonese
> Chinese believe that drunken misbehavior is a manifestation of one's
> personality regardless of one's sobriety. The individual takes
> responsibility for his/her behavior whether sober or inebriated.
>
> Alcoholism is heritable. This tenet completely disregards learned
> behavior; i.e., a child learns how to drink from parents, role models,
> peers, etc. IF alcoholism were a 10% heritable or genetic trait, then
> it would be immutable. Why? Because genetics cannot be changed
> volitionally and statistically 85% of all alcoholics volitionally stop
> their alcohol consumption without any outside interventions,
> therapies, hospitalizations, etc. One cannot volitionally change their
> eye color, hair color, or skin color volitionally, yet alcoholism has
> a significantly higher success rate through volition than through any
> other means. There is no research that scientifically supports
> alcoholism as being heritable.
>
> What is the possibility that alcoholism is genetic and heritable? Per
> the Human Genome Project, there are 80,000 genes with approximately 3
> billion different interacting combinations that exist in the human
> genome (the sum total of heritable, genetic material in a human
> being). Even the proponents of disease theory alcoholism have
> acknowledged that finding the gene that causes alcoholism would be
> like finding the gene that causes one to like basketball. The idea
> that alcoholism is 100% genetic and heritable is highly unlikely by
> all studies and statistics.
>
> Loss of control. Studies have consistently shown that alcoholics drink
> to achieve a certain level of intoxication that they personally find
> desirable. Alcoholics will alter their drinking pattern (consume less)
> if so doing benefits them. By definition, IF alcoholism were a disease
> that was truly an irresistible impulse of uncontrollability then
> alcoholics would consistently drink until they are unconscious or
> until they overdosed on alcohol. That is simply not true.
>
> Denial. A major tenet of disease theory alcoholism is denial. Denial
> is an unconscious defense mechanism that in theory is implemented to
> protect the ego from unpleasantness. If one is to believe in denial
> then one has to believe that in spite of everything that is obvious
> and negative in an alcoholic's life; i.e., divorce, loss of
> employment, loss of family, medical problems, legal problems, etc.,
> the alcoholic is incapable of associating these negatives in his/her
> life with his/her consumption of alcohol. Even AA's Big Book addresses
> this as conscious lying, not denial. Also, it has to be noted that a
> typical alcoholic is not the stereotypical skid row type.
> Statistically, alcoholics are slightly smarter than average, hold
> better jobs, hold professional jobs, managerial positions, etc. Yet,
> according to this tenet of alcoholism they are not smart enough to
> associate the obvious negative aspects of their lives with their
> consumption of alcohol.
>
> There is a chemical imbalance of the brain. This is one of the newer
> theories pertaining to disease alcoholism. It is questionable how
> there can be an imbalance of the brain when there are no standards of
> what a chemically balanced brain is; i.e., what chemicals comprise a
> balanced brain in terms of percentages or weights, qualities,
> quantities, etc. What is a normal, chemically balanced brain? It is
> assumed that a brain becomes 'balanced' when drugs alleviate symptoms.
> The alleviation of symptoms never includes the adverse side effects of
> the prescriptive drug. Side effects may include one or any combination
> of dry mouth, drooling, diarrhea, constipation, sleep disturbance,
> eating disorders, sexual dysfunction just to name a few. Yet
> proponents of this theoretical construct do not look at these very
> serious side effects as being included as an imbalance of brain
> chemistry.
>
> Neurotransmitters. This is another new theoretical construct of
> disease alcoholism. This theory proposes that neurotransmitters such
> as dopamine and/or seratonin become particularly influenced towards
> alcohol consumption; i.e., these neurotransmitters require alcohol in
> order to trigger their function within the body. What this theory
> fails to address is how a generic neurotransmitter such as dopamine
> (the continuum of pleasure) or seratonin (the continuum of mood,
> affect and sleep) become highly specific and targeted towards
> alcoholism? There is merely associative, anecdotal evidence to support
> this tenet of alcoholism. Also, this theory fails to address how
> genetically similar people such as Cantonese Chinese and Ojibwa
> Indians can be so different in terms of the effects of alcohol and
> alcoholism yet be genetically similar? This theory implies that if a
> Jew becomes an alcoholic, then his neurotransmitters or brain
> chemistry has spontaneously become altered. Not only is this not a
> compelling theory, it tends to contradict itself.
>
> Brain Waves or images. No similar brain waves have been found between
> different alcoholics. All brain waves appear to be more similar to
> fingerprints; i.e., each person's brain waves are unique unto
> themselves.
>
> Addictive Personality. Addictive personality is defined as having an
> existing premorbid condition prior to the onset of alcoholism. There
> are no studies that have found any existing premorbid condition prior
> to the onset of alcoholism among alcoholics. Therefore, this tenet of
> disease alcoholism falls flat. There does not appear to be any such
> entity as an addictive personality. This is a media construct, not a
> scientifically based construct.
>
> It the first drink that gets you drunk. An AA aphorism meaning that
> once an alcoholic consumes the first drink, he/she is then an
> alcoholic. This is not true. This is not even supported by proponents
> of disease theory alcoholism. Even the proponents of disease theory
> alcoholism acknowledge that alcoholism takes at least several years to
> develop. There is no scientific foundation or substantiation for this
> saying.
>
> Alcoholism is a behavior. Behaviors are not disease entities, they are
> bad habits perseverated by obsessive repetition and habituation.
> Habituated, substance induced behaviors cannot be reduced to a single
> etiology anymore than non-substance induced behaviors can be reduced
> to a single etiology. Sex, eating, gambling, computers, computer
> games, and unrequited love are normative behaviors that have been
> declared diseases. Sex, gambling, computers, computer games, and
> unrequited love do not involve the ingestion of any substance yet
> abstinence from these habituated behaviors may incite withdrawal
> symptoms identical to substance withdrawal symptoms. The answer to the
> eradication of alcoholism lies in our national perspective of
> alcoholism. Do we want to perpetuate the myth of alcoholism being a
> disease entity that is out of the realm of one's discretional,
> volitional control or do we tell the truth? Do we let the dirty secret
> out of the bag and tell everyone that, like Dorothy in the Wizard of
> Oz, they already possess the power to hold dominion over alcoholism.
>
> Web links:
>
> http://www.alcoholicscandrinksafelya...newpage11.html
>
> http://www.holdenpd.com/alcohol.html

"Alcocure" <alcocure@aol.com> wrote in message
news:39516dcd.0409301148.e505e63@posting.google.co m...
> Alcoholism - the volitional disease
>
> by Officer S Garry Nowak. Holden Police Department, Massachusetts
>
> Alcoholism is not a disease with an invasive pathology, nor is it a
> disease of genetics gone awry. Alcoholism has nothing to do with
> irresistible impulses or uncontrollable urges. Alcoholism is a disease
> of volition.
>
> Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there is an invasive
> pathology present where none exists. Calling alcoholism a disease
> infers the possibility of a heritable genetic lineage with a
> predetermined immutable eventuality where no such heritable genetic
> link has been proven. Calling alcoholism a disease infers that there
> is a medicinal cure when no amount of medicine or counseling can cure
> this 'disease.'



Smoke a joint. Its Sugar FREE!!

voodoo disease 666