Robert Smith: Seven Years Sober

[pbmax]

PB, cancers result from genetic changes; you can be predisposed to a cancer, but you need a 'second hit' (either in the second allele of a gene which has one defective allele or in a second locus (gene) that will initiate cancerous growth.

While your genetics can make you more susceptible to addictive behavior, I don't know of any studies that show genetics cause addiction. When you put behavior in the equation, everything changes. I feel sorry for the poor characters who are more susceptible. It would perhaps be helpful if susceptibility could be more accurately measured for people so they know not to go down that path at all.

Not saying genetics cause addiction, just that is can indicate an increased risk.

Don't environmental factors sometimes cause those changes in genes for cancers? If I remember correctly, breastfeeding (or not) can help inure some women against developing cancer. I know someone who has an inflammatory disease that is mitigated by another genetic factor.

If the availability of alcohol produces a reward stimulus in a person and that pathway activates the predisposition to alcoholism, I am not sure there is much of a distinction here.

Agree that knowing predisposition of risk would help. But even if you think the delineation between developing alcoholism and cancer has a bright line, I very much doubt its explained by weakness.

[texaspackerbacker]

x

[mraynrand]

Not saying genetics cause addiction, just that is can indicate an increased risk.

Don't environmental factors sometimes cause those changes in genes for cancers? If I remember correctly, breastfeeding (or not) can help inure some women against developing cancer. I know someone who has an inflammatory disease that is mitigated by another genetic factor.

If the availability of alcohol produces a reward stimulus in a person and that pathway activates the predisposition to alcoholism, I am not sure there is much of a distinction here.

Agree that knowing predisposition of risk would help. But even if you think the delineation between developing alcoholism and cancer has a bright line, I very much doubt its explained by weakness.

I'm not sure, but I don't know if anyone becomes an alcoholic from one drink.

Sure, there are 'environmental' ways to trigger pathways that protect against various cancers.

I draw a distinction between the physiology of cellular cancer and behavior. The way you describe it is more tilted to the viewpoint that becoming an alcoholic is out of the hands of the victim. I know it's possible for people to slip into alcoholism without really knowing it, but typically people know and have chances to turn it around on the downward spiral. Smoking cigarettes is also addictive and cancer causing. Do you think people are just as helpless in that case? Or any other addiction, like blog posting?

[pbmax]

I'm not sure, but I don't know if anyone becomes an alcoholic from one drink.

Sure, there are 'environmental' ways to trigger pathways that protect against various cancers.

I draw a distinction between the physiology of cellular cancer and behavior. The way you describe it is more tilted to the viewpoint that becoming an alcoholic is out of the hands of the victim. I know it's possible for people to slip into alcoholism without really knowing it, but typically people know and have chances to turn it around on the downward spiral. Smoking cigarettes is also addictive and cancer causing. Do you think people are just as helpless in that case? Or any other addiction, like blog posting?

I can't imagine the low number of people who have only had one drink ever. I have teetotaling relatives who have had more than that. Another relative who does not drink except when at a social business gathering (thought the social climate made it problematic to say no).

I suspect the number who have never had a drink is higher. But let's say one drink could trigger alcoholism, how would you even identify it? Alcoholism is almost always diagnosed by behavior but could one exposure tell you anything? You have to have two groups to study, the affected and the unaffected and observe and hypothesize how they came to different results. That means more than one drink I suspect.

A better test would be to find some common norm, high school or college age, and observe the incidence of alcoholism from that point forward. At that point, measuring low levels of usage (one drink in past year or similar) probably tells you something useful.

A behavior has to be prevalent enough to identify and study before it becomes meaningful in a predictive sense I would think.

[Anti-Polar Bear]

Some things aren't worth the fight.

Trust me, you do not want to be conquered by porn. Addiction fucks up a person mentally, physically, socially and even in cyberspace.

The last part, I’m waiting for the rebirth of my smart brain cells. Need ‘em to response to Tex and 31’s debunkable posts in FYI.

[texaspackerbacker]

I don't know, APB. I'm into porn too, although maybe not as much as you hahahahaha, and it really doesn't mess with all those things. I think you're just using it as an excuse.

[smuggler]

He always struck me as a very intelligent guy. I'm not surprised he's been able to stay sober 7 years.