September 2007 Archives

Whatever people in the drug and alcohol rehab business might tell you, not everyone needs, or even benefits from rehab. That's not to say that no one needs rehab, and for some people, nothing short of residential care offers much hope of a betterment of the problem, but it's certainly not outrageous to at least try either cold turkey willpower, or some form of outpatient therapy first before committing to the intensity (and expense) of a month or more of inpatient rehab. I don’t think that everyone needs rehab, but I know that a lot of people do, I and I was one of those people…twice! But I do think that people should try to quit on their own if at all possible. If you can't it tells you a lot about the strength of your addiction, and ultimately helps to get you sober. So how do you start? Step one…try to stop on your own! If you know you have a substance abuse problem, but aren’t sure just how bad things really are, there's one great way to find out…try to stop. A lot of people with alcohol and drug abuse problems just get tired of the consequences of their use, and the lack of enjoyment that so often comes with prolonged abuse, and want to make a change...and a lot of people can. It won't be easy, and you will need to be committed, need to have a plan for sober activities, and need to set a goal of a certain period of sobriety; but if you can quit for a month or more, you'll find every further day just a little bit easier, and you'll have avoided what will have proven to be an unnecessary period of rehab. For anyone who has developed an addiction or physical dependency to drugs or alcohol, cold turkey willpower is rarely enough; but if you find that even making your best personal efforts to quit alone doesn’t work, you still may not need to enter into a residential treatment program. Step 2, get help, but stay at home The nest step up in therapeutic intensity is outpatient drug treatment. Available options include participation in Alcoholics or Narcotics Anonymous, finding a local community peer support group, or meeting with a therapist or psychologist once or more a week. Sometimes just getting some professional advice and some professional assistance in relapse prevention gives you enough of a boost to allow for sobriety and prolonged abstinence; and millions find the fellowship and support of 12 steps meeting such as AA or NA an effective path to a better life without abuse. If that doesn't work… Step 3, last stop…quit messing around and get into rehab If you try to quit on your own, and you try some form of outpatient therapy, and still you cannot control your use behaviors; you at this point need to start considering the benefits of prolonged and residential therapy at a drug or alcohol rehab. For people with serious and long lasting addictions histories, for people with a limited sober support network and for people with a dual diagnosis, little else seems to offer much promise. A drug and alcohol rehab offers the most intensive therapies, an enforced period of clarity inducing sobriety, and enough nutritional and health programming to get you feeling a lot better before the month is through. Rehab is expensive, and better private rehabs can charge up to $20 000 or more per month, but if nothing else has worked for you, you have two real options, either pay the money, or keep abusing drugs or alcohol! Rehab is expensive, it does require of you to take leave from work and family, and it certainly does disrupt your life; but when an addiction has reached the point where nothing else seems to help, its time to forget about your external responsibilities, to forget about the costs, and to concentrate on getting healthier. I've done the three steps to sobriety myself I've went through this three stage process myself, and found that step one (willpower) didn’t help much, and this may say something about my personal strength, but I prefer to think that it says more about the persistence of and difficult in tackling an addiction. From step one failure, I started in at AA, and got myself a therapist, and this helped a lot, and I was able to quit for a while…but once again, I soon found myself right back at it. My wife and family eventually convinced me to stop fooling around, to stop worrying about the money, about the time away from work, and just do what I needed to to get healthier. I may have resisted further, but it became pretty clear that I was going to lose my family unless I took some action, and that was enough to get me into a rehab program, for 28 days of therapy. It worked for a while, although I eventually found myself using again, and this time I just skipped steps one and two and went straight back to rehab for another pass at what I still needed to learn about sobriety; and I am now happy to boast of years of sobriety, and hopefully never again another month at rehab. Recovery is an option, and continuing abuse should never be. Take care of yourself; get as much help as you need to beat your addiction, and live a better and happier life of sobriety.

There are four drugs currently FDA approved for the treatment of alcoholism, and of those four, naltrexone and acamprosate are the most commonly prescribed. A recent multi disciplinary study sponsored by the National Institute on Alcoholism and Addiction, The COMBINE study, has shown that naltrexone does influence a small but still significant betterment in relapse rates, but acamprosate was ineffective. But researchers out of the Yale University School of Medicine say that such a gross understanding of the effectiveness of the drugs is actually misleading, and to truly use these drugs effectively, we need to have a better understanding of how well they work on distinct subgroups of alcoholics. In controlled laboratory studies, the Yale researchers examined the comparative effectiveness of Naltrexone on two distinct subgroups of alcoholics, those with a family history of the disease, and those without a genetic background of alcoholism. The drinking levels of the two groups were compared on a number of different dosage strength of naltrexone. It works for some…a disaster for others The researchers were pleased to see that naltrexone did have significant betterment effect on the hereditary alcoholics, and the higher the dose given, the less these alcoholics drank. Contrarily, the drug did not work for those without a family history of alcoholism, and when given in higher does, these alcoholics even drank more! The study leaders conclude that naltrexone may have more value than limited success rates calculated from large field trials may indicate, and with a better understanding of the effects of the drug on different sub groups of alcoholics, the drug may be prescribed in a more targeted and more effective manner. More research is clearly needed Hopefully, as researchers gain a broader understanding of the different manifestations of subgroups of alcoholic use, treatments in general will evolve to better match the needs of the individual alcoholics. The results of the study indicate a promising role for naltrexone, and it's obviously very beneficial to know that when prescribed to non hereditary alcoholics, it seems to worsen the problem! The study further indicates how powerfully influential the genetic component to alcoholism is, and although still poorly understood, many of the secrets to effective treatments may well emerge as scientists better understand the genetic predisposition to alcohol abuse and alcoholism.

I get asked this question a lot, and it used to surprise me until I realized how little a lot of people knew about how a Christian drug or alcohol rehab really operates. Christian drug and alcohol rehabs run a spirituality based program in which an addiction is considered a malady of the body, of the mind, but most importantly of the soul; and treatments for best effect need to tackle the unique issues of all three areas of our being. Christian rehabs emphasize the power and wisdom of God's love throughout recovery; and through a study of the scriptures, recovering addicts are grounded in timeless wisdom and learn how their problems are the problems of the ages. Through study of the bible, Christians in recovery gain a powerful work of long term reference against temptation and abuse. Why pray to a "higher power" when you can pray to Jesus Christ? Actively praying together also feels a lot more natural to Christians than praying to some obscure "higher power" as in AA based programs. And through individual prayer and meditation with Jesus Christ, and through shared prayer sessions with other addicts in recovery, we take some of the strength offered by God as our own, and ask Him to lead us into better lives of service, and away from the harms of a drug or alcohol abuse. Healing the spirit is the true way out of addiction and the only way to a lasting peace and better life of sobriety, but the realities of the body and mind cannot either be ignored, and Christian rehab never abandons what has proven effective from secular rehabs, and never abandons norms of medical science in the treatment care of participants. A Christian detox is just like any other form of detox So a Christian detox runs a lot like any other form of detox. The Lord gave us doctors and medications for a reason, and we would be foolish to risk our health by ignoring His gifts. Detox occurs under the supervision of medical personnel, and all available medications and medical care are used to ensure that detox progresses as safely and as comfortably as possible. Other therapies are used, and you'll see the latest addiction and therapeutic science applied in a Christian Rehab as you'll find it in a secular facility. But while most rehabs leave treatment at the body and mind, only Christian rehab heals the area of our being that needs the most help and assistance towards a better life of sobriety, and a lasting peace in the service of family, of Church and of the Lord. Christian rehabs are available throughout the Nation and the world, they are as safe and medically sound as any other form of rehab, and only a Christian rehab offers the guidance and love of Jesus Christ to addicts so desperately in need of the strength of the Lord.

It can drive you crazy trying to find out how much a stay at a drug or alcohol rehab is going to cost; and although the price of treatment should never be the only consideration--and you don’t necessarily want a "bargain" drug rehab--we all live within our financial realities, and you can only afford what you can afford! Most drug rehab centers don’t want to give accurate pricing information within their promotional materials for one important (to them) reason, and that is they'd much prefer to get you on the phone, and give you a bit of a sales pitch while they give you the information. Which is fine, as they are in the business of helping people, but also exist to make a profit, and they only make money if you walk through that door; but it does make it harder than it needs to be for people just trying to make the right choice, and at a time in life when they may not be well equipped to deal with the extra stress of a major financial decision. Here is a general guide to the prices of rehab Better private drug rehabs: $20 000 and up per month. These drug and alcohol rehabs are the best in the Nation, and should offer an outstanding level of care. You should benefit from excellent therapies, including a very high level of individual counseling with a trained psychologist or therapist. You should also enjoy a beautiful and tranquil setting, private and even luxurious accommodations, nutritionist directed meal programs, great peripheral programs such as yoga, meditation, massage, and excellent sports and gym facilities. These rehabs are the most expensive, but are also generally the best. All rehab is hard work, and never a vacation, but at first glance these facilities more closely resemble a resort or 5 star hotel than a treatment environment. Standard private rehabs: $10 000 and up to close to $20 000 per month Private rehabs in this price range make up the bulk or rehab facilities offering services in America today. These facilities in general (and there are low quality exceptions) offer a standard of therapeutic care that will nearly match the more expensive rehabs, but you will not likely get the same intensity and frequency of individual therapy (which is important). The environment, accommodations and facilities will be less impressive, and you may not have as private or luxurious an experience. Non profit and public rehabs: 0$ up to close to $10 000 per month Most non profit publicly run facilities are set up for people without the means to fund a private stay. There are some excellent public and non profit facilities, but they generally suffer from some funding constraints. They will not offer as much individual therapy, the allowable stay may be shorter, and there may be a waiting list for admission. The facilities and environment tend to be more institutional, and the accommodations rarely private. These facilities' operate with the best of intentions, but live under continual budget strain and shortfall. There are too many people that need low cost help, and not enough beds or professionals to give them all the care they deserve. You get what you pay for Price does not tell the whole story, and the best non profit is surely better than the worst of even the most expensive of private rehabs; but in general, you can expect to get what you pay for. You should be prepared to make a substantial investment in your sobriety, and if you have good insurance coverage, or can afford the entrance fees, you should look at entering into the best rehab you can reasonably afford. If you can achieve sobriety, the long term savings are immense, and sobriety is far more than a financial decision and benefit anyways. Ideally, you have some form of insurance coverage, and if so your insurance carrier should be obligated to cover a substantial portion of the costs of your stay. It's always wise to check with your insurance company to find out what you are entitled to, and as well to ensure that any rehab under consideration accepts your provider, and better still, will handle the payments through them directly. You also may have the option of credit financing a stay, should you be unable to cover the costs as an upfront payment; and some facilities may also work with lower income participants to arrange for a reasonable total cost and payment schedule, and you should inquire about the availability of such programs. If you cannot afford a better private facility, any treatment is better than no treatment, and you should simply choose the best available option within your budget and get help as soon as possible. Because many public drug rehabs have waiting lists, it's a good idea to enroll for entry as soon as possible. Get the best you can reasonably afford, and don't wait another day before making a commitment to change and to a better life of sobriety!

As much as the pharmaceutical companies might argue for greater self regulation as a way to streamline the approvals process and reduce the expense to the consumer (while creating greater profits as well) certain unsettling reports about the industry as a whole should raise serious questions about the industry's ability to self regulate. Most notoriously of recent months is the oxycontin settlement, where executives in the company where found guilty of misleading doctors and the general public about the dependency risk of oxycontin, and just last night on CNN was another report about troubling drug company practices. Apparently, there are massive quantities of medications sold throughout the country everyday that have not yet been approved by the FDA as safe, and some of these drugs have been on the market, consumed and available for some time. How can this happen? Through the FDA drug approval process, when drugs apply to begin testing for approval, they are issued a 10 digit tracking number. Problematically, this same 10 digit number is used by pharmacists selling the drug, whether or not they have been approved. What has happened is that doctors and pharmacists mistakenly believe that since the drug has the FDA number and is available for sale, that it has passed FDA testing as safe; when this is too often not the case. A knowing disregard of the law But although doctors and pharmacists may claim legitimate ignorance, obviously the manufacturers of the drugs are well aware of the status of each and every drug they market, and well aware that they are selling what is reported to be over 65 million filled prescriptions worth of these illegal drugs each year. Obviously this is not the FDA's finest moment either, but the fact that pharmaceutical companies are knowingly exploiting a previous lack in enforcement on the sale of unapproved drugs for profit is shameless, and seriously damages their credibility as a self regulating industry. Prescription drugs currently contribute to a massive abuse and addiction problem, and we may need to tighten regulation and control ever further on the production and sale of drugs, and obviously those in a position to profit from the sale of these drugs cannot be relied on to act ethically, or with the best interests of the public in mind. The money to be made in the pharmaceutical industry is enormous, and while the vast majority in the industry are likely conscientious and moral people, there are obviously enough that will engage in questionable practices--risking the safety of consumers--that the industry as a whole cannot be trusted to act with integrity.

Literally billions of annual dollars are invested in beer and liquor marketing campaigns, and these advertising spots seem determined to influence a public perception that drinking makes you better looking, more successful, and more fun to be around...and the people most vulnerable to these untruthful subliminal messages are our kids. There is no doubt that alcohol marketing campaigns work, and beer and spirits companies would unlikely invest billions of annual dollars in intensive print and TV campaigns if they didn’t reap dividends. These same companies can (as far as I'm concerned) argue until they’re blue in the face that they advertise solely for market share and brand awareness, and while this motivation undoubtedly exists; they also advertise heavily as a recruitment tool, and to convince every emerging generation of prospective consumers about just how cool, handsome, beautiful, athletic and sexy alcohol can make you. I mean, just how much does a television commercial of bikini clad women and rippled torsoed men enjoying an (intoxicated?) beach volley ball game tell us about the taste of a drink? Alcohol advertising leans heavily on subliminal implications that using alcohol makes life more fun, and those people that use it live somehow more charmed lives than those that don't. And those subliminal messages do seem to hit home with the consumers that beer and liquor companies' value most…teens soon to join the legal market, and very likely already consuming. High school students, who were heavily exposed to beer or liquor advertisements when polled about the attributes of people who used alcohol, responded that drinkers were more likely to be attractive, wealthy and successful than non drinkers…which is surely far removed from any kind of reality. High school kids also responded that viewing beer or liquor ads made them want to try drinking, and 77% of parents polled believed that alcohol advertising was significantly influential in their children's lives. So what's the answer? There are two fundamental answers to advertising that encourages the use of a dangerous and harmful (but legal) drug. The first is to greatly reduce or even ban the marketing of alcohol, and the second is to mandate or fund a heavy campaign of counter advertisements. An alcohol counter advertisement is a public service ad that counters the promotional nature of a marketing spot with sobering and accurate information the dangers of alcohol, the health risks of drinking, or the societal costs of alcohol abuse. The intent is to create a more balanced and accurate perception of the dangers versus the pleasures of using alcohol. Experts agree that counter advertisements work, and counter advertisements used against tobacco usage have proven effective. While the will exists to create and display the ads, the barrier is money, and all public service groups combined command nothing close to the advertising budget of even a single massive brewery. The National Alcohol Tax Coalition has the answer to that problem though, and they estimate that by raising the price of a single drink by only a dime, more than 4 billion dollars a year could be raised to fund effective and accurate public service alcohol counter advertising campaigns. I don’t believe that prohibition is ever the answer, and I'm not even sure that companies selling a still legal product should be denied the right to market their wares; but due to the massive societal destruction wreaked by alcohol, I do believe that these alcohol promotions cannot be allowed to go unanswered. We need to make sure that kids and teens are getting a balanced and accurate picture of the realities of alcohol use. Write to your State and Federal elected officials and demand that for every Bud ad, we get a grieving mother after a drunk driving fatality, and that for every beer beach party spot we also learn about the dangers of alcohol and brain damage.

A recent Japanese study indicates that alcoholism induces brain damage, and that this brain damage is occurring before any cognitive declines or structural changes are evident. The problem is that this early brain damage progresses unnoticed by all, and as such never scares people into getting help, and stopping the damage. Long term heavy drinking may be doing even more damage to brain functions than previously realized. Addictions professionals and medical personnel have long witnessed the cognitive deficits and even premature dementia induced by years of chronic and heavy drinking, and no one disputes the harm that alcohol does to the mind. Magnetic imaging and autopsy testing has also clearly shown evidence of significant cell death, brain shrinkage, and structural damage in the brains of people who had lived with years of heavy abuse; but new research out of Japan indicates that permanent brain damage may be occurring even in those people who have yet to exhibit any signs of diminished cognitive functioning, or show any physcial or structural changes in the brain. Researchers out of Keio University compared recovering alcoholics showing no signs of cognitive deficits and with no apparent brain damage, and with an average period of abstinence of 40 months; with a population of never alcohol dependent people. Using brain imaging techniques, and observing blood flow during a mental matching task, the researchers found that key areas of the recovering alcoholic's brains (including the pre frontal cortex) were receiving less blood during the task than in the brains of the "normal" group of study participants. The concern is that people yet to show any obvious signs of mental decline, nor exhibit any forms of structural damage (and as such unaware of any neural problems) are in fact sustaining damage and a reduction in mental potential. Essentially, damage is occurring, but people drinking have yet to really notice the damage, and standard diagnostic testing will not spot any physical damage. These latent lesions, as the researchers call them are likely the first stage of alcohol induced brain damage, and since alcoholics don’t realize that they are occurring, they don’t induce people to get help for their drinking. These brain deficits cannot induce sobriety (because people are yet to be aware of the problem) and yet they are only getting worse with time and further abuse. Heavy drinking is causing brain damage earlier than anyone had ever realized. If you're drinking heavily, you need to consider treatment help to minimize any potential of neural damage and cognitive declines.

Teens that use drugs other than marijuana are three times as likely to have suicidal thoughts…and only about a third of teens at risk for suicide receive any preventative counseling. Revealing statistics by the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA) show that although we know that the best way to lessen the prevalence of suicide is through early intervention and counseling, we are failing to intervene with the vast majority of at risk kids. Additionally, we also know that those kids who use drugs other than marijuana are three times as likely (29% as versus 10% for non drug using kids) to have suicidal thoughts. Also disturbing is that the vast majority of kids who do eventually get preventative therapy for suicidal ideations receive this treatment only after an unsuccessful suicide attempt or voiced suicidal thoughts. Although we aren't doing a great job recognizing and intervening in the lives of at risk kids, nobody really has any concrete ideas or plans for doing better; and any attempts at bettering our track record of intervention surely have to begin in the home, and with the only people who have much real influence over at risk teens…their parents. A wake up call for parents Parents who catch their kids using illicit drugs need to understand the accompanying risks associated with drug seeking behaviors, and recognize that almost 3 in 10 teens that are using drugs are at risk for suicide. Parents need to stay involved and vigilant in the lives and behaviors of teens prone to experimentation, and be ready to take appropriate action should teens exhibit drug seeking behaviors. Don't take a chance...get professional help! Substance abuse is always best caught as early as possible, and in the early stages very low intensity therapy or treatment can have great effects. Another compelling reason for catching substance abuse at the earliest possible opportunity is to identify kids at risk for suicidal thoughts…and some professional involvement may be advisable when kids are experimenting with drugs other than marijuana. Although most kids experimenting with harder drugs do not have suicidal thoughts, enough do that early drug experimentation must be a call to preventative action and possibly professional intervention.

We as a society are really doing a terrible job helping people overcome alcohol abuse or alcoholism. Recognized as a disease by the AMA, treatment coverage remains severely limited by most insurance providers, and the high costs of treatment deter hundreds of thousands of people a year, wanting treatment, but unable or unwilling to foot the bill. Even more disturbingly, an incredible number of people who recognize the need for treatment, and who are not unwilling to seek out and even pay for treatment, cite the fear of social repercussions and stigma as a major factor deterring them from initiating treatment. Here is the breakdown *18.6 million Americans have an alcohol abuse problem or dependency *A mere 8% of these people gets treatment each year *4.5% of these people recognize a need for treatment, but for a number of reasons don’t get it…and of these 4.5% (which works out to well over 700 000 people) 24% say a major reason why they don’t get treatment is the fear of social stigma. So about 175 000 Americans, who recognize that they have a problem and want help don’t get it out of a fear of social or professional repercussions. They would rather continue to be alcoholics, than get better and become labeled as recovering alcoholics…which is a dismal appraisal by hundreds of thousands on the true mood of tolerance within our country. No one would ever avoid chemotherapy for fear of being labeled a cancer survivor!!! Although alcoholism is recognized as a disease, we continue to treat people afflicted with the condition as social pariahs, who could choose not to drink, but through a lack of willpower, loose morals or sheer self indulgence, just won’t stop drinking. That anyone would choose the heartbreak, ravaged health, and family pain of alcoholism belies belief, but through extension of popular logic, alcoholics must therefore choose these accompanying destructions. And I wish I could say that those alcoholics that make the decision to avoid treatment out of fear of social repercussions are crazy or paranoid…but I don’t believe that, and although I don’t believe that any price is worthy of the continuing destruction of active alcoholism, there most undoubtedly is a stigma attached to alcohol recovery, and people will pay a social cost for getting treatment. Never overt, the subtle repercussions' endure for years after successful abstinence. Whether it's being continually passed over for deserved promotion, never being invited to coach little league or enduring the chilly civility of neighbors, the costs are not imagined. As a recovering alcoholic, and someone who has participated in treatment and has always been open about my disease; I have felt the discrimination of the ignorant and the uninformed. I never regret having sought treatment, but neither am I naïve any longer about the true attitudes of too many in our country. Alcoholism is a disease!!! We need people to understand this, and understand that by continuing this subtle discrimination of recovering alcoholics they propagate the condition. Alcoholism inflicts a heavy price on society and all of us are affected, and by perpetuating myths and stereotypes we all make the problem worse. We contribute to more DUIs, more family abuse and more early deaths. Any time anyone discriminates against or belittles a recovering alcoholic or the disease in general, there may be a still drinking alcoholic within earshot, realizing the price they'll pay for conceding to treatment. Out of compassion, and out of self interest, all in this country should make it clear through our actions and our words, that we do accept alcoholism as a disease, and that we respect those that can beat it.

A great many parents are nervously wondering how their away from home for the first time kids are getting on at college, and a lot of them will be justifiably concerned about the risks of college drinking, especially when kids are away from parental supervision for the first time in their lives.

College binge drinking and the eventual development of dependency is an enormous societal problem across college campuses in the United States, and the devastation of alcohol related deaths, assaults, and alcohol induced sexual violence transcends schools throughout the country. Some schools are worse than other though…

Researchers at Harvard University wanted to see what variables seemed to influence the levels of alcohol related problems at diverse schools across the nation, and one factor that earned an enormously strong correlation with rates of problem drinking was the number of alcohol outlets within two miles of the campus center.

185 bars within 2 miles of campus!!!

Out of the schools surveyed, the range of alcohol outlets within a 2 mile radius ranged from a substantial 32 to a mind boggling 185, and not surprisingly there was an almost direct correlation of increasing alcohol problems, alcohol abuse, and alcohol dependence with greater numbers of outlets serving alcohol. The school with the greatest number of alcohol outlets had 48% of students getting drunk more than three times a month.

There is no doubt that environmental variables influence the development of alcohol abuse problems and alcoholism, and while a real alcoholic would surely drink even if there existed only one outlet within a 2 mile radius, by providing an enormous and ever present environment of alcohol access and temptation, certain schools are undoubtedly contributing to their own alcohol abuse problems.

The solution to college binge drinking may be easier than we had thought

Parents wanting to evaluate the risks to their kids need only take a short drive around and count the number of bars in the neighborhood, and if schools and their communities want to enact serious changes to the culture of college drinking, the answer may well be easier than we had all thought; and with a bit of creative rezoning...we could save thousands of lives a year, and tens of thousands from alcohol abuse and alcohol dependency problems.

The responses of different schools to the problem of college drinking have varied from fundamental changes in policy to lip service and knee jerk reactions, not likely to bring any betterment of the problem. Harvard researchers were surprised at the incredibly strong correlation between alcohol access and alcohol abuse, and suggest that these very "wet" environment pose an incredible risk to people who have not yet developed alcohol abuse problems…but very well might.

I was a drunk…and I had a fat ass. Seriously, I drank heavily for years, and when I look back at pictures of me in my drinking days, I can’t believe that I belong to that pudgy face looking blearily back at me. When I quit drinking, within a year I lost 70 pounds. No exercise, no diet…just no beer, and within months my clothes hung loosely on my shrinking frame; and I stopped sweating so profusely on relatively cool days!

I felt better, I looked better, and I was all of a sudden far healthier. Weight gain is one of the very obvious and externally visible symptoms of alcohol abuse, and the internal and mental damage, although unseen, is far worse; but it's hard to describe how great it felt to be enjoying sobriety, and also looking so much better just by cutting out 12-15 beers a night on the couch.

There are two kinds of drinkers, fat ones and skinny ones…and it's actually bad to be either. The fat ones get fat through the enormous intake of calories within the daily consumption of alcohol needed. The skinny ones are arguably worse off, as they are drinking just as much but since they don’t gain weight, their gastro intestinal tracts are either damaged to the point that they no longer effectively process consumed food, or they just don’t eat much beyond liquid meals, and are at a fantastic risks for vitamin and nutritional deficits.

The calories in different alcoholic drinks are:

Beer 1 regular bottle = 150 calories

Liquor 1 ounce, not including mixer = 65

Liqueurs 1 ounce = 188

Red wine 1 glass =80 calories

Dry white wine = 1 ounce 75 calories

1 martini = 140 calories

1 margarita = 168 calories

1 cooler = 150 calories

Even people who drink nothing close to the amount I did will still gain weight from regular drinking. Teenage girls who drink a 6 pack of coolers 3 times a week would gain 3 pounds of fat a month unless they either compensate by eating less (nutritional deficits) or spent an awful lot of time on the treadmill (1 six pack = 1.5 hours of hard running).

A 3 pound gain a month becomes a 36 pound gain over a year, and starts to become a very noticeable, unattractive and unhealthy sign of drinking too much.

Perhaps as a part of teenage prevention plans we need to show people what heavy drinking starts to look like after a year or two, and see how many teens always concerned about their appearances still want to binge drink on a regular basis.

Obesity is a major health risk, and heavy drinking is one of the quickest ways to an unhealthy weight. Obesity may also be something that teens can understand and relate to as a real and imminent danger of heavy drinking, whereas the dangers of addiction and long term health problems don’t seem to truly register with teens living in the here and now, with middle age seeming a thousand years away.

There's a reason for a portrayal in movies of "stoners" as slow on the uptake half wits, and that's because the reality of frequent and heavy marijuana usage is a significant cognitive impairment, and greatly decreased mental performance.

Kids like to be cool, but not too many like to be dumb; but that's just what kids who are smoking marijuana are doing to themselves. I unfortunately speak from the voice of experience here, and I can remember (foggily) a couple of years in high school during which time I smoked marijuana almost daily, and also during which time I lost almost complete interest in participating in school. But not only did I lose all interest in school…I seemed to lose all interest in thinking as well! That was a great many years ago, and since estimates have today's pot as 300%-600% stronger than the pot I grew up on…I can only guess how today's stoners even manage to tie their shoelaces!

Some quick facts on marijuana and thinking ability

*Kids with a D average are 400% more likely to light up than kids with an A average.

*Smoking marijuana causes impaired concentration and memory performance for 24 hours after lighting up…you can see how a daily joint could have a serious impact!

*A recent study showed that people who used marijuana 7 times per week or more had significant deficits in verbal and mathematical abilities, and in memory retention.

*The effects of marijuana on the brain are exaggerated when marijuana is used by teens, with still developing brains.

Also

Marijuana is addictive

Early marijuana use is a significant predictor of later drug problems

Marijuana use is associated with increased risks for schizophrenia and depression

We as a society have a problem. We are too often spreading the message that marijuana use is relatively harmless, that it's a natural weed and even a beneficial medicine; and that the long term risks of marijuana use are negligible…and part of the problem is that many of today's parents grew up in a cultural period very tolerant to marijuana use.

The difference today is that marijuana users don’t start in college…they start in high school or junior high (49% of high school seniors have tried marijuana!) and that marijuana today is estimated as 600% stronger than the marijuana of a few decades ago. With increasing potency comes increasing problems, including the very real possibility of developing a marijuana addiction.

Marijuana's usefulness as a medicine remains controversial and even disputed, and it remains an illicit substance in most of the country. Pro marijuana groups seem especially concerned with spreading the propaganda of marijuana as medicine, whereas doctor's groups have been far more cautious, and most groups suggest that the risks and harms outweigh any benefits.

Marijuana is dangerous, it does have consequences…it does make you dumb!

Teens need to be made aware of the true risks of marijuana usage, and parents also need to get educated as to the risks of today's marijuana. Whether through decreased school performance, an increased risk for psychiatric conditions, criminal justice system involvement, increased aggression or intoxicated driving, and ultimately a serious risk for addiction, the dangers of heavy marijuana smoking a real, are many and are significant.

There is a lingering perception that government is somehow misleading us as to the dangers of marijuana, and in the past this likely was so (see the movie "reefer madness") and unfortunately this has greatly reduced their credibility on marijuana issues. The reality is that today's marijuana is dangerous, the information presented by health and governmental groups accurate, and the risks of heavy smoking high.

Teens (or anyone) unable to stop smoking marijuana may need professional intervention and treatment.

Alcoholics fall over a lot…and have weakened bones; not an ideal combination.

It seems as though you can pretty much name any part of your body…and alcohol abuse will negatively affect it. Bones are no exception, and the chronic and heavy use and abuse of alcohol is a major contributor to experienced osteoporosis. Osteoporosis has no effective treatment, and prevention is the only way to minimize the odds of this debilitating health and mobility condition.

Alcohol abuse negatively effects bone density and bone health, and it does so in a number of ways.

The problems…

Firstly, alcoholics often neglect their diet and tend to get much of their daily caloric intake through the liquid but empty calories of alcohol. This legacy of nutritional deficits causes many problems, and one expression of nutritional neglect is observed through bones weakened by years of little calcium and vitamin D consumption.

Secondly, chronic alcohol consumption causes an increase in levels of parathyroid hormone, which lessens calcium storage; and alcohol also disrupts the body's ability to produce calcium linked vitamin D.

Additionally, in both men and women, chronic and heavy alcohol abuse alters bodily hormones that impact on bone health and development. Heavy drinking in men causes a reduction in testosterone, and this decrease in testosterone further decreases peripheral cells called osteoblasts, which are responsible for bone cell formation. Chronic and heavy drinking in women can cause menstrual irregularities and hormonal deficits, and is also linked to a reduction in bone cell development.

The solutions…

Firstly, the best way to reverse the deficits on the skeletal bones of the body is simply through achieving abstinence and ending the continuing assault on calcium.

Secondly, abstinence should be combined with a nutritional program designed to reverse the nutritional deficits created through abuse, and recovering alcoholics should take special care to take additional supplements of vitamin D and of Calcium.

Weight bearing exercise can strengthen bones, and so can quitting smoking.

Many years of alcohol abuse can greatly increase the probability of experiencing osteoporosis in later years. The best way to better the odds and improve bone health is through a better lifestyle and a cessation of drinking.

Don't worry; you can still drink…milk!

If a couple of drinks makes you flushed and red in the face, watch out…you're at a greatly increased risk for alcohol related cancers! A person's genetically predetermined efficiency for alcohol metabolism factors into a predisposition for the development of alcoholism. Alcoholism is a both a genetically expressed hereditary disease, and also a disease profoundly influenced by environmental variables. The genetic component for a predisposition to alcoholism is not yet entirely understood, but researchers have linked certain gene expression differences (that influence the metabolism of alcohol) with a decreased risk of developing alcoholism. Contrarily, although these same people enjoy a reduction of risk to the expression of the disease, those that do drink heavily seem to suffer more severely from their consumption. Certain groups of people share a common enzymatic gene expression that leads to inefficiency in metabolizing alcohol. This makes the consumption of alcohol less pleasant, and also more harmful. How is alcohol metabolized in the body? Ethanol -->acetaldehyde-->acetate--> water and carbon dioxide Ethanol (Alcohol) as consumed in the body goes through two enzymatic transitions before it is completely metabolized out of the body. Ethanol is first broken down into the enzyme acetaldehyde, and then further broken down into the enzyme acetate, which can be in turn reduced to water and carbon dioxide for expulsion from the body. Acetate is relatively harmless and inactive, but acetaldehyde is a toxic and very active substance and is a known carcinogen. The intermediate stage at which ethanol is transformed to acetaldehyde is brief, but with enough exposure, this acetaldehyde can influence the development of cancers of the mouth, esophagus, the digestive tract, the pancreas, liver and the breast. Genetic differences in the metabolism of ethanol Certain groups of people, most notably many people of a Korean, Chinese and Japanese decent enjoy a genetic expression that protects them from alcoholism, but that increases the harm of heavy drinking if it does occur. The metabolism from ethanol through acetaldehyde to acetate generally happens quickly; and the quicker the acetaldehyde is metabolized into acetate, the less harmful the consumption of alcohol and the more enjoyable the consumption. Certain groups of people endure a contrasting efficiency and then inefficiency in the breakdown of alcohol. That is they can transition ethanol into acetaldehyde relatively quickly, but are slow to convert acetaldehyde into acetate. These people tend to exhibit a reddened and flushed face after a small amount of drinking and are also more prone to experienced nausea and a weakened and quickened heart rate after drinking. The act of drinking is far less pleasant, and as such, people with this particular gene expression don’t tend to drink as heavily, and suffer far lower probabilities of developing alcoholism. If people with this particular genetic expression do continue to drink through the negative experienced symptoms, they can develop alcohol abuse problems and dependencies just as readily as the general population, but since their bodies are exposed to the toxic and carcinogenic acetaldehyde for far longer, these people are at a greatly increased risk for certain cancers and other negative long term health risks associated with chronic alcohol consumption. The red faced warning!!! If you or a loved one is one of those easy to spot drinkers who go fire engine red after a drink or two, you should be especially cautious of heavy alcohol consumption. If you think that you may be inefficiently metabolizing alcohol, yet do drink heavily; you do need to cut down on your drinking, and get professional intervention and treatment if needed. Alcohol abuse is destructive for anyone, but for people who do not process acetaldehyde well, it is particularly devastating.

The National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism has determined that there is a "lost decade" between the age of onset of alcohol abuse or alcohol dependency and the age of first treatment.

The average gap between alcohol abuse onset and treatment is actually a decade, while for dependency it is about 8 years, with the average alcoholic succumbing to dependency at the age of 22 and not attempting first treatment until the age of 29. A long and destructive time!

And that's only for the 25% who ever initiate any form of treatment…and treatment was defined in very broad terms, including any form of intervention from a doctor or psychologist, any inclusion in group support meetings or any participation in 12 steps meetings such as AA.What we know is that the longer alcohol dependency is allowed to progress, the worse the eventual prognosis, and that those people that do ever seek out treatment endure many years of deepening addiction before doing so, and most never even try to get better.

Better public awareness about intervention strategies that work

The agency calls for better public and professional education as to the signs and symptoms of alcohol abuse and dependency, and education about how families and medical care workers can apply intervention strategies to both decrease the average length of alcohol abuse or dependency before treatment, and even more importantly, to increase the total percentages of alcoholics initiating any form of treatment.

Let's focus on the intervention part of that…

And while educating about the signs of alcohol abuse and dependence is maybe a beneficial thing, it's hard to imagine that for those 25% who (after 8+) years seek out treatment, that people didn’t notice the emergence of the alcoholism.

I think that instead of teaching people about the signs of alcoholism, we need to be teaching them what to do when they do see it. People can always spot a drunk, and its not as if family doesn't notice when a loved one passes out drunk every night. The problem is that too many people mistakenly believe that only alcoholics themselves can decide when to initiate treatment, and that only after hitting rock bottom can alcoholics really decide to get help.

We need public campaigns that educate people of influence (anyone!) about effective strategies such as interventions that do prove very successful at influencing changes in behaviors and in forcing an acceptance of a need for treatment.

We need to educate people that by doing nothing to intervene they remain complicit in the levels of abuse and the destruction of the disease, and that when the damage of alcoholism starts to migrate through the family, the workplace or the community, it becomes everyone's business to intervene for the individual and the common good.

At first glance it sounds ridiculous, but variations on this philosophy have been touted as a solution to our international drug problems for ages, and a number of countries have actually implemented programs to this effect with great results (the Netherlands and Canada).

1. Buy the raw ingredients and make our own drugs!!!

Governments need to start the process out on the poppy fields of Myanmar and Afghanistan and in the Columbian coca plantations, with massive investments into the infrastructure of the precursors to drugs of abuse. In one fell swoop, by becoming a legitimate, well funded and motivated buyer; you could eliminate the power of militant drug factions and end the profiteering of military based and terrorist organizations funding arms projects through drug sales.

We could also get enough of the medical drug precursors for legitimate usages, and as we burn poppy fields in Pakistan, we also suffer through a real medical shortage of morphine based derivatives…crazy!

Fill a few cargo planes and get this stuff into laboratories throughout America, where we could make high grade drugs of standardized purity, and with no harmful additives.

2. Give it away for free…or at least pretty cheaply!

The high street costs of drugs come from the profiteering of a series of middle men along the way to the consumer, and if government legitimately purchased and manufactured common drugs of abuse, the production costs per dosage would be laughably small.

Give addicts that need them the drugs they're going to take anyways, and provide drugs of a known standard of purity and without harmful additives to addicts at a price that doesn’t require of them to rob convenience stores or mug old ladies to get their needed fix. Drugs will be issued in small and controlled quantities, and addicts will need to register for programs to get involved.

It won’t be too tough to participate though, as the whole point of the program requires inclusivity of access, but neither will government be supplying recreational drugs to high school students looking for a buzz!

Overnight, the criminal drugs industry would disappear, and with it an enormous legacy of crime and urban violence. Selling drugs would immediately become unprofitable and neither would desperate addicts be forced to commit crimes or prostitute themselves to earn drug money.

Countries that have implemented free drugs programs do not see a massive influx in numbers of users, but they do see a great reduction in crime and associated social problems.

3. Work with addicts towards treatment and sobriety

When addicts are full and voluntary participants in non punitive governmental programs for illicit drugs we have a fantastic opportunity to effect real and substantial change.

Firstly, by giving drugs of a known quality and potency, and in limited (observed?) quantities, you greatly lower the risks of fatal or harmful overdoses. Secondly, addicts already participating in the program can be better encouraged to participate in accompanying therapies, drug education seminars and other medical peripheral programs. We can get these people healthier, we can keep them safer, and we can try to get them off drugs completely…and all while we do real societal good.

No one wants to be a drug addict

The idea that by giving out free or affordable drugs to addicts that we would create ever greater numbers of addicts is laughable. No one wants to become an addict, and those people who do end up dependent on drugs need our help and treatment rather than our scorn and sanction.

The enforcement of anti drug policies has ruined entire communities, has enriched overseas and local criminals, and has provided billions of dollars in funding to groups hostile to the United States. With one easy move we could change all of this, and have a better opportunity to reduce the number of addicts as we improve their health and reduce risk behaviors (sharing needles, prostitution).

The reason that this is an oldie though is that the political will to even suggest policies perceived as favorable or "soft" on drugs simply does not exist within the conservative drug climate of our nation; and as such we are sure to endure many more years of faulty drug policies that do far more harm than good, and squander opportunities for real societal change.

Write your elected leaders with and tell them you want free heroin…who knows, after they stop laughing they might even think about it.

It's not often that I find myself on the same side of a policy argument with our esteemed president, but when President Bush started promoting further use of drug testing in schools, I cheered of concrete action being taken to help reduce the risks of drug and alcohol use behaviors in a group of people so very at risk to develop substance abuse problems and dependencies.

Anyone could see that the issue would create some controversy, but I can’t believe the strength of opposition to a privacy rights violation confirmed as permissible by the Supreme Court.

First of all, let me clarify…I am very much against the "war on drugs" and I don’t believe that enforcement of drugs and alcohol addiction issues will ever create any positive change in our society. I also believe that rigid criminal penalization of drug use does far more harm, and promotes far more criminal activity than it could ever hope to reduce; and I am uncomfortable siding with an administration that (despite a dubious personal history of abuse by our commander in chief) has done very little to reduce harsh federal sentencing and done equally little to improve access to treatment by those that need it.

But done well, and with sensitivity, school drug testing gives school administrators and through them parents, the information they need to take concrete and productive steps towards intervention and possibly treatment…as early into drug abuse as is possible. We should not look at drug testing as an enforcement issue, but instead as a fantastic way to improve treatment intervention for a group uniquely vulnerable to the effects of drugs and alcohol.

Early drinking and or drug abuse dramatically increases the risks of ultimately having an abuse issue or dependency to drugs or alcohol, and if we could just keep kids from experimenting for a few more years we would achieve a massive reduction in eventual dependency rates, accompanying social costs and personal devastations.

There have been a number of arguments put forth by those that ideologically oppose drug testing in our schools, and while I respect the motivations of those people that hope to put a stop to the testing, I question their ideations.

Myth no. 1…drug testing won’t protect kid's rights to confidentiality

Opponents of drug testing in the school blast measures that don’t do enough to protect the privacy rights of kids using drugs or alcohol…but it's not as if other teens don’t already know who’s using and who isn’t; it's just educators and parents who are largely in the dark…and kids sharing a joint under the bleachers certainly aren’t hiding their consumption from other teenaged eyes.

We won’t "out" kids abusing drugs or alcohol, we'll just be able to help them.

Myth no. 2…drug testing will damage trust issues between educators and teens

Another major point of contention amongst opponents to the policy is a belief that drug testing will increase the adversarial nature of the teacher student relationship, and reduce the ability of educators to positively influence the actions of teenagers.

I find this one also pretty ridiculous. Almost 3 quarters of high school kids will illegally use alcohol and almost half will try illicit drugs…clearly the influence of educators has some pretty serious limitations outside of the school environment, and I would even argue that conclusive evidence of abuse would reduce the adversarial nature of a relationship.

Things tend to get most heated when one side accuses without proof, and one side denies while unable to prove absolute innocence. With drug testing, there is no need for uncertainty, and neither is there any need for an adversarial relationship. A positive drug test does not need to be handled punitively within the school environment, but that information does need to be passed to concerned parents who are in a far greater position of influence, and far more able to effect change.

Myth no. 3…drug testing won’t reduce drug taking in schools

Opponents point to studies that polled high school students about whether drug tests would cause them to reduce their consumption as evidence of their ineffectiveness; but drug testing has had real success, most notably in the military where compulsory drug testing has dramatically lowered levels of abuse over the last years.

We should never be drug testing kids looking for an excuse to punish, and all we should be trying to accomplish is to protect teens at risk of abuse and addiction from the greater dangers of drug use. Schools should not be responsible for enacting policies against drug usage, and only parents have enough influence and control over their kids to really induce any real change…unfortunately most parents either never know about drug use, or don’t find out about it until it's too late, and a recreational usage has become a serious problem.

We don’t need or even want schools to try to influence drug taking…that's a job for the family; but they are in a great position to spot and conclusively test for usage, and give that information to people who really care and want to see a behavioral change. Parents deserve information that will allow them to take concrete and constructive steps towards drug and alcohol avoidance.

We will have to see…

Drug testing non compliant teenagers does carry some risks, and I don’t think that it should be done with a heavy hand or with punitive measures in mind. But if it is done well, and if schools allow parents the right and responsibility of taking appropriate action after a positive test…I can’t see how drug testing could be anything but a very positive step to protect our kids.

An epidemiological study by the National Institute on Alcohol abuse and Alcoholism, that evaluated data on almost 1500 people who met the criteria for alcohol dependence, has subdivided the different types of alcoholics into 5 distinct subgroups. By better understanding the different types of alcoholism and how it afflicts diverse groups of people, interventions and treatments can hopefully be designed better suited to the needs of individual alcoholics.

The study reveals that more than half of all people that meet the criteria for alcohol dependence have no familial history of alcoholism, and that those most likely to ever seek out treatment were the most antisocial and most dependent of drinkers. Only about 25% of all alcoholics ever seek any form of treatment for their drinking, and much fewer than even that number succeeds in successfully conquering the disease.

What we know is that only a fraction of people with alcoholism are ever getting better; and while this may seem a very pessimistic view for the future, the fact that 75% of alcoholics avoid treatment for life means that we have a great opportunity to effect change by designing interventions and better treatments to get those people never treated into treatment, and onto the road to sobriety.

The five sub groups of alcoholics as classified by the NIAA are:

The Young Adult Alcoholics 31.5%

These people have a very low percentage history of family drinking, and a low rate of other substance use or dependency. These people are very unlikely to seek out treatment for their alcoholism.

The Anti Social Young Alcoholic

This group representing 21.5% of alcoholics started drinking heavily early, more than half have a family history of alcohol abuse, and more than half present with some form of co present psychiatric disorder (often anti social personality disorder). This group is very likely using other drugs with alcohol and about 33% of these people will seek out help for their drinking

The Functional Alcoholic

This group of alcoholics represents 19.5% of the sample, and these people are normally well educated and professionally and stably employed. About half of these people will have experienced a major psychiatric disorder at some point, and these people are unlikely to seek help for their drinking.

Intermediate Familial Alcoholics

Representing 19% of alcoholics, these people are not as successful as the functional group. About half come from families with a multigenerational history of alcohol abuse, and more than half will have suffered from a depressive disorder. About 25% of these people will ever seek out treatment.

Chronic Severe Alcoholics

This last group, representing 9% of drinkers, are mostly middle aged, and have a long history of alcoholism, normally starting out in adolescence. 80% of these people have a multigenerational history of alcoholism and also present with a high degree of criminality and other substance abuse. This group of people is the most commonly seen group in alcohol treatment, with more than 75% of these people initiating alcohol treatment at some point.

How does this information help?

Examining the classification data, we can see that very few people are ever seeking out treatment help, and that the two groups most likely to ever seek out treatment are the two group displaying the most severe alcoholism and criminality. We know that the earlier treatment is attempted the better the eventual outlook, but it seems that the vast majority of treatment is only ever initiated on people with very severe and long lasting histories of alcohol abuse and dependency.

Those people who do suffer from alcoholism but do manage to hold down jobs, and lead more "normal" lives, are the most likely to benefit from treatment, are the largest group of alcoholics by the numbers, and are also by far the least likely to ever seek or receive appropriate interventions and treatment.

Because alcoholism is a progressive and destructive disease, we need to effect better change in the people most likely to benefit from treatment, and at the earliest possible opportunity. Young adult and functional alcoholics very rarely get the treatment that they need, and interventions and outreach need to do a better job at convincing these reluctant addicts of the need and the benefits of rehab or other appropriate treatment opportunities.

The fact that we are only treating a quarter of alcoholics over their lifetimes can be presented as a great opportunity to better treatment participation percentages, and to enact real positive change for a group of people that are very likely to benefit from these offered treatments.

Interfere!!!

Families, employers, clergymen, friends and co workers, we all need to do a better job at intervening in the lives of those people that desperately need treatment, but who are statistically so very unlikely to ever initiate it. We hate to stick our noses where they don’t belong, but the benefits of intervention far outweigh a perception of interference, and we have a great opportunity to do some real good.

Be nosy, interfere, and do some real good amongst groups of people that could really benefit from available therapies.