Talk:Disease theory of alcoholism

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 45 days may be automatically archived by .

There is currently no consensus about the disease theory

There is currently no consensus in support of the disease theory, nor has there been one recently as the following documents demonstrate:

Korhonen, M. Alcohol Problems and Approaches: Theories, Evidence and Northern Practice. Ottawa: National Aboriginal Health Organizations, 2004 [1]

Nackerud, L. The disease model of alcoholism: a Khunian paradigm. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 2002 [2](Presented above but awaiting response from dritlow)

Kelly, D. Understanding the Nature of Alcoholism (2001). Discusses the disease controversy. [3]

Schaler, J. A. Thinking about drinking: the power of self-fulfilling prophecies. The International Journal of Drug Policy, 1996, 7(3), 187-191 [4]

Doweiko, H. E. Concepts of Chemical dependency. NY: Brooks-Cole, 1996.

Levy, M.S. The disease controversy and psychotherapy with alcoholics. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 1992, 24(3), 251-256. [5]

Maltzman, I. Is alcoholism a disease? A critical review of a controversy. Integrative Physiological and Behavioral Science: The Official Journal of the Pavlovian Society, 1991, 26(3), 200-210 {

[6].

Citation 1 has nothing to do with opening sentence

The opening sentence, which says that the disease theory is generally accepted by the medical community, includes a citation which does not confirm this statement. The linked citation does not mention disease at all. - Scipiocoon 12:42am 12 Jan 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.90.26 (talk) 06:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

when I clicked the link the following statement was on the top of my screen:

"Alcoholism or alcohol dependence is a diagnosable disease characterized by several factors including a strong craving for alcohol, continued use despite harm or personal injury, the inability to limit drinking, physical illness when drinking stops, and the need to increase the amount drunk in order to feel the effects."

Is this what you saw?

now since it is published by the center for disease controll, I think it validates the statement that it is generaly accepted by the medical community. Coffeepusher (talk) 06:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the same thing when I clicked on the link.--DizFreak ^{talk Contributions} 02:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Opponents

I wonder if we should put a qualifier in for Dr. Thomas Szasz's opposition to the desease model of alcoholism, as he has an extremely controversial position on all mental diseases.Desoto10 (talk) 21:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Changes

I've made quite a few minor changes, removed some of the more bizarre bits, edited down, and a structural change to this little article. I think in needs looking at by an expert in the field.

I've put the bits that don't relate to the debate in a Miscellanea section. I think those three items should probably be removed as they don't add anything to the article really. Mr Miles (talk) 23:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Diseases of the Will: Alcohol and the Dilemmas of Freedom

Very good book on the topic. -- Scarpy (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article...

...is bizarre. Repeating over and over, especially in the history section, that alcoholics can return to normal/controlled drinking. Then the Current Acceptance section lists a majority of medical associations accepting the disease and abstinence theory.

Either the US establishment has it all wrong or this article was written by someone intent on pushing a POV. Needs a little time spending on it by some kind soul. Mr Miles (talk) 13:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]