chronology of annoying correspondence, 10/30/13
Him: Alcoholism is not a disease. Diseases are caused by bacterial infections. If it were it could be cured with some penicillin. Alcoholism is a character weakness, it can only be "cured" by strengthening your character. It is a Liberal way of passing the blame for your own shortcomings on to anything but yourself.
Me: Tell that to the AMA.
"Alcoholism or alcohol dependence is defined by the American Medical Association (AMA) as 'a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations.'"
You might want to do some research before spouting ignorance for all to see.
Me: I happen to be afflicted by Graves' disease. It is incurable. Many diseases are incurable. Additionally, it is not caused by bacteria. Myriad diseases are caused by things other than bacteria. (Ever hear of viruses?)
Your definition is flawed to the nth degree.
Him: Viruses are not actually diseases. Ever hear of the flu or a common cold being called a disease? Or a food allergy being called a disease? My definition is definitely not flawed.
Me: Yes, it is! Just go read a biology textbook.
HIV/AIDS not a disease. IBS not a disease. Lupus not a disease. Ebola not a disease. Please.
Again, take your argument up with the AMA.
Him: As a former drunk (for about 15 years, if I wasn't at work I was drunk), I have all of the research I need. I was definitely a drunk, and accused more than once of being an alcoholic. But as a solid Conservative, I understood where the real problem was. It wasn't in some mythical disease, it was in a weakness of character. People get drunk to mask their own insecurities. The only way to solve those insecurities is to address those insecurities. You don't need some magical 12 step program, or some antibuse (the drug they gave me in the Marines that would make me sick if I drank, and didn't work to stop me from getting drunk) to wean you off alcohol.
As for the AMA, they have a profit motive for convincing you that your drinking problem is a disease. After all, how can they make that money from you if you know that you only have to address your own problems to stop being a drunk?
You might want to know a little about the person you are accusing of ignorance before sticking your foot in your mouth.
Me: You aren't the only one with some knowledge (third-, second- or firsthand) of what addiction is & how it affects the body. It most certainly is a disease. It is counterintuitive to some folks (like you, apparently) but it's the truth.
Willpower, unlike what you are advocating, gets weaker the longer folks attempt to use it. The phenomenon is called "decision fatigue." Look it up.
This means that the more an addict attempts to resist the substance s/he craves, the more likely s/he will succumb, unless there are other factors in play to reduce that probability. Those factors include (but are not limited to) therapy, support groups, other learned coping mechanisms or medication. Willpower cannot do it alone. The "character flaw" argument falls on its face (especially when one realizes that addiction has an underlying genetic component in a great number of cases).
Him: I already addressed the AMA in a previous comment. And I am sure you realize there is a difference between a virus and a disease, technically speaking. [This came in around the same time I was making my statement above.]
Him: No, I'm not advocating will power. I am advocating addressing the issues that lead to over-indulgence. It is the reason I can now drink a glass of scotch or a bottle of beer when I get home, without getting drunk. I am no longer drinking to cover up for an insecurity issue. You are right that I am not the only who has experience with "addiction", but I am one of the very few who didn't use it an excuse and make the claim that "it isn't my fault, I have a disease."
Addiction has an underlying genetic component? Which gene would that be? Exactly? No, it isn't genetic. It can be a learned trait, but it can also be unlearned.
I will grant that you are right about "addicts" being more likely to "succumb" to their cravings, but only because they don't address the real problem. Addiction isn't a disease. At best, it can be called a psychological disorder. And like any psychological disorder, the cure starts with addressing the issues that cause the disorder.
Him: I already addressed the AMA in a previous comment. And I am sure you realize there is a difference between a virus and a disease, technically speaking.
Me: Yes. Some viruses CAUSE disease. My god.
Just google "disease". You'll be amazed.
Him: No, some viruses cause sickness, Learn the difference.
Me: If you look up the definition of "disease", you'll see that it is described as "sickness". Jesus Christ, can you google?
Him: A new definition of sickness? At one time there was a distinction between disease and virus. Sickness is not necessarily the same thing as disease, just as a there is a substantial difference between a virus and a disease.
Him: And, just out of curiosity, are you suggesting that "alcoholism" is caused by a virus?
Me: No. You are so locked in your worldview that you cannot even comprehend what I am saying.
Him: I'm locked up in reality. You keep insisting some mythical disease is responsible for drinking problems and refuse to accept that it is merely a personal failure.
Him: And you are what? The difference between you and me is that I accept personal responsibility for my failures and work to improve them. You want to blame some mythical disease. Then you chastise me for not accepting your world-view.
(I've more to say, but my comments haven't made it past the moderators.)
This entry posted originally at Dreamwidth Studios. You may comment here or there.
Me: Tell that to the AMA.
"Alcoholism or alcohol dependence is defined by the American Medical Association (AMA) as 'a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations.'"
You might want to do some research before spouting ignorance for all to see.
Me: I happen to be afflicted by Graves' disease. It is incurable. Many diseases are incurable. Additionally, it is not caused by bacteria. Myriad diseases are caused by things other than bacteria. (Ever hear of viruses?)
Your definition is flawed to the nth degree.
Him: Viruses are not actually diseases. Ever hear of the flu or a common cold being called a disease? Or a food allergy being called a disease? My definition is definitely not flawed.
Me: Yes, it is! Just go read a biology textbook.
HIV/AIDS not a disease. IBS not a disease. Lupus not a disease. Ebola not a disease. Please.
Again, take your argument up with the AMA.
Him: As a former drunk (for about 15 years, if I wasn't at work I was drunk), I have all of the research I need. I was definitely a drunk, and accused more than once of being an alcoholic. But as a solid Conservative, I understood where the real problem was. It wasn't in some mythical disease, it was in a weakness of character. People get drunk to mask their own insecurities. The only way to solve those insecurities is to address those insecurities. You don't need some magical 12 step program, or some antibuse (the drug they gave me in the Marines that would make me sick if I drank, and didn't work to stop me from getting drunk) to wean you off alcohol.
As for the AMA, they have a profit motive for convincing you that your drinking problem is a disease. After all, how can they make that money from you if you know that you only have to address your own problems to stop being a drunk?
You might want to know a little about the person you are accusing of ignorance before sticking your foot in your mouth.
Me: You aren't the only one with some knowledge (third-, second- or firsthand) of what addiction is & how it affects the body. It most certainly is a disease. It is counterintuitive to some folks (like you, apparently) but it's the truth.
Willpower, unlike what you are advocating, gets weaker the longer folks attempt to use it. The phenomenon is called "decision fatigue." Look it up.
This means that the more an addict attempts to resist the substance s/he craves, the more likely s/he will succumb, unless there are other factors in play to reduce that probability. Those factors include (but are not limited to) therapy, support groups, other learned coping mechanisms or medication. Willpower cannot do it alone. The "character flaw" argument falls on its face (especially when one realizes that addiction has an underlying genetic component in a great number of cases).
Him: I already addressed the AMA in a previous comment. And I am sure you realize there is a difference between a virus and a disease, technically speaking. [This came in around the same time I was making my statement above.]
Him: No, I'm not advocating will power. I am advocating addressing the issues that lead to over-indulgence. It is the reason I can now drink a glass of scotch or a bottle of beer when I get home, without getting drunk. I am no longer drinking to cover up for an insecurity issue. You are right that I am not the only who has experience with "addiction", but I am one of the very few who didn't use it an excuse and make the claim that "it isn't my fault, I have a disease."
Addiction has an underlying genetic component? Which gene would that be? Exactly? No, it isn't genetic. It can be a learned trait, but it can also be unlearned.
I will grant that you are right about "addicts" being more likely to "succumb" to their cravings, but only because they don't address the real problem. Addiction isn't a disease. At best, it can be called a psychological disorder. And like any psychological disorder, the cure starts with addressing the issues that cause the disorder.
Him: I already addressed the AMA in a previous comment. And I am sure you realize there is a difference between a virus and a disease, technically speaking.
Me: Yes. Some viruses CAUSE disease. My god.
Just google "disease". You'll be amazed.
Him: No, some viruses cause sickness, Learn the difference.
Me: If you look up the definition of "disease", you'll see that it is described as "sickness". Jesus Christ, can you google?
Him: A new definition of sickness? At one time there was a distinction between disease and virus. Sickness is not necessarily the same thing as disease, just as a there is a substantial difference between a virus and a disease.
Him: And, just out of curiosity, are you suggesting that "alcoholism" is caused by a virus?
Me: No. You are so locked in your worldview that you cannot even comprehend what I am saying.
Him: I'm locked up in reality. You keep insisting some mythical disease is responsible for drinking problems and refuse to accept that it is merely a personal failure.
Him: And you are what? The difference between you and me is that I accept personal responsibility for my failures and work to improve them. You want to blame some mythical disease. Then you chastise me for not accepting your world-view.
(I've more to say, but my comments haven't made it past the moderators.)
This entry posted originally at Dreamwidth Studios. You may comment here or there.