Substance Use – a habit of the gene’s?

What's even more disheartening than labeling normal folks as sick is that
a large percentage of erroneous diagnoses are not made by doctors, but
by unqualified "drug counselors." Treatment and AA are recommended by
counselors as a way to "nip it in the bud" but these recommendations do
far more damage to the individual than if they had just been left alone
(which will be discussed in some of my blogs later.) It should be pointed
out that there is a major conflict of interest among drug counselors, a
conflict of interest that cannot be ignored. The majority are, themselves,
members of 12 step groups and are believers in AA dogma. These non-
professional "professional" counselors have been manipulated into
believing 12-Step propaganda. And, like the AMA, their "professional"
status allows counselors to convince their patients that the patients need
help because they are sick.

And, if this 12 Step nonsense is not harmful enough, misinformation

abounds. Consider that recently in an attempt to prove a genetic link for
alcohol and drug abuse, most studies only provide roundabout evidence of
a predisposition, not a cause for alcoholism. With this said, we should
point out that the predisposition can only prove a difference in bodily
processes, not a difference in thinking. ''Knowing the sequence of
individual genes doesn't tell you anything about the complexities of what
life is,'' said Dr. Brian Goodwin, a theoretical biologist at Schumacher
College in Devon, England, and a member of the Santa Fe Institute in New
Mexico. Goodwin goes on to explain single gene mutations are not
accountable for, and cannot explain, complex behaviors. Genes produce
proteins; they do not guide behaviors. The truth is a predisposition for
substance abuse, if it does exist, has no bearing on subsequent behaviors.
Chemical processes do not make a person an alcoholic. The person makes
the conscience choice. Altered processing of alcohol in no way determines
choice or behaviors. Obsessive drinking is not a reaction to bodily
processes, but merely a choice. The amount consumed is determined by
the individual not by the body.

Nevertheless, news stories surface every year proclaiming discoveries of

the genetic sources of emotional and behavioral problems while ignoring
the mountains of evidence that refutes such preposterous assertions.
Genetics is the new panacea for medical professionals. Since 1987 such
reports have appeared on the front page of The New York Times in
connection with manic-depressive disorder, schizophrenia, homosexuality,
drug abuse and alcoholism. For example, in the early 1990's the Times
published a front page story with the headline "Alcoholism Gene Found."
However, soon after, the Times published a story titled "Scientists Now
Doubt They Found Faulty Gene Linked to Mental Illness." This was not on
the front page like the initial story but deep within the paper (Stanton
Peele). In the study a genetic marker was found in 69 percent of 70
cadavers who had died from alcohol related deaths. But, the cadavers
only represented 5 percent of the American population. According to the
study 25 percent of the population has the "alcoholism gene marker" or
genetic predisposition. The actual alcoholic population is 10 percent. It
was then found that only 1/5 of the 25 percent that have the marker
would develop alcoholic drinking that fit the parameters of those involved
in the Blum-Noble study. Therefore the results fail to demonstrate any
increased vulnerability to alcoholism. In later articles it was revealed that
the genetic marker appears to have little to do with becoming an
alcoholic. Not surprising, the AMA supported the faulty findings with
limited investigation. The two members of the team who reported the
false discovery of the gene were not without bias. Ernest Noble is the
former director of the NIAAA and Blum, a Pharmacologist for Texas
University, markets his own remedy for the malady in the form of
supplements.

Subsequently, a team of three genetics researchers summarized the

results of research on the Blum and Noble "alcoholism gene:" excluding
results from studies Blum himself conducted, "the frequency of the A1
allele at DRD2 is 0.18 in alcoholics, 0.18 in controls (random population
and nonalcoholic), and 0.18 in severe alcoholics. Blum et al. reported
allele frequencies for their alcoholics that are significantly different from
the combined allele frequencies reported by a total of seven other groups
of investigators for alcoholics (p < .001)." (J Gelernter, D Goldman, N
Risch, The A1 allele at the D2 dopamine receptor gene and alcoholism: a
reappraisal, JAMA, 1993;269:1676) (Stanton Peele, the Bottle in the Gene)

Looking at the situation objectively, if alcoholism is passed through genes,

the abnormality must be relatively new. As stated previously, alcoholism
did not exist in the early colonization of America. In fact, it did not exist
until the late 1700's. Some would argue that the residents of the United
States are largely immigrants and as a result the alcoholism gene was
introduced later in history. Meaning, the "new" citizens are not of the
same family tree as those of the 1700s. But, it’s important to point out,
many cultures outside of the United States do not even know what
alcoholism is; they do not have a word for it. People with different cultural
backgrounds do not have different genetic make-ups. America's arrogance
has led the population to believe that we are scientifically more advanced
than other cultures; therefore, we know the truth and they do not. But this
is far from true. In a country where we claim to "know the truth", the City
of Los Angeles has more addicts than all of Europe. While professionals
strive to remove the stigma surrounding alcoholics, they are in essence,
removing the social unacceptability of the act. By removing the stigma,
they are encouraging this socially unacceptable behavior to continue.

Today the AMA reports that while there is no "alcoholic personality," it

does not seem unreasonable to believe that there may be "some
combination of personality traits which are contributive to the
development of alcoholism." They assert that emotional immaturity and
strong dependency needs are commonly seen in alcoholics. While
researchers work hard to prove the disease concept sound and verifiable,
repeatedly studies refute the impact of genetic predispositions. "A great
deal of evidence, more consistent and extensive than anything yet
established by biological research, shows that social categories are the
best predictors of drinking problems and alcoholism. For example, in one
study of Boston ethnics, Irish Americans were seven times as likely to
become alcoholic over a 40-year period as Italian Americans living in the
same neighborhoods. Research uniformly finds alcoholism to be 3 to 10
times as prevalent among men as among women. Even researchers with a
biological orientation acknowledge that group differences of such
magnitude cannot be explained by genetic factors; certainly no such
genes have been identified." (Peele, Second Thoughts about a Gene for
Alcoholism) Strangely, cultural groups that don't believe they can control
their drinking have higher rates of alcoholism than those who believe they
can.

The NIAAA (National Institute of Alcoholism and Alcohol Abuse) found that
1 in 4 children, before the age of 18, in the US, have been exposed to a
family member who was/is an alcoholic. In 1974 an estimate was
developed by Booz-Allen Hamilton based on the ratio of problem drinkers
in the US, and the average number of children a family has. This method
was then applied by the Children of Alcoholics Foundation in 1984, and it
is estimated that 6,600,000 adolescents were children of alcoholics (Keep
in mind that there are 195,000,000 people in the United States, so even
though 6,600,000 looks large, compared to the total population, it is not).
Another estimate, using the 1980 population census, puts the number of
COA's (Children of Alcoholics) at 22,000,000. It has also been found that
children exposed to the idea that they will inevitably become alcoholic
drinkers should they decide to drink, and those who enter support groups,
have lower self-esteem and increased feelings of depression, two
characteristics of every substance abuser. Similar to treatment for
substance abusers overall, children entering support groups as a result of
familial problems are more likely to develop the same or similar problems
themselves. Furthermore, it has been shown in numerous studies that
COA's are only 6 percent more likely to become problem drinkers. Like the
need for a war on drugs, the idea that COA's will inevitably become
alcoholics, is pure propaganda. Teaching children they will face inevitable
consequence upon the consumption of substances, for many, creates the
problem.

It seems that self-proclaimed treatment professionals, blinded by

intention, are ignoring the overwhelming evidence that contradicts the
very principles they teach. True scientist and medical professionals know,
beyond reasonable doubt, the truth about alcoholism and substance
abuse. The rise of pop-psychology has clouded reasonable thought. Self-
help groups, treatment "therapy," counselors, and groupers are severely
damaging the very people they are whole-heartedly trying to help.
Twelve-Step dogma and treatment misinformation contradicts empirical
evidence and rational thought, in essence, stripping patients and
members of inherent and inbred abilities of spontaneous recovery.

If you or someone you know is being labeled a genetic “alcoholic” or a

“drug addict” you may want to consult some professionals that have been
helping people move past these labels for over two decades. Contact the
St. Jude’s Retreat House at www.soberforever.net, or Baldwin Research at
1-888-424-2626. The St. Jude’s Retreats have helped thousands over the
years live the dream of personal empowerment and joyful living, not
based on misguided science, but rather, on common sense and reality.