![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 25 of 37. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by AMD on April 30, 2005, at 18:34:26
chemist,
I keep reading about the potential for dementia, permanent brain damage, liver damage, etc., all caused by "excessive" alcohol use, vitamin B deficiency, etc.
I take a daily vitamin B supplement (and have for a year), eat a healthy dose of carbs and meat daily, and drink, say, two or three times a week, usually 4-5 drinks over the course of a couple of hours. Too fast, in other words.
However, is this enough to put me at risk for the permanent mental syndromes associated with long-term alcohol consumption? I actually was sober for about a year and a half before I moved back to the city, and now I've been drinking again -- since I returned about 2 1/2 months ago. Again, only in the evenings, two or three times a week, but a few times to excess, and almost always more than what is "recommended."
I'm going to quit again as I feel kind of sh*tty from this (thank god I can quit alcohol cold turkey without problems), but I'm wondering if I'm already at risk. Am I? Or is this overblown? Is there a chance I have vitamin deficiencies brought on my the alcohol, even if I have a more-or-less healthy diet? (Well, I could eat more vegetables, but I disgress.)
Anything I should do to reverse any damage done? Or is this overblown? I don't want to wake up a vegetable one morning. But I'm not sure: is the alcohol bad, or is it the affect it has on other things -- like your diet, etc. -- that really causes the problem?
Then again, I can tell my memory has been slightly impaired, particularly the days after drinking, and now I'm worried this won't rectify itself.
Information would be very useful!
TIA,
amd
Posted by chemist on May 1, 2005, at 3:45:31
In reply to chemist: alcohol? how much?, posted by AMD on April 30, 2005, at 18:34:26
amd, my chum...the first thing you need to do is consult professor larry hoover in re: toxicity, vitamins, and minerals. any questions about just about anything else are likely to be answered in full from him as well.
i spent my college nights with a beer tap attached to my lip, and became much more of an ``adult'' by switching to wine later. like you, i minded my p's and q's in terms of vitamins, exercise, and so forth. then, anxiety, panic, mood disorder, depresson, insomnia, and who knows what else came on board.
there is a point to all this, bear with me. i addressed the psych issues with medication, as therapy was harder on the walet than a meds check (and i had insurance). meds like xanax - 0.5 mg p.r.n. insomnia h.s., e.g. - often fell into my bordeaux glass. for about a year.
there is no alcohol or drug abuse in my family, and i do not care much for booze or cigs. i eventually noticed that although there was no intervention looming, the psychoactive meds - and smidgeon of therapy - were only going to help if i abstained from other substances (alcohol being the only one).
surprisingly, i am opinionated about this matter (you know me, even-keeled), and have seen - and am continuing to see - friends go by the wayside thanks to alcohol abuse. the fact that clinics are still well-funded in the quest for the mechanism by which alcohol damages every single organ in one's body suggests to me that tax dollars spent on deploying Roundup-laden aircraft to eradicate coca plants in colombia might be better spent on ethanol-related chases.
if you are young, genetically well-endowed, and are being truthful in reporting your intake, i suspect that your trousers might mysteriously shrink at a slightly faster rate than that were a few months ago. i doubt that brain damage that results in impairment that can be distinguished from, say, that which is caused by inhaling exhaust fumes from automobiles or by ingesting toxins in foods/beverages that have been ill-prepared will result.
my friends who are working on hardening their livers while subsidizing Dewar's are not only losing on the physiological front: relationships, jobs, and tangible items are going away, too.
in summary: the more you worry, the more you set back any gains made by the medication/therapy meant to address your other maladies. the more you try to integrate alcohol (here is an industry that should be bashed instead of big pharmas: alcohol is bad for people. that's a fact. drugs can and do help people, and do cause harm to others. also a fact. but my prescription xanax must be taken away from prying eyes, and every social occasion is not deemed complete without a few goverment-regulated and taxed belts) with a successful treatment of a condition that is better suited to meds/therapy, the worse off you become.
again, get with larry: he'll set you straight. i say choose one tack or the other: booze and smokes or meds/therapy/exercise/compliance/alternative. take it easy and let us know...all the best as usual, c
> chemist,
>
> I keep reading about the potential for dementia, permanent brain damage, liver damage, etc., all caused by "excessive" alcohol use, vitamin B deficiency, etc.
>
> I take a daily vitamin B supplement (and have for a year), eat a healthy dose of carbs and meat daily, and drink, say, two or three times a week, usually 4-5 drinks over the course of a couple of hours. Too fast, in other words.
>
> However, is this enough to put me at risk for the permanent mental syndromes associated with long-term alcohol consumption? I actually was sober for about a year and a half before I moved back to the city, and now I've been drinking again -- since I returned about 2 1/2 months ago. Again, only in the evenings, two or three times a week, but a few times to excess, and almost always more than what is "recommended."
>
> I'm going to quit again as I feel kind of sh*tty from this (thank god I can quit alcohol cold turkey without problems), but I'm wondering if I'm already at risk. Am I? Or is this overblown? Is there a chance I have vitamin deficiencies brought on my the alcohol, even if I have a more-or-less healthy diet? (Well, I could eat more vegetables, but I disgress.)
>
> Anything I should do to reverse any damage done? Or is this overblown? I don't want to wake up a vegetable one morning. But I'm not sure: is the alcohol bad, or is it the affect it has on other things -- like your diet, etc. -- that really causes the problem?
>
> Then again, I can tell my memory has been slightly impaired, particularly the days after drinking, and now I'm worried this won't rectify itself.
>
> Information would be very useful!
>
> TIA,
>
> amd
Posted by AMD on May 2, 2005, at 12:53:46
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by chemist on May 1, 2005, at 3:45:31
Thanks chemist.
I'm just curious about how much is too much: my mood is generally good, but I wonder if this occasional over-doing it will cause liver damage in the long run, or whether, basically, it's the daily, heavy drinkers who suffer these consequences.
As to brain damage -- I certainly hope not. But then, we probably shouldn't go through life with constant worry. Our brains are intact, sure -- and then we die.
What I'm wondering is, will the introduction of a few glasses of wine every night -- as opposed to once or twice a week binging -- be lighter or harder on my constitution? I'm speaking red wine here. Rather than give up drinking completely -- at least not while I'm feeling otherwise balanced on my medications -- I wonder if temperance is the key. Or will heavy drinking once or twice a week be safer, long run, than two or three glasses of wine daily?
I realize alcohol is "evil" -- but it's also a part of the culture, and I'd like to get to a place where I /can/ go to dinner and have a fine wine, something I enjoy, as an alternative to not drinking for days, weeks, and then exploding into a heavy, regretful night.
Again, my question is, which type is actually more damaging, if either is, which one would introduce more cognitive problems (or even enhancements), and how close is either to, say, alcohol abuse or alcoholism?
I'm trying to get hard facts, not the exaggerations as as pushed by the alcohol companies on one end and the anti-drinking crusaders on the other.
As always, your input proves invaluable.
amd
Posted by chemist on May 4, 2005, at 6:48:31
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » chemist, posted by AMD on May 2, 2005, at 12:53:46
hello again, pardon the time and lapse: work has taken my days and nights away, for a time. the theme of this thread makes me a bit leery. the ADMET business applied to ethanol in humans remains one of the grand challenges in the sciences. the fact that the substance is legal in many parts of the world, is embraced by many faiths as a part of ceremony or ritual, and endorsed by the scientific and lay communities as being something that is likely beneficial to one's health makes commentary beyond biased opinion on my part difficult.
from what i understand, ethanol damage is easy - simple, really - to control, and involves two and only two rules: drink moderate amounts of alcoholic beverages; and define the word ``moderate'' in this context.
ethanol damages all organs, inclusive of skin. chronic consumption of ``small'' amounts of alcohol vs. what the authorities refer to as binge drinking are likely more socially acceptable means to the same end, but this varies person to person and might actually be due to ethanol itself.
the red wine tilt - and do not leave dark brews of beer and ale from the list - is one that is fodder for the innards of the dining section of the sunday newspaper. resveratrol is an antioxidant that is a stilbene derivative and has been found to possess properties ranging from estronergic to cardioprotective to anti-inflammatory (and more). it is also used to justify consumption of ``moderate'' amounts of ethanol by humans wishing to exploit the J-curve of risk/benefit.
fortunately for the community of knockout mice and agar dishes, melanoma and stomach cancer need not worry them as long as they are consuming red wine. in a similar vein, when i am riding my bicycle in the early hours of the morning, i no longer concern myself with the threat posed by vehicles piloted by mice who have consumed a ``moderate'' amount of alcohol along with a moderate dose of alprazolam and forgot to take a moderate dose of insulin to moderate their blood sugar level before they drive home from the lab.
an editorial in the journal Circulation (Rimm and Stampfer, 2002; 105; 2806-2807) and the opening salvo in a paper by Barefoot et al. (Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2002; 76; 466-472) are as far as one need go in stating the punchline to all of this: there is a non-significant component that is hard if not impossible to quantify in determining whether or not the consumption of alcohol is good, bad, or other in an individual (or, in the second case, an alumni of the university of north carolina at chapel hill).
the ``mediterranean diet'' even varies as one traverses the mediterranean, at least according to some scientists in France and some in Greece - and the ``French Paradox'' is no paradox at all to de Lorgeril and colleagues, yet white wines from northern Italy and Germany and olive oil from Italy are as good as retsina and Feta from Greece or a Chateuneuf-des-Papes and Brie from France, according to Bertelli and colleagues in Milano and Pisa. Danish scientists concluded that wine drinkers have better diets than those who drink other types of alcohol-containing beverages, noting that smoking, education, and body mass index were accounted for in this study; Spanish scientists have shown that aging a wine does not increase the amount of antioxidants present in the wine, focusing upon whites and roses and spelling doom for Tavel and Champange in neighboring France; while Korean and Japanese studies - led by scientists likely to have underexpressed amounts of alcohol dehydrogenase in their bodies, thanks to genetics - have shed light upon possible neuroprotection and antitumor growth. Pal and colleagues have shown that Hardy's Nottage Hill, a cabernet shiraz from southern Australia, could be employed in a study leading to publication just as well as any French or Italian wine could, and a few Spanish scientists in Barcelona have shown that the antioxidants are present in grape juice (sans alcohol): i will refrain from commenting about Hardy's Long Flat Red offering and the obvious advantages of alcohol-free grape juice here.
adding alcohol to your diet will indeed call for added resources in your body to be employed. the liver/brain damage that occurs over time and by other pathways than those induced by alcohol are not likely to be over- or undershadowed by two five-ounce (or 150 mL) glasses of wine each day, just as whether or not you are an alumni of UNC or a full-blooded resident of Grenoble will not offset the effects of eight or ten drinks per day. i do feel that alcohol and medication are a mixture that is best avoided, and thus arrive where i begin: on the fence.
my folder containing publications related to resveratrol is rather thick, yet is devoid of references to ethanol and medication interactions being deemed positive. i think that ``two or three'' can turn into ``three or four'' in short time, or just as likely be zero: i do not feel the pull of ethanol, nor have i in the past. that said, i will add that my own experiences in adding wine to a diet that includes medication has shown that any benefit from the wine is outweighed by negative interactions with others and, equally importantly, sets back any gains made by therapy, medication, diet, exercise, or the other parts of a foundation of good health i try to include (and no, working through dawn is not one of them).
in summary: i would love to endorse a (literally) finite and moderate (according to the literature states) consumption of alcohol for the medicated populace, myself included. however, i think that it is detrimental to do so if for the only reason being that controlling medication, alcohol, and mood is much more difficult than mood and medication; mood and alcohol; or alcohol and medication. EOF
yours, chemist
> Thanks chemist.
>
> I'm just curious about how much is too much: my mood is generally good, but I wonder if this occasional over-doing it will cause liver damage in the long run, or whether, basically, it's the daily, heavy drinkers who suffer these consequences.
>
> As to brain damage -- I certainly hope not. But then, we probably shouldn't go through life with constant worry. Our brains are intact, sure -- and then we die.
>
> What I'm wondering is, will the introduction of a few glasses of wine every night -- as opposed to once or twice a week binging -- be lighter or harder on my constitution? I'm speaking red wine here. Rather than give up drinking completely -- at least not while I'm feeling otherwise balanced on my medications -- I wonder if temperance is the key. Or will heavy drinking once or twice a week be safer, long run, than two or three glasses of wine daily?
>
> I realize alcohol is "evil" -- but it's also a part of the culture, and I'd like to get to a place where I /can/ go to dinner and have a fine wine, something I enjoy, as an alternative to not drinking for days, weeks, and then exploding into a heavy, regretful night.
>
> Again, my question is, which type is actually more damaging, if either is, which one would introduce more cognitive problems (or even enhancements), and how close is either to, say, alcohol abuse or alcoholism?
>
> I'm trying to get hard facts, not the exaggerations as as pushed by the alcohol companies on one end and the anti-drinking crusaders on the other.
>
> As always, your input proves invaluable.
>
> amd
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 4, 2005, at 8:29:13
In reply to chemist: alcohol? how much?, posted by AMD on April 30, 2005, at 18:34:26
> chemist,
>
> I keep reading about the potential for dementia, permanent brain damage, liver damage, etc., all caused by "excessive" alcohol use, vitamin B deficiency, etc.Your taking a vitamin supplement is a good idea. Your liver does indeed need supplies of nutrients if one is in the habit of consuming toxic substances requiring liver processing. The same goes for most pharmaceutical drugs, by the way.
The alcoholic dementias, e.g. Korsakoff's memory syndrome, or Wernicke's encephalopathy, both arise from the thiamine (B1) deficiency brought on by two things: years of chronic heavy drinking, *and* the poor diet that such drinking promotes.
Alcohol to the point of stupor does not produce measurable defects in cognitive capacity, once the effects have totally worn off. That includes hangover effects, obviously. Everyone knows that hangovers are not conducive to higher thinking.
> Then again, I can tell my memory has been slightly impaired, particularly the days after drinking, and now I'm worried this won't rectify itself.
It most certainly will normalize again. However, the idea that your liver will rebound to its former state is not nearly as certain.
> Information would be very useful!
>
> TIA,
>
> amdHow about some personal experience? I drank to stupor, daily, for years and years and years. I truly believe I have recovered all my former cognitive skills, although full recovery took a little over a year of full abstinence.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 4, 2005, at 8:37:46
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by chemist on May 4, 2005, at 6:48:31
> and the ``French Paradox'' is no paradox at all to de Lorgeril and colleagues, yet white wines from northern Italy and Germany and olive oil from Italy are as good as retsina and Feta from Greece or a Chateuneuf-des-Papes and Brie from France, according to Bertelli and colleagues in Milano and Pisa.
I don't know where I read this, now, but I do recall a fascinating conjecture that the French Paradox is an artefact not of the wine, nor the foods, nor an interaction between same, but instead of the dining style.
In France, meals are a drawn out affair, often taking four or more hours (the main meal of the day). Even the idea of "courses" is of French restaurant origin, reflecting the social structure of the country itself. During those lengthy meals, wine is totally intermingled, in dribs and drabs, with a host of other ingredients, all taken in small doses over an extended period. Formalized grazing, as it were.
In contrast, you have the American tendency to "gorge and go".
So, is dining style a huge uncontrolled variable?
Habitually doing one or the other might have profound effects on both fat storage and blood chemistry, quite apart from the ingredients of the foods themselves. Of course, one must not discount e.g. resveratrol, and other flavonoids, etc. (French food also tends to be much less processed than is e.g. North American.)
Just thought I'd throw this in here.
Lar
Posted by AMD on May 5, 2005, at 22:42:59
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by Larry Hoover on May 4, 2005, at 8:29:13
What do you define as "stupor"? I'm glad to hear the damage is not so extreme, but of course it's still something to be cautious of.
Hangovers are definitely not good for concentration. For inducing sleep, however, they do wonders.
Thanks for your replies, chemist and Larry. Erudite as usual.
amd
Posted by chemist on May 6, 2005, at 11:09:49
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much?, posted by AMD on May 5, 2005, at 22:42:59
you had better not be calling me erudite! i have manners...i'll give my two-cents in re: stupor...this is well beyond the lapshade on the head gag and can be mistaken for coma, especially after the walk-into-the-wall and fall number is executed...all the best, chemist
> What do you define as "stupor"? I'm glad to hear the damage is not so extreme, but of course it's still something to be cautious of.
>
> Hangovers are definitely not good for concentration. For inducing sleep, however, they do wonders.
>
> Thanks for your replies, chemist and Larry. Erudite as usual.
>
> amd
Posted by chemist on May 6, 2005, at 12:24:50
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? An aside..... » chemist, posted by Larry Hoover on May 4, 2005, at 8:37:46
hi lar et al....you are spot-on with the diet as the recurring theme, as it makes an appearance in almost all of these studies, even if one rules out smoking (as in cigarette) and body mass index, in general...as for the lengthy consumption of the meal, i am on the same page as you: sounds familiar but i cannot recall the source.
the review of the mediterranean diet and the French paradox by de Lorgeril et al. 2002. cardiovasular research 54, 503-515 is only marred in my opinion as having been published before the papers that link caloric restriction and the Sir2 enzyme in yeast business to long life - long quality life....
insightful nuggets implicate superior and widespread French home gardening techniques coupled with widespread good cheer as additional benefit - ``Gardening is actually very popular in France and about 30% of French adults are claimed to regularly garden. In contrast to most Western populations, for which gardening means flowers and lawns, the primary motivation of the French gardeners is to grow fruits and vegetables for familial consumption'' and ``The group associating food most with health and least with pleasure was the Americans [c: in an international study], and the group most pleasure-oriented and least health-oriented was the French'' - thus ruling out the lack of modesty as a contributing factor in lowering the risk of heart disease. (Western-style ``binge drinking on Saturday nights'' is also noted as trouble, and is compared to the superior French style - ``essentially wine, every day, during meals and rarely alone'')
back to science (and this is a nice review, all joking aside): they do cover the Greek version of the mediterranean diet (heavy on fruits and vegetables and olive oil) and the superior French version (no joke), which is defined as a non-strict vegetarian diet featuring lots of oleic acid, omega-3 fatty acids, fiber, B vitamins and little saturated and polyunsaturated fats (better because unlike the inferior Greek diet - which addresses heart disease alone - the French one features antioxidants, anti-inflammatory compounds, blood-pressure lowering compounds, and other features). as you note, food processing is implicated as well....it does appear to be the factor...and interstingly, the role of alpha-linolenic acid in particular is noted, high being good (and yes, this would be the Lyon trial) and low being not so good (the foods representing typical of Greek and Southern Italy in the 1960s)...
finally (all from this review, an excellent read): ``Therefore, becuase they drink more moderately [c: than the males], French women do not suffer from the same alcohol-related diseases as men and their life expectancy is one of the best in the world;'' ``It was reported that the percentage of the French adult population with a high dietary diversity score [c: high score == more different kinds of foods represented] is remarkably high as compared with a similar US population (90% against 33%);'' ``Thus, in America as well as in Europe, living in the south is obviously not a protective factor in coronary heart disease [c: and no, France is not in southern Europe: Portugal, Greece, Malta, Bulgaria, and Romania are];'' ``[T]he middle-age men recruited in the Paris Prospective Study, who were active policemen, were not representative of the French male population at risk of coronary heart disease;'' and ``Interestingly, the chance of eventually dying of coronary heart disease at age 0 (zero) is not very different than the chance of eventually dying of coronary heart disease at age 65 in most European countries.'' no mention of le blanc mange...
on strike and in le havre until august, yours, chemist
> I don't know where I read this, now, but I do recall a fascinating conjecture that the French Paradox is an artefact not of the wine, nor the foods, nor an interaction between same, but instead of the dining style.
>
> In France, meals are a drawn out affair, often taking four or more hours (the main meal of the day). Even the idea of "courses" is of French restaurant origin, reflecting the social structure of the country itself. During those lengthy meals, wine is totally intermingled, in dribs and drabs, with a host of other ingredients, all taken in small doses over an extended period. Formalized grazing, as it were.
>
> In contrast, you have the American tendency to "gorge and go".
>
> So, is dining style a huge uncontrolled variable?
>
> Habitually doing one or the other might have profound effects on both fat storage and blood chemistry, quite apart from the ingredients of the foods themselves. Of course, one must not discount e.g. resveratrol, and other flavonoids, etc. (French food also tends to be much less processed than is e.g. North American.)
>
> Just thought I'd throw this in here.
>
> Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 6, 2005, at 22:50:04
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much?, posted by AMD on May 5, 2005, at 22:42:59
> What do you define as "stupor"?
We used to call it "kissing carpet".
Lar
P.S. Yer welcome.
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 6, 2005, at 22:54:15
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? An aside..... » Larry Hoover, posted by chemist on May 6, 2005, at 12:24:50
Posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 20:32:34
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by Larry Hoover on May 6, 2005, at 22:50:04
Well, I rarely drink /that/ much, and if you did it daily for /years/ and have recovered to a point indicative of your literate, intelligent posts, well ... I guess there is hope for those of us out there with the occasional habit.
My problem is deeper. I went out Friday and, whaddyaknow, one drink too many and I'm flying, next thing I know it's cocaine, cigarettes, beers, and 36 hours in bed. I am up now, still feeling more-or-less horrible, mind-scattered, and generally ... well, I've been on here enough that you know how I get.
Mix some marijuana in there, as well.
I also did a bump of ketamine, which has me worried. I didn't even know what I was doing at the time -- didn't realize it wasn't just another line.
I didn't feel any noticable effects from the K. It was probably offset by the cocaine. But I'm not in the habit of using downers, and I especially didn't want to do it unknowningly.
Are there any long-term effects from one bump? And what about cognition? How long should I expect the ketamine to be in my system and affecting my concentration and executive functioning?
Dammit -- this is vicious cycle. I calculate I do one night of hard partying out every two weeks or so. Is this extreme? Is this "moderate" or "heavy"? Given the amount of time between "parties," should I relax about long-term damage and concentrate, instead, on quitting before it /does/ become a more habitual and (I assume permanently damaging) habit?
I am considering doing another geographic -- leaving New York and heading back to California, where I was drug and (mostly) alcohol free for 18 months, near family, and stable in my job. I know, this probably sounds like a "band aid," but I wonder if the East Villege is not the best mileau.
More erudite thoughts welcome!
And for the record, chemist (and you know this), erudite means "out of rudeness (ignorance)". So that was, in fact, a complement.
a
Posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 21:17:31
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by Larry Hoover on May 6, 2005, at 22:50:04
Would one bump of K be enough to trigger "Olney's Lesions" or the vaculoes seen in rats?
Also, I forgot in my last post to state that I'm taking Lamictal, Celexa, and had Seroquel about 8-10 hours after first going to bed in order to get more sleep. Did these drugs exasperate or block the K's effects?
Just what I need. Now I'm going to be walking around imaging little holes in my cells, and think I have brain damage. Ugh!
amd
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 8, 2005, at 9:01:00
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 20:32:34
> Well, I rarely drink /that/ much, and if you did it daily for /years/ and have recovered to a point indicative of your literate, intelligent posts, well ... I guess there is hope for those of us out there with the occasional habit.
If there is a benefit to others, hearing my story, so be it. However, that is not a license to misbehave.
> My problem is deeper. I went out Friday and, whaddyaknow, one drink too many and I'm flying, next thing I know it's cocaine, cigarettes, beers, and 36 hours in bed. I am up now, still feeling more-or-less horrible, mind-scattered, and generally ... well, I've been on here enough that you know how I get.
Do you note the effect of the first drink? That's where you need all your judgment. That's where the key decision is made.
> Are there any long-term effects from one bump? And what about cognition? How long should I expect the ketamine to be in my system and affecting my concentration and executive functioning?
No.
> Dammit -- this is vicious cycle. I calculate I do one night of hard partying out every two weeks or so. Is this extreme? Is this "moderate" or "heavy"?Heavy.
> Given the amount of time between "parties," should I relax about long-term damage and concentrate, instead, on quitting before it /does/ become a more habitual and (I assume permanently damaging) habit?
There are two issues. Acute exposure and chronic exposure. Acute exposure can cause long-term damage. There are many variables, but don't assume that your binges are safe.
Concentrate on that "Friday night, I'll have one drink" attitude. "The first drink is too many, and a thousand never enough."
> I am considering doing another geographic -- leaving New York and heading back to California, where I was drug and (mostly) alcohol free for 18 months, near family, and stable in my job. I know, this probably sounds like a "band aid," but I wonder if the East Villege is not the best mileau.
Just remember, you will go with you on that trip. Whoever you now are, i.e.
> More erudite thoughts welcome!
>
> And for the record, chemist (and you know this), erudite means "out of rudeness (ignorance)". So that was, in fact, a complement.
>
> aLar
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 8, 2005, at 9:12:06
In reply to Ugh -- ketamine vacuoles, Olney's Lesions » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 21:17:31
> Would one bump of K be enough to trigger "Olney's Lesions" or the vaculoes seen in rats?
Virtually impossible.
> Also, I forgot in my last post to state that I'm taking Lamictal, Celexa, and had Seroquel about 8-10 hours after first going to bed in order to get more sleep. Did these drugs exasperate or block the K's effects?
Exacerbate. No.
> Just what I need. Now I'm going to be walking around imaging little holes in my cells, and think I have brain damage. Ugh!
>
> amdOlney's Lesions are also associated with another NMDA blocker, dextromethorphan.
The lesions are likely caused by chronic excessive doses.
In a single acute exposure to a toxicant, there is an injury threshold. Your body can take a tiny bit, with no problem. More, and the biochemical stressors increase along with it. At some point, the stress meets the capacity of the system to manage that stress. Any dose beyond that will cause damage.
The problem with chronic exposure is that it can do two things. It can constantly deplete the biochemical resources of the cells, preventing them, in effect, from stockpiling the safety equipment they would otherwise store. And, it can disturb regulatory systems in the cell, up- or down-regulating cell function.
Then, it is possible that low chronic doses routinely exceed the toxic threshold (cell injury), or that acute exposures at lesser doses than that single dose example above exceed the toxic threshold. You now have the setting for permanent injury from both acute and chronic exposures.
I strongly advise you seek out substance abuse counselling. There is some really good counselling out there (and some crap, too). You need to understand what it is that you gain from doing these drug binges. However it is that you process your experiences, the pain of continuing on with the drugs is still less than the pain of changing. Counselling can help you put your finger on the balance, tipping your decisions in one way, and one way only. Then, you can consciously find ways to provide safe substitutes for those things drugs once gave you. If you can satisfy those needs, you won't want drugs to meet them.
Best,
Lar
Posted by chemist on May 8, 2005, at 12:39:34
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 20:32:34
hello amd...in general: using a substance - ketamine, 3,4-MDMA, cocaine, alcohol, etc. - once in any quantity short of landing one in the emergency room is going to induce remorse (perhaps) and a lousy waking the next day and very little else: this is a well-established fact and not my opinion. my opinions, commentary, and even some factual information follow, delineated by asterisks....yours, chemist
> Well, I rarely drink /that/ much, and if you did it daily for /years/ and have recovered to a point indicative of your literate, intelligent posts, well ... I guess there is hope for those of us out there with the occasional habit.*** everybody enjoys immunity from the ills of addiction and damage to the body/mind for the very infrequent party gone awry, i suspect...many of us boozed our way through college and/or high school, tried an assortment of drugs in our youth, and lived to tell about it...when use becomes a problem - or when headaches and money spent at bars becomes excessive - it's time to throw in the towel, in my opinion....*****
>
> My problem is deeper. I went out Friday and, whaddyaknow, one drink too many and I'm flying, next thing I know it's cocaine, cigarettes, beers, and 36 hours in bed. I am up now, still feeling more-or-less horrible, mind-scattered, and generally ... well, I've been on here enough that you know how I get.
>
> Mix some marijuana in there, as well.**** the ``occasional habit'' sounds like a cyclical breaking of self-imposed prohibition. the question is if/when occasional becomes often, at which point it might be a little late to try to evaluate the situation with a clear head. at that point, you will be glad to know that the a.a. meetings on perry street are not fictional plot devices for a recently-concluded cable television program series starring sarah jessica parker. try the late-night meetings on friday or saturday night: an old pal of mine kicked a 2-liter per day vodka habit and was among the lightweights in attendence there (yes, a friend and not yours truly: however, i cannot say that i was not unimpressed by the stories i heard and the people who told them.)...if you are looking to get scared straight about booze and drugs, rest assured, a trip like this one will do it. ******
>
> I also did a bump of ketamine, which has me worried. I didn't even know what I was doing at the time -- didn't realize it wasn't just another line.**** probably not pure ketamine...more than likely the coke...*****
>
> I didn't feel any noticable effects from the K. It was probably offset by the cocaine. But I'm not in the habit of using downers, and I especially didn't want to do it unknowningly.**** see above comment. if a bump is an amount one would assign to the quantity of a powdered substance that can fit on the end of a automobile key (or so i am told...): forget about it, don't do it again, and stay away from tranquilizers used by the veterinarian. the coke will show up invariably at social functions where you can reasonably expect to find it. this means: if you can spot the guy who is holding when you walk into a room, you had better be of a mind to be able to decide yes or no...don't put yourself in the position of being unable to decide if doing some blow is good or not: if you are liquored-up, then chances are.....*****
>
> Are there any long-term effects from one bump? And what about cognition? How long should I expect the ketamine to be in my system and affecting my concentration and executive functioning?**** nope. as for residence time, it is certainly gone by now. the only residue is in your conscience *****
>
> Dammit -- this is vicious cycle. I calculate I do one night of hard partying out every two weeks or so. Is this extreme? Is this "moderate" or "heavy"? Given the amount of time between "parties," should I relax about long-term damage and concentrate, instead, on quitting before it /does/ become a more habitual and (I assume permanently damaging) habit?**** to me, the one night of hard partying inclusive of coke, pot, a potential spell in the k-hole, lots of booze, smokes, and three prescription meds is one night too many: i say ``heavy.'' however, i have not been in a social setting where anything other than booze and cigarettes makes an appearence: even pot is in the noise level, although i expect it to be as it's not on my menu...thus, my idea of ``heavy'' is likely biased...i think your proposal to concentrate on quitting this behaviour - forget about whether it is damaging your liver, brain, memory, etc. for the moment, as there are more pressing issues at hand - is the best plan. it makes the other queries irrelevant: one of the reasons i do not post questions concerning use of alcohol/drugs in addition to the drugs prescribed to me is that i do not mix them. hence, no worries about marijuana, alcohol, etc. this does not mean i am worry-free: it means i have less to worry about, and that is very attractive to me...perhaps you can try a similar tack...***
>
> I am considering doing another geographic -- leaving New York and heading back to California, where I was drug and (mostly) alcohol free for 18 months, near family, and stable in my job. I know, this probably sounds like a "band aid," but I wonder if the East Villege is not the best mileau.**** it depends on what you are doing there, really...yours truly hails from the nyc metro area, and the perils of my youth are no longer present when i visit: the closest i come to living on the edge is banking on the NR to exhibit some sort of regular schedule. i would recommend heavier use of zagat's and more visits to the guggenheim, the whitney, and moma for a good start. i realize that the temptations are many in the city, and that turning the channel, as it were, is difficult. however, i am certain that the night-life in los angeles and san francisco rivals that of n.y.c., and the party scene can be found by those who look for it...*****
>
> More erudite thoughts welcome!
>
> And for the record, chemist (and you know this), erudite means "out of rudeness (ignorance)". So that was, in fact, a complement.*** many thanks, and tongue firmly in cheek in previous, of course...****
>
> a
Posted by chemist on May 8, 2005, at 12:54:10
In reply to Ugh -- ketamine vacuoles, Olney's Lesions » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 7, 2005, at 21:17:31
hello again...this is beginning to remind me of a section of joseph heller's finest, where Ewing's tumor makes a cameo...larry not only is more intelligent and experienced than i, he is a toxicologist and thus much more savvy with things of this sort...i will reiterate my previous statement in reference to one way to avoid things related to intake of booze and party favors that are not regulated by our government (no snickering, please): do not ingest (nor inhale). while this is easier said than done for alcohol and cigarettes, the added dimension of the current state of criminalization of cocaine, marijuana, and ketamine (as used by humans, at least) should help in deterring their use...yours, c
> Would one bump of K be enough to trigger "Olney's Lesions" or the vaculoes seen in rats?
>
> Also, I forgot in my last post to state that I'm taking Lamictal, Celexa, and had Seroquel about 8-10 hours after first going to bed in order to get more sleep. Did these drugs exasperate or block the K's effects?
>
> Just what I need. Now I'm going to be walking around imaging little holes in my cells, and think I have brain damage. Ugh!
>
> amd
Posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 18:28:26
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by Larry Hoover on May 8, 2005, at 9:01:00
Thank you for the responses. I'm still feeling a bit depressed and thus also all the effects that go with it: memory is blunted, recall slow; it's hard to get out of bed; I want to sleep constantly (which is easy to do when you have a bottle of Seroquel handy). So until this passes, I'll be in full-on "freak out" mode.
You're right, this is definitely heavy use, and it's definitely a prohibition breaking cycle given my post-use guilt.
I keep thinking: "What did you do, what did you do, what did you do?" And hoping at any minute the capacity to smile will return, life will look good again, and my hopes and desires won't seem as unattainable as they do now.
I should never play such a mental crap shoot with my brain. I can't believe all the substances I mixed -- that's eight or nine different chemicals in there playing with one another. Not a good idea, amd.
The kick-starter for all of this is that first drink: it lowers my inhibitions, and the next thing I know I'll do anything. I'm sure if heroin had been present at the time I'd have injected. So on the one hand I will freak out about the damage I may have done with the K, while on the other I count myself lucky it stopped with that.
I am just afraid that something is mixed up in my head now, especially after doing the ketamine, and that whatever is mixed up my brain won't be able to unmix.
One day at a time, I suppose. Perhaps in a week I'll have a clear head again and can do what it takes not to have a repeat of this.
I need to change my surroundings, too. I live above a bar; I date a woman who indulges. Both, I think, need to go. Sure, in theory it's me who has to change. But their presence is definitely not helping.
I need counseling, and help.
I hope I will be all right. I don't want my memory to be destroyed because I did an animal tranquilizer one night. (So ketamine has never been used on humans? And if it has, this amount -- 25 - 75 mg of powdered K -- would not call permanent damage?)
Larry, chemist -- I'll try to quit bugging you guys with questions. Next time I'll do a Google search and look for the previous answers you supplied, which will invariably address my concerns.
amd
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 8, 2005, at 18:53:32
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 18:28:26
> The kick-starter for all of this is that first drink: it lowers my inhibitions, and the next thing I know I'll do anything.
Another AA saying: "One drink, one drunk."
It all starts with one. You have to not take that first one.
I hope you come to terms with that. Not using substances means managing the first use.
> One day at a time, I suppose.
One hour at a time. One minute at a time. One second at a time. Take as small a slice of life that you need, to make it manageable.
> I need to change my surroundings, too. I live above a bar; I date a woman who indulges. Both, I think, need to go. Sure, in theory it's me who has to change. But their presence is definitely not helping.
You're quick to see the implications. Another saying: "You have to change your play places, your play people, and your play things."
The point is, using is situational. If you stay out of bars, you stand a much better chance of not taking that first drink.
> I need counseling, and help.
Good idea. You are not alone.
> I hope I will be all right. I don't want my memory to be destroyed because I did an animal tranquilizer one night. (So ketamine has never been used on humans? And if it has, this amount -- 25 - 75 mg of powdered K -- would not call permanent damage?)Ketamine is still used in humans. It used to be employed much more frequently than it is today, but it still has uses in anaesthesiology.
> Larry, chemist -- I'll try to quit bugging you guys with questions. Next time I'll do a Google search and look for the previous answers you supplied, which will invariably address my concerns.
>
> amdDon't worry about questions. The only stupid question is the one not asked.
I like questions.
And I like you. So don't worry about it, okay?
Lar
Posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 19:08:08
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by Larry Hoover on May 8, 2005, at 18:53:32
Larry,
I don't know where I'd be without your support. Same goes for chemist. Still in trouble, but certainly better off than I'd be stuck in my own swirling head. I'm trying to stay optimistic about tomorrow, rather than worrying about yesterday. What happened happened: the best I can hope for is that over time if there was any damage, it will repair itself. The fact that I'm writing this, thinking about my problem ... well, I haven't lost all cognition yet.
Can I look forward to feeling better every day, without drugs or alcohol in my life? Has the repairing begun ... will tomorrow feel clearer than the next day, and so forth?
New question: would ketamine interfere with the efficacy of Lamictal, which I've been taking and which has kept me more-or-less stable aside from when I'm misbehaving?
I am going to try to go run at the gym now, stay positive. The more I think about the stuff I put into myself Thursday night, the more I panic. Need to keep my mind off that and concentrate on things that make me think and thus reaffirm that I haven't yet completely lost it.
So, again: has recovery begun, at least mentally? Or can I expect to wake up tomorrow worse off than today? (That is, are any of the changes induced by these chemicals of delayed onset?)
On a completely separate topic -- I've been on Celexa for several years. My pdoc has begun lowering the dose, and says it might actually improve my concentration and mood. Is this possible? I've read SSRI's can actually decrease dopamine levels, and I'm curious to see if my old energy level, enthusiasm and concentration will actually improve upon lowering the Celexa dose (very, very slowly of course).
amd
Posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 19:09:48
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 19:08:08
It occurs to me an XML feed of dr-bob.org postings would be useful for those of us not completely sated by our current addiction (a much healthier addiction it is, I must add).
I should spend more time on the Social board. I bet there are some good ideas for reading, music, leisure activities over on that board.
amd
Posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 20:29:28
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 19:08:08
I misspoke in this post: I mean, will tomorrow will better, /then/ the next day better still, and so forth?
amd
Posted by chemist on May 9, 2005, at 2:29:03
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » Larry Hoover, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 18:28:26
> Thank you for the responses. I'm still feeling a bit depressed and thus also all the effects that go with it: memory is blunted, recall slow; it's hard to get out of bed; I want to sleep constantly (which is easy to do when you have a bottle of Seroquel handy). So until this passes, I'll be in full-on "freak out" mode.
*** i hope you get some rest: aside from the implications of an unpleasant pattern emerging, you are being rather proactive (in my opinion) and addressing the issues before your weekend is a seven-day-long affair...*****
>
> You're right, this is definitely heavy use, and it's definitely a prohibition breaking cycle given my post-use guilt.**** whatever the reason(s), the mixing and matching is not helping...nor is the guilt, which i see as being as detrimental at this point as a big night on the town. again, it comes down to things that can be chosen and things that must be worked upon with vigor. if you can eliminate one chemical variable from the mix every so often, you make the big picture much clearer to yourself..***
>
> I keep thinking: "What did you do, what did you do, what did you do?" And hoping at any minute the capacity to smile will return, life will look good again, and my hopes and desires won't seem as unattainable as they do now.**** you've got the guilts, my chum. throw in a jumbo chemical cocktail + hangover and some depression and there you have it: a recipe that is good for many days thereafter...****
>
> I should never play such a mental crap shoot with my brain. I can't believe all the substances I mixed -- that's eight or nine different chemicals in there playing with one another. Not a good idea, amd.
>
> The kick-starter for all of this is that first drink: it lowers my inhibitions, and the next thing I know I'll do anything. I'm sure if heroin had been present at the time I'd have injected. So on the one hand I will freak out about the damage I may have done with the K, while on the other I count myself lucky it stopped with that.**** next time i come north, i'll meet you in newark and introduce you to my dead friends, as we head into the city via the path and j.c. i have one remaining living heroin addict friend, who is fresh out of rehab #7, and picked up hep C this last go 'round. she is 36 years old and has been shooting smack since we were kids - 14 years old. some kids play with dolls; others play with a kit and know how to spike a dose under their toenails to make sure mom doesn't see the tracks. if you are doing anything that loosens you to the point that you would be game for booting junk, stop right now. immediately. being the chatty drunk is one thing; the dead guy on the sofa the morning after is another. stay away from the sh*t and anything that puts you near it. ****
>
> I am just afraid that something is mixed up in my head now, especially after doing the ketamine, and that whatever is mixed up my brain won't be able to unmix.**** listen to larry. and listen to me about the next step you might have taken. the k is the least of your problems. you do not know if you even did the drug advertised, and the quantity was miniscule. you could be headed for a bigger ride on a one-way street if you don't watch it. cross ``powders: misc. and other'' off the list of party favors. ****
>
> One day at a time, I suppose. Perhaps in a week I'll have a clear head again and can do what it takes not to have a repeat of this.
>
> I need to change my surroundings, too. I live above a bar; I date a woman who indulges. Both, I think, need to go. Sure, in theory it's me who has to change. But their presence is definitely not helping.**** you will not change the location of the bar, methinks: whether your relationship weathers a more tame outing remains to be seen. there are bars and liquor stores all over the place, and i am not sure that a change of venue will be effective in areas other than getting to bed earlier and not spending cash on booze just downstairs. your call...****
>
> I need counseling, and help.
>
> I hope I will be all right. I don't want my memory to be destroyed because I did an animal tranquilizer one night. (So ketamine has never been used on humans? And if it has, this amount -- 25 - 75 mg of powdered K -- would not call permanent damage?)**** i need help and counseling, too. and so i go. questionable as to whether it's working, but i have to try. ketamine has been used on humans - i mentioned the therapeutic category (vet) only to emphasize that (1) it is an anesthetic to be administered intravenously; and (2) none of us has any business using anesthetics for recreational purposes. again, worry about the acetylated morphine that you claim would unquestionably be a go if you had a few drinks in you: try finding ketamine vs. smack and you'll see why the former is of little consequence. *****
>
> Larry, chemist -- I'll try to quit bugging you guys with questions. Next time I'll do a Google search and look for the previous answers you supplied, which will invariably address my concerns.
>
> amd**** i would be disappointed if the dialog came to a halt, personally. and i do not claim to be anything more than a scientist with a stack of reasonably well-read and reviewed sources in my possession when i state that a google search on anything drug-related == cat >& /dev/null. keywords in another tab for ketamine and brain damage yield: (1) some forum of posters, a few seeking to contact ``Mr. White'' in order to ease the damage from ketamine use, although one poster writes ``Please Use ketamin with great caution.'' this is beyond lousy advice and well into a recipe for disaster. and the first hit on google. (2) takes you to drugscope, where you learn that ketamine isn't all that bad after all - there are citations, although i would not wager that taking it for fun is a good idea. on the same website, you can go to ``Heroin misconceptions'' where you learn that ``That heroin is addictive is a fact. Heroin is not however, instantly or even nearly instantly addictive (neither is crack cocaine or any other substance). This idea is based upon a fundamental misunderstanding of addiction and the supposed power of addiction. Research consistently shows that becoming addicted to any drug takes time, usually 2-3 months (often much longer) where the user builds up to regular daily use.'' another ringing endorsement for giving yourself at least 3 months - and longer - of daily heroin use to see if you get hooked. you can ask google or your dealer about smack, and you'll get a more honest answer from your dealer; (3) back to the same site in #2; (4) the national institute on drug abuse (NIDA), the first hit that actually has a basis in fact. frankly, you are better off with larry and the rest of PB: i have to close that google tab as the smell of bulls*it is permeating my apartment, and it's not coming from me. be well, yours, c
Posted by chemist on May 9, 2005, at 4:01:12
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 19:09:48
> It occurs to me an XML feed of dr-bob.org postings would be useful for those of us not completely sated by our current addiction (a much healthier addiction it is, I must add).
>
> I should spend more time on the Social board. I bet there are some good ideas for reading, music, leisure activities over on that board.
>
> amdit's a nice facet of the PB community that is refreshing, especially when compared to a grumpy person such as myself. regardless of one's disposition, all are welcome, and there is no shortage of ideas and support. if you like, i will be more than happy to detail the names and locations of some excellent coffeehouses in your general location, and tell you the name of the most excellent waitperson working at aqua grill - shoot me a babblemail...do follow through on stopping in at social!! best, c
Posted by chemist on May 9, 2005, at 4:02:28
In reply to Re: chemist: alcohol? how much? » AMD, posted by AMD on May 8, 2005, at 20:29:28
> I misspoke in this post: I mean, will tomorrow will better, /then/ the next day better still, and so forth?
>
> amdyes. with time comes return to quasi-equilibrium. yours, c
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Substance Use | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.