Answer Addiction

Tag: excess drinking

  • Can Binge Drinking Alter DNA?

    Can Binge Drinking Alter DNA?

    For a new study, scientists investigated whether heavy drinkers experienced genetic changes due to their alcohol consumption.

    Researchers have determined that binge drinking may alter a person’s genetic makeup and result in an even greater desire to consume alcohol.

    A recent study suggested that two genes that help to control drinking behavior become altered, and as a result, have different responses in individuals who classify as binge or heavy drinkers.

    The study appears to underscore the notion that genetics play a more significant role in alcohol and drug dependency, as well as the possibility for scientists to determine a predisposition for addiction.

    The study, conducted by researchers from Rutgers University and Yale University and published in the journal Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, focused specifically on genetic responses produced in binge or heavy drinkers—which according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are defined as men who consume five or more alcoholic beverages in a two-hour period, and women who consume four or more in the same period, resulting in a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08% or above, at least four times per month. 

    The two genes at the center of the study are PER2 and POMC, both of which are involved in the regulation of drinking behavior. PER2 plays a role in the body’s biological clock, while POMC regulates the stress response system, according to a press release from Rutgers.

    In binge drinkers, both genes were found to exhibit a change caused by alcohol called methylation, which employs a chemical tag that retains the DNA sequence of the gene but also retains the ability to turn those genes on or off.

    As the Philadelphia Inquirer noted, environmental stressors like drugs or alcohol, but also emotional stress, can cause methylation in different genes.

    To support the notion of genetic change due to alcohol, groups of test subjects—differentiated by their level of drinking (moderate, heavy and binge)—were shown stress-related, neutral or alcohol-related images, as well as containers of beer, and were allowed to taste beer while their motivation to drink was evaluated.

    The researchers found that binge and heavy drinkers who exhibited signs of genetic change also showed an increased desire to consume alcohol.

    Though the exact impact of the DNA change will require additional research, the study authors believe that focusing on genetic alteration will lead to the discovery of a biomarker, or genetic indicator, that can determine if a person is more likely to develop an alcohol or drug dependency.

    “That’s always been the hope of all mental illness,” said Bill Jangro, medical director for the division of substance abuse programs at Thomas Jefferson Hospital, to the Inquirer. “That we would find a medical cause that is somehow reversible.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • 15 Million Americans Are Battling Alcohol Use Disorder

    15 Million Americans Are Battling Alcohol Use Disorder

    Over an eight-year period, alcohol-related emergency room visits increased 47%.

    As a new year kicks off, some may be rethinking their relationship with alcohol. 

    In fact, according to the National Institutes of Health, greater than 15 million people in the US are living with alcohol use disorder.  

    The most recent numbers come from a study that examined data from 2006 to 2014 and found that alcohol-related emergency room visits increased to 5 million, up 47%. Of those, the biggest increase was in women ages 45 to 64. 

    One such woman is Teena Richardson of Seattle, who nearly lost her husband and two adult children due to her drinking habits. 

    “I wasn’t drinking wine anymore,” she told Fox 17. “It had escalated to hard alcohol. I wanted to get the buzz as fast as I could get it, and I wanted to hide it so that nobody knew.”



    Dr. Eric Shipley, medical director of Overlake Medical Center in Seattle, told Fox that despite these increasing numbers, people aren’t willing to cut out alcohol. 


    “If I went to somebody and said, ‘You could eliminate 15% of emergency room visits; would you do it?’ And they’d be, like, ‘Absolutely.’ Well, that means cutting out alcohol. ‘No, no, we’re not going there,” he said. 

    According to Fox 17, 88,000 people die each year of alcohol-related causes. This makes it the third leading preventable cause of death, with smoking and obesity coming in ahead.  

    “It’s one of the most dangerous drugs there is,” Dr. Harris Stratyner, a New York psychologist, told Fox 17. “It’s a little slower to kill you. It might take 10 years before it causes cirrhosis, but it’s gonna kill you.”

    For those who choose to seek treatment, there are a number of options for help. For Richardson, it took a few tries to find what worked. She tried outpatient therapy and 12-step programs before going to a 10-day aversion therapy program at Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle. 


    Erick Davis, the medical director at Schick Shadel, said the goal is to take away the craving for alcohol. 

    “What we do is we pair the experience of nausea with the thought, smell, taste and sight of alcohol,” he told Fox.

    For Richardson, it worked, and she has been in recovery for seven years. 

    “Now I’m present, and I’m mindful of where I came from,” she told Fox. “And the test of alcoholism gave me a testimony. I’m on the other side of it.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Could Higher Taxes Affect Binge Drinking?

    Could Higher Taxes Affect Binge Drinking?

    A new op-ed makes the case that higher taxation could reduce excess drinking. 

    Decreasing the amount of binge drinking in the country could be as simple as increasing taxes, according to a recent piece by The Washington Post editorial board.

    The board notes that 60 years ago, about 40% of American adults smoked cigarettes, whereas fewer than 20% do today. According to the board, this decrease has to do with the increase in cigarette taxes — and binge drinking should be treated in a similar manner. 

    The board cites a Johns Hopkins study from this year, which examined two tax increases in the state of Maryland. One was a 50% increase in alcohol sales tax in 2011 (bringing it to 9%), and the other was doubling the excise tax on a pack of cigarettes, bringing it to $2. In both cases, the board writes, consumption of the products went down quickly.

    “Opponents of such increases are often quick to denounce nanny-state politics, but government has a responsibility to promote public health,” the Post board wrote. “Cigarette and alcohol consumption exact a terrible toll, and not just on users; witness the impact of binge drinking on families and children, not to mention the carnage on the nation’s highways attributable to drunken driving.”

    More specifically, the study determined that in Maryland in 2015, retailers sold about 30% fewer packs of cigarettes than in 2007, which was the year before the excise tax was put into effect. Researchers determined that much of that decrease came quickly after the price increase. The change also affected minors, as researchers state teens who said they had smoked at least one time in the past 30 days decreased in that same span of eight years. 

    When it came to the increase in alcohol tax, the results were similar. According to the editorial board, researchers in another study examining police crash reports in Maryland found that the number of teenagers in alcohol-related crashes decreased by 12% annually in 11 years from the tax increase. Among drivers as a whole, the decrease was 6% annually. 

    The Johns Hopkins study also determined that alcohol intake decreased, as researchers said adult binge drinking in the state dropped by 17%, five years after the alcohol tax was enacted. 

    According to the board, those who oppose such increases may not be thinking about the whole picture. 

    “Among the arguments from opponents of such taxes is that they fall disproportionately on low- and middle-income people,” the board writes. “That’s true. It is also true that by reducing consumption (which weighs on wallets), they relieve the burden of long-term health care costs on those same people. That’s part of the compelling argument for public-health taxes, and why lawmakers are justified in imposing them.”

    View the original article at thefix.com