[Totga]

Matthew, I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to have to disagree with you in the strongest possible - but polite - terms I can.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

I've seen cases much worse than anyone in this thread so far seems to be.

I doubt it - I've seen alcoholism do its thing to a wide range of people. I've known my share of people who needed to drink first thing in the morning and stay permanently drunk. They even hid it from us for years by drinking fruit-based cocktails so we wouldn't smell it on their breath.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

To me, the essence of alcoholism is not losing control, having a disease, having a pre-disposition or anything else like that.

An alcoholic is somebody who has REALISED that they have lost control.

Everybody who drinks has lost control - that's the nature of the beast, it's why we fall over, throw up, "have just one more". Those who realise this is happening and carries on, is an alcoholic. Those who don't know it's going on are just lying to themselves, IMHO.

The biggest lie prevalent in our society today concerning alcohol is that there is such a thing as an "in control" and "normal" drinker. There just isn't. It's a lie.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

Those who are truly not alcoholics but still drink do so in a controlled way that has no negative impact on the rest of their life.

I'm afraid Matthew that is - IMHO, of course - completely, totally, and utterly wrong, but I suspect that most people are too close-minded to consider in a fair-minded way what I'm repeating here, written originally by Carr.

There is no way to drink alcohol in a controlled way completely of free will, in the same way there is no way to smoke nicotine or use heroin in a 'controlled way'. It's a trap. If you don't drink booze, and you take a sip, you realise it tastes disgusting: this is nature's warning that it's not good for you - it is literally a poison. When you acquire the taste - which your body does, as it assumes you have to take this drug and you don't have a choice in the matter - you are effectively caught in the trap. That's the main point of Carr's book.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

I disagree that someone has to know they have a problem to be an alcoholic. "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt" as they say.

I'm happy to revise my definition it to "anybody who has adjusted their taste so as to not be disgusted by the taste of alcohol, and so carries on drinking" if you prefer. If you doubt me, think back to the first two or three drinks you had when you were younger and whether you really, genuinely, liked the taste? Or did you just fit in with the people around you because you thought that's what grown-ups did?

Another point of Carr's book addresses the brainwashing prevalent in society about alcohol, and it is this brainwashing that makes us all start in the first place. The fact people think alcohol is any less a drug than nicotine completely baffles me. I used to be a very, very heavy drinker, and now I can't help but think I was basically being conned by the whole of society for years on end.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

Some may never truly recover.

In my opinion, this only happens because AA teaches that the 'victim' as an individual is at fault for drinking. They just absolutely point-blank refuse to accept the true nature of alcohol.

Think of it like this (an analogy from the book):

There are a load of healthy, able-bodied young people standing on a beach. Some of them, after a few minutes get stuck and can't lift their feet out of the sand, even when the tide comes in. Which one of the following is the most likely explanation for this anomaly?

a) They were probably standing in Quicksand
b) They probably have a physical/chemical defect
c) They probably have a mental health issue or personality disorder

You would be an idiot to answer anything other than a), yet AA refuse to accept the answer can be anything other than b) or c) and counsel people into thinking it's their fault they're sinking on the beach. Some people will take just a few minutes to sink into the sand of alcohol, others might take decades, but alcohol is quicksand: eventually everybody who drinks is going to have to realise that the drug is abusing them. AA themselves accept that it can take "between 2 and 60 years to become an alcoholic" - i.e. at any point in your adult life, no matter how long you drink "responsibly". Anybody who tells you that alcoholism is something to do with the person concerned is just ignorant, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

Let me end by saying that most people will require social support to maintain a state of sobriety, which is why groups like AA are so valuable.

I'm afraid, I really couldn't disagree with you more. People will require social support to stay stable whilst they are told that it is their problem they drink, and nobody points out that is the alcohol doing this to them.

If instead, people were told it was the alcohol that was doing this to them, why it was doing it to them, and how to deal with giving up, they wouldn't need social support in the same way that people who give up smoking don't spend the rest of their lives 'one smoke away from disaster'. AA requires people to turn up to meetings for years after quitting alcohol, because they make them think they are flawed people. When was the last time you saw people needing to do that with nicotine? I haven't smoked my usual 20/day for years now, but I don't think "oh, but I'm so flawed, I could be taken in at any moment".

I'm sorry you knew somebody who felt they were so flawed they needed to end it all and shot themselves. That's incredibly sad. However, it just goes to show the damage AA is doing to people: if we just admitted what alcohol is, we'd be a happier society, and people who wanted to stop drinking would be able to do so without feeling that it was impossible for them to give up.

I really, really, REALLY STRONGLY urge people interested in alcoholism to read Carr's book. I can't stress it enough. I know that I will never want to drink alcohol again and will not require social support to do it, because I now see it in exactly the same terms as nicotine and heroin: they are absolutely no different in how they abuse us.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

Someone with only a mild problem, as you seem to have, may be able to simply decide to stop.

I was getting to the point where stealing was looking like an option to fund it. I was permanently hung over. I was starting at midday, and my work was suffering. I don't remember many of the evenings of the last few years of my life. I don't remember the names of most of the people I drink with. I once spent an evening rolling around in my own vomit because I was too drunk to stand up.

It wasn't a mild problem.

What is extraordinary, is to many people - the thought of stealing aside - that this was "normal" drinking behaviour. Most of my friends think this is acceptable and a normal lifestyle!

Please don't take this harshly, but I feel you're patronising me: "oh, well, for you it might have been easy". But the ease with which I am giving up booze has nothing to do with the extent of my drinking: it was thanks to the way that I gave up drinking.

I stopped listening to the lie that there is such a thing as a "normal" drinker. I refused to listen to the lies AA spread that alcoholism is a fault of the individual. I accepted what alcohol is: an addictive poison like nicotine. In the same way I think I would be mad to smoke, I now think I would be mad to drink.

The fact I got here from where I was without counseling is not, I repeat NOT, anything to do with me "just deciding to stop" because I had "a mild problem". It was everything to do with that book.

If you've ever given up smoking, you'd know Carr's book on smoking, which is now infamous. The alcohol book will get it's reputation one day, as it deserves to. Even people who drink a bottle of wine once in a while don't realise the damage they're doing to themselves, but when public health programmes move to focus on alcohol, maybe we'll be able to save a few of the thousands of deaths a year caused by even "mild" drinking.

Originally Posted by Matthew Shea

During my college days I was headed down the path to alcoholism myself. My epiphany was when my dad waited up for me one night after I had been drinking to the point of puking and passing out. He told me he loved me, walked me to bed and never said another thing. That was more powerful than any lecture he could have come up with and stopped me dead in my tracks. I didn't drink for a year or more after that and, when I did drink again, took it much more carefully. To this day, I feel I truly don't have a problem. I'm sure even my dad would vouch for that.

I'm glad to hear it, and maybe the abuse you put yourself through was enough to keep a check on it for now, but I promise you that the nature of alcohol as a chemical and as a drug is that you will find yourself over coming decades increasing your intake. All I'd say is when your mind is open to it, go hunt down Alan Carr's book - he's not paying me to say this, but I really do think it's the most important book I've ever read in my life.

Also, please remember that the majority of people who present themselves with cirrhosis of the liver do so with only a "mild" drink habit - it really is a toxin that is doing all sorts of damage to you. Consider quitting. You'll feel like a new man, I promise you.

Thanks for your thoughts anyway, and sorry if you think I'm being argumentative.