Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientist Seeks Investment For "Alcohol Substitute"

Posted by samzenpus on from the bottoms-up dept.

First time accepted submitter MalachiK writes "A senior academic and former UK government drugs adviser reckons that pretty soon it'll be possible to enjoy the fun of being drunk without having to suffer the negative effects of alcohol. In a proposal reminiscent of Star Trek's synthehol, Professor David Nut has identified a number of molecules that he claims offer experiences that are subjectively indistinguishable from alcohol intoxication. Apparently a major advantage of using these more selectively psychoactive drugs is that the effects can be quickly reversed. It's not all good news though as Professor Nut seems to think that the drinks industry is using its financial and political clout to stop this sort of research being undertaken."

64 of 328 comments (clear)

  1. You had me at ... by bigjocker · · Score: 4, Funny

    Professor Nut

    --
    Life isn't like a box of chocolates. It's more like a jar of jalapenos. What you do today, might burn your ass tomorrow.
    1. Re:You had me at ... by NettiWelho · · Score: 5, Informative
      http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/oct/30/drugs-adviser-david-nutt-sacked

      Professor David Nutt, the government's chief drug adviser, has been sacked a day after claiming that ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol.

      His claims are factual but go against official-opinion-on-the-matter(tm)

    2. Re:You had me at ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When a government scientist gets sacked for stating an obvious fact you know things are fucked.

    3. Re:You had me at ... by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 5, Funny

      The Nut son married a Sachs girl and they now have a bunch of little ones running around with a wonderfully hyphenated last name.

    4. Re:You had me at ... by EngnrFrmrlyKnownAsAC · · Score: 2

      It didn't help he (correctly) pointed out ecstasy is safer than horse riding, which happens to be relatively popular in the UK. The BBC felt obliged to publish an article arguing the dangers of riding were "tempered" by its health benefits and that, somehow, his assessment was invalid.

      --
      Howdy howdy howdy
    5. Re:You had me at ... by YttriumOxide · · Score: 2

      200 gallons of LSD?! That's probably enough to trip the entire planet, let alone you personal use...

      Generally liquid LSD varies in actual LSD content, but let's call it "one drop contains 100mcg", which is a common expectation.

      100mcg is considered a typical dose of LSD for anyone to experience a trip (some people will trip on less; some require a little more. Also generally, for more experienced users or people wishing to have a 'heavy trip' for self-discovery or other such purposes, much higher doses are used; but we'll go with just 'experiencing a trip' for the purposes of calculation and so 100mcg is acceptable).

      One 'drop' from an eyedropper is around 0.1ml (varies a lot with different eyedroppers and users, but that'll do). So, for each 0.1ml, we've got enough to get one person tripping.

      A gallon contains 3785.4ml; so enough to get 37854 people tripping. 200 gallons is therefore enough for 7570800 people. A little less than the population of New York City.

      Of course, if you were talking 200 'gallons' of LSD in salt form rather than liquid, it's harder to judge. I'm not quite sure about the size/volume of LSD salt crystals in relation to exact weight; I get the feeling LSD salt is probably a little more dense than water, but it also doesn't stack so perfectly and so there'll be empty space between the crystals in the container. So for the purposes of just calculating it out for fun, let's go with a 'simplistic' (and quite possibly horribly wrong) calculation and say it's 1g per ml volume as with water. In that case, 200 gallons would be enough for 7570800000 people - a half a milliard or so over the current population of the earth.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  2. Not all good by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover. With no pain for indulgence, this could be much more addictive than alcohol, which is already very addictive.

    1. Re:Not all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Then again, there will be no need to 'curb your drinking' when you can control the effects instead of the effects controlling you.

    2. Re:Not all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover

      No.
      If you're an alcoholic, the hangover is just a reason to start drinking early, not a deterrent. No hangover? I'll drink to that!

      If you're not, then you don't really need to "curb" it, and the memories of the dipshit things you did will be just as much of a deterrent. In fact, since you'll have a clear head and fully remember all your antics from the night before, the lack of hangover would actually increase the chances you'd think twice before having that last six shots of Tequila.

      As for the article, we already have alternates to booze and it's called Marijuana. But because it's not physically addictive and doesn't cause horrible health effects, that means it has an even higher potential for abuse and is thus even more "addictive". Legally speaking, that is. I have a feeling that anything this guy comes up with is going to end up in the same boat. Either it'll have some nasty side effects (like so-called 'bath salts') or it'll be "too good" to allow people to use.

    3. Re:Not all good by fey000 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Then again, there will be no need to 'curb your drinking' when you can control the effects instead of the effects controlling you.

      The problem depicted is not that of hangovers, but rather that of excessive drinking leading to a severe lapse of judgment and restraint. This seems like a smart consideration to make.

      I have seen drunks with little regard for their own or other's safety, and I would prefer if such behaviour stayed rare and infrequent. We already have problems with drug addicts behaving in undesireable ways, so let's take a moment to ponder if we want more alcoholics that behave in a similar manner.

      Also, it should come with a redshirt.

    4. Re:Not all good by jrumney · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Psychological addiction is all in your head. You can get addicted to absolutely anything (including non-chemical things like gambling), and you can wake up one morning and quit cold turkey. The real danger from alcohol is the physical addiction. Alcohol is one of the few drugs that can be life threatening if a serious alcoholic suddenly can't get any. As long as the replacement drug is not physically addictive, then it is a big improvement.

    5. Re:Not all good by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover.

      That is absolutely so. I haven't been drunk since shortly after college and it's because I hate how it makes me feel the next morning.

      I don't know about the rest of the comment though. I don't quite understand why people feel that intoxicants are inherently bad. I don't use them, but I don't share the moral objection to them.

      If someone can use an intoxicant and still manage their life in a way that is satisfactory to them, I don't believe that society needs to place artificial strictures on intoxicating substances.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    6. Re:Not all good by steelfood · · Score: 2

      you can wake up one morning and quit cold turkey without any physiological effects.

      FTFY.

      There are psychological effects to quitting psychological addictions cold turkey. In fact, some of these can become severe enough to eventually manifest as physical symptoms.

      As the practice of hypnotism has shown, the subconscious is very, very powerful and not to be so casually treated the way you do here.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    7. Re:Not all good by Altus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You do understand that alcohol withdrawal can kill you right? It's phyxical effects are more dangerous than heroin withdrawal. Not that psychological addiction should be scoffed at but alcohol addicicion is no small matter.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    8. Re:Not all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Physiological addiction in most cases can be beaten by a short stay in an inpatient rehab center. Success rates are very high. But the real danger and the real long term worry is the psychological element of the addiction. It's what makes addictions so hard to beat, the day in day out avoidance of the addictive chemical/behavior (even after what you consider the "real danger" period is past). Note that psychological addiction is very much related to genetics and background, so only a limited percentage of people will suffer from it. This also contributes to the insidiousness of it; someone with a non-addictive background will simplify the addiction down into "no physical withdrawal, no big deal" logic you are echoing.

    9. Re:Not all good by Charliemopps · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, there are certain people (mostly Asian) that have a genetic mutation involving how Ethanol Metabolizes that causes their hangovers to come on quicker and stronger. It's been proven that these people have significantly lower rates of alcoholism. It's been proposed that this common genetic mutation among Asians is a contributing factor to eastern societies relatively low rate of alcohol consumption.

    10. Re:Not all good by Charliemopps · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This begs the question: If a drug has no pain for indulgence, and you can turn off the effect almost immediately with a counter-acting dose... Does it matter if you're addicted to it? Do we have a problem with people using drugs of their own free will if those drugs have no negative impact on their lives?

    11. Re:Not all good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, there are certain people (mostly Asian) that have a genetic mutation involving how Ethanol Metabolizes that causes their hangovers to come on quicker and stronger. It's been proven that these people have significantly lower rates of alcoholism. It's been proposed that this common genetic mutation among Asians is a contributing factor to eastern societies relatively low rate of alcohol consumption.

      Spoken like a man that has only studied East Asia in books and journal articles, having never been there. They drink like fish and are stone alcoholics, too. Not sure where you're getting your information, but it's not from reality. Lying to save face is also extraordinarily common. Just look at Fukushima!

    12. Re:Not all good by s.petry · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What you said!

      Some things simply should not be produced, or studied beyond a certain point for that matter, because they harm society much more than they help society. If a guy develops a cure to heal you of an alcohol addition and provides you a nice fat dose of daily PCP have they helped, harmed, or have things stayed the same?

      Historically drugs have been used by people in power as a method of control. Simply teaching people about that aspect is not enough to cure the abuse of substances, but it's a start. A lack of upward mobility in society ensures they are still used today.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    13. Re:Not all good by germansausage · · Score: 5, Funny

      You should hang out with some Koreans some time. Their genetic mutation seems to be 2 parts Irish and 1 part Russian.

    14. Re:Not all good by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      You're hitting some unrelated topics. "Binge drinking" is not addiction. It's stupid behavior. I'm not sure I want society to prevent stupid behavior by putting strictures on substances that most people use without being stupid about it.

      Escaping reality never makes people stronger.

      Hold on a minute. I'm pretty sure you're making a big assumption there. What is "stronger"? Do you mean, "better able to work for a living"? Or do you mean, "more likely to have successful family lives"? Or do you mean, "conforming to societal norms". There are simply too many unknowns in the term "reality" and the term "strong".

      And this "reality" you speak of... Are you sure you know what it is? You have a construct inside your mind that you call "reality", but it's only as real as the consensus. I could make a case that spending time reading Slashdot is "escaping reality", or that being involved in religion is "escaping reality". I could also say that what great authors do is "escape reality", yet you probably shouldn't say that makes them less "strong", or that religion makes people less strong, because there is a very good argument that's not true. Is going to work at your cubicle farm every day strong? Or is taking an axe into the wilderness and living off the land "strong"?

      I think we should, for the purposes of this discussion, stick to the term "intoxication" rather than "escaping reality", because "reality" can be too slippery of a term (and so can "strong").

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    15. Re:Not all good by spaceman375 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You have it backwards. Asians are one of the few human lineages that haven't developed an adaptaion to the consumption of alcohol. Specifically a liver pathway for dealing with ethanol rather than a more generalized one. It's a little slower to metabolize the ethanol into the first step, an aldehyde, and the one produced has a different feel to it. Less euphoria, more blushing red face IIRC.

      --
      On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
    16. Re:Not all good by CodeBuster · · Score: 2

      It's been proposed that this common genetic mutation among Asians is a contributing factor to eastern societies relatively low rate of alcohol consumption.

      Have you never been to Japan? Going out after working late and getting shit-faced drunk before showing up for work again early the next morning (hopefully sober) is a long standing tradition of the typical Japanese salaryman. In fact, doing business in Japan without engaging in social drinking would be practically impossible.

    17. Re:Not all good by Dahamma · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, your post is factually incorrect. The common mutation to the pathway is with ALDH2 (aldehyde dehydrogenase), the *second* step of the process.

      What happens is ethanol is broken down into acetaldehyde by alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH), and then the aldehyde into acetic acid by ALDH2. When ALDH2 is not effective, aldehyde (a toxin) builds up in the bloodstream and causes flushing, nausea, headaches, etc. And it's been traced down to a single amino acid substitution in ALDH2 with partially dominant expression.

      One interesting anecdote I've seen from this is the use of certain drugs (an antihistamine, I think?) as off-label ALH inhibitors - basically to slow the pathway down and reduce buildup of acetaldehyde. In fact, an anesthesiologist friend was giving it to all of the Asian guys at the last bachelor party I attended :)

      And do the slightest research into it and you will see the OP was correct - one study showed something like 40-50% of Japanese had ALDH2 deficiency as a whole, but less than 5% of Japanese alcoholics had it. If you almost immediately got flushed and sick when you drank you'd obviously be more likely to avoid it in general...

    18. Re:Not all good by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 2

      I don't quite understand why people feel that intoxicants are inherently bad. I don't use them, but I don't share the moral objection to them.

      There are many people with a strong streak of Calvinism in their makeup. Anything that is pleasurable is immediately considered evil.

      It crops up in so many places. The temperance movement was one. The Comstock laws are another. The Harrison act, and the war on drugs is yet another.

      Even in more legal circles we see a lot of hate toward e-cigarettes. No particular health hazards, no second had smoke, allows ex smokers to improve their health.

      But it really pisses off three groups; those who have been trying to prohibit all tobacco sales, many of whom are frothing at the mouth about this, those who become upset when seeing another person enjoy something, (there must be something wrong with vaping) and an unrelated group, the Government, who when they started taxing tobacco, became just as addicted to the money as the smokers to the tobacco.

      Too many people believes pleasure = evil.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  3. As someone with a high tolerance... by neminem · · Score: 5, Informative

    The effects of alcohol are occasionally fun to experience, but what aren't fun are a. attempting to get drunk and failing because it takes a lot, b. attempting to get drunk, overshooting and being too drunk, and c. even after drinking exactly the right amount, getting a hangover because you had to drink a lot to get there. I totally applaud this research.

    That said, this is apparently also very old, so I'm not holding my breath ever seeing this in reality. (That is a link to basically the same synopsis of the same guy's research, from 2006.)

    1. Re:As someone with a high tolerance... by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 2

      That said, this is apparently also very old, so I'm not holding my breath ever seeing this in reality. (That is a link to basically the same synopsis of the same guy's research, from 2006.)

      Shows what he claims; the business of producing alcohol for consumption is blocking his research and efforts.
      In a Nutt shell he's fighting Budwiser, just one of the many companies that would involve themselves in blocking this.

  4. Already exists ! by bob_super · · Score: 5, Funny

    "the effects can be quickly reversed"
    It's called RU-486

    *ducks*

  5. Not just this research. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've heard the drinks industry is allegedly involved against the decriminalization of pot. For obvious reasons.

    I'd consider pot an already researched and much better alchohol substitute too, but each to their own.

  6. Re:Already Exists by Xicor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    everything that does anything similar is illegal... just look at weed...

  7. Taste vs Effect by Lanforod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't drink Alcohol for the effect/buzz etc. I drink it for the taste. I love a cold beer, or nice rum n coke, a scotch on the rocks, or a glass of pinot noir, all depending on the situation. The buzz can be nice, but that's more what the teenagers drink for, IMO.

    1. Re:Taste vs Effect by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What's interesting is that the alcohol is such an important part of the taste of these drinks. I did an unfortunately large amount of research to find my wife a decent tasting NA beer to drink while pregnant (yes, I know there's still some alcohol in NA beer). And even the best of them (IMHO Thomasbrau, by Paulaner), just didn't taste right without the alcohol. I'd say the same of red wine where I did less extensive tasting and could find no NA wines that were even in the acceptable range.

    2. Re:Taste vs Effect by chameleon3 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't drink Alcohol for the effect/buzz etc. I drink it for the taste.

      I love the taste of alcohol, too, but the buzz is part of the reason we got to liking it in the first place-- simple classical conditioning.

  8. Nutt, not Nut by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Informative

    First of all, it's Professor David Nutt, not "Nut"

    Second of all, it's the same Professor who was a British government advisor, who was sacked for "criticising politicians for distorting research evidence and claiming alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than some illegal drugs, including LSD, ecstasy and cannabis."

    Seems like a scientist with integrity. Perhaps this is less the risible ramblings of a madnam, and more he's at the "...then they laugh at you" part of fighting the good fight.

    (Unless, of course, you think LSD and cannabis are more damaging than alcohol and tobacco, in which case feel free to poke fun.)

    1. Re:Nutt, not Nut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thank you, came here to make that point.

      Yes, Prof Nutt is a remarkable sane, evidence based, thinking person. That's why he got fired by the UK government, he looked at the evidence and told the truth. That didn't mesh.

      A large amount of the political pressure was from the then-hysteria over Ecstacy (MDMA), mostly led by the papers. One of his conclusions was that the sheer scale of usage, and the relatively few deaths (probably less than 10 high profile ones from memory) meant that it was statistically safer than many prescription drugs, and certainly safer than alcohol and nicotine, and that was without any controls on production and distribution whatsoever.

      I tried Ecstacy once. Really pointless drug in my opinion (I'm a beer and a joint man), but you can't argue with his logic on that one. Don't discount him, he's one of the most realistic thinkers when it comes to humans and their enjoyment of psychoactives. I'd put him on a par with Ford and the motor car, if any of the current leaders in the field change society's approach to the issue it'll be him.

  9. Get Proctor & Gamble on the Phone by Pollux · · Score: 2

    After their success with Olestra, I'm sure they have eager investors on speed-dial with money to burn on the next artificial-vice-substitute.

  10. it's Nutt, you nut by SuperElectric · · Score: 5, Informative

    Former member of the UK government's drugs advisory panel, until some pol fired him for pointing out (correctly) that the health risks of horseback riding outweigh those of doing ecstasy. He's the author of Drugs Without the Hot Air, a fantastic book. http://boingboing.net/2012/06/20/drugs-without-the-hot-air.html

  11. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Will Prof Nut's concoction taste this good?

    I know it's a rhetorical question but can't stand not answering with a decided *NO*. I've tried both "near beer" and "non-alcoholic wine" and neither tastes anything like the real thing. They aren't even poor substitutes; they're horrible.

    Professor Nut seems to think that the only reason people drink is to get drunk. He definitely needs to expand his circle of drinking companions as well as what he drinks.

    Lastly, I would be afraid that his cure would be worse than the disease. This sounds like the next "date rape" drug.

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  12. Re:Less healthy? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2

    You only need to drink like 1oz of wine to get those benefits. You might as well just take a tablespoon of booze and get the best of both worlds.

  13. Higher alcohols... by jasno · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There are many substances that effect our bodies in ways that are similar or complimentary to ethanol. Many of those substances are already present in fermented products like wine and beer. Some of those are higher weight alcohols(i.e. - fusel oils) like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tert-Amyl_alcohol or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryptophol. There are other components too, such as the chemicals found in hops. Most of these compounds do not metabolize into acetaldehyde so they do not result in a traditional hangover.

    --

    http://www.masturbateforpeace.com/
  14. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a can of Natural Ice here, and have a similar question to ask.

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  15. Re:Already Exists by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The thing is that most of the "bad effects" of alcohol, e.g. lapsing judgment, are also the "good effects". It's all about context.

  16. Re:Already Exists by Cryacin · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess everyone who said it would take a nut to come up with this was right.

    --
    Science advances one funeral at a time- Max Planck
  17. Re:Already Exists by alvinrod · · Score: 2

    A high dose of anything will cause negative effects, if not death. You can even kill yourself from drinking too much water. The problem with some drugs is that the lethal dose isn't too far off from the common dose to experience the effect. Things like alcohol and GHB fall into that category, where the lethal dose is less than an order of magnitude than the effective dose, which make them somewhat dangerous.

  18. Terrifying side effect by PPH · · Score: 2

    The intoxication wears off.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  19. Re:I think by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

    Those of us with German parents started acquiring a taste for beer well before our teenage years.

    Germans have a product called 'kinderbeer'. Sweet and malty with a light hoppy flavor.

    To say nothing of the kirshwasser in the whipped cream, wine in the sauce etc etc.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  20. Chemical basis for gambling addiction by Any+Web+Loco · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hi - my partner works in problem gambling and (according to her) there's reasonably strong evidence for a biological (read:chemical) component to gambling addiction. I think the wikipedia article even touches on it. Yep, it does.

  21. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by bitMonster · · Score: 2

    Ridiculous.

    Please explain why I frequently have 1 beer or 1 glass of wine in an afternoon or evening. I weigh 205 pounds and this doesn't intoxicate me at all. I find this behavior common amongst my friends and family.

    Also, maybe you should read about the history of fermentation. It's a natural, self-limiting process that preserves and concentrates calories. That might have been useful for something else, no?

  22. "subjectively indistinguishable" by Hartree · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "subjectively indistinguishable from alcohol intoxication"

    So to do that, too much would have to make you pee a lot, fall down the stairs and wake up in your own vomit, but no hangover?

    Now there's a selling point for you.

  23. Re:Less healthy? by cmdr_tofu · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yet alcohol is a risk factor for developing cancer of the throat, mouth, and basically the rest of the digestive tract. The anti-oxidants in wine are also readily available (without risk-factor alcohol) in the form of grape juice or grapes.

    http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/alcohol
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_and_cancer (3.6% of cancer cases and 3.5% of cancers deaths are attributed to alcohol)

    Research into a healthier alternative (maybe added to a high anti-oxidant blueberry juice) is certainly worthwhile.

  24. Re:Already Exists by skirmish666 · · Score: 2

    I wonder what the LD/50 of sand is...

    --
    Sigger than your average
  25. Re:Already Exists by icebike · · Score: 2

    everything that does anything similar is illegal... just look at weed...

    Weed's only illegal because you ALLOW it to be.
    Washington and Colorado have made it not illegal, Oregon and Alaska likely to to follow soon, with a whole raft of other states after that

    So instead of whining about it, start collecting signatures.

    Personally, I'd rather drink than smoke.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  26. Re:Already Exists by afxgrin · · Score: 2

    The risk with GHB is that when consumed with alcohol the reaction is very very bad. So the issue is, if we were to supply GHB-based beverages on the market, even with a very controlled low dose, once mixed with alcohol the results can be instant blackout (the reason why GHB is used as a date rape drug), profuse vomiting, coma, seizures, and death. You're essentially asking to end up in the ER if you do this combination to even a bit of excess.

    I personally know people who had the attitude of "oh i'm experienced using GHB, I can control myself from drinking too much alcohol while on it" ... right there is half the problem, once some people start drinking the subsequent drinks are consumed with less judgment - surprise surprise considering it inhibits your sense of judgment.

    So we're not talking about high doses here, the LD50 for GHB is kind of low, combine that with alcohol and it's even lower.

  27. Re:Already Exists by tragedy · · Score: 2

    Tolerance is a mixed bag. You're still likely to be messing up your liver long term. Not to mention that heavy drinkers, _especially_ those with a high tolerance, are at a high risk of an alcoholic stroke.

  28. Re:Already Exists by Hamsterdan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Alcohol is *NOT* on the lower spectrum regarding addictiveness.

    (you can die from alcohol withdrawal)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcohol_withdrawal#Prevention_of_brain_damage
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rational_scale_to_assess_the_harm_of_drugs_(mean_physical_harm_and_mean_dependence).svg

    --
    I've got better things to do tonight than die.
  29. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by jones_supa · · Score: 2

    The one beer or glass of wine gives you the buzz too, that's why...

  30. enlightenment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I now understand a shitload of anime that never made sense with regards to this until now, thank you.

    I could never understand why they used red face to mean tipsy, I was like "why would even an uptight character be embarassed to be drunk, thats the one time they can let loose and won't give a fuck what other people think until the next day" because in real life none of my friends get red faced when they get shit faced.

    Granted I will look at the ones with asian backrounds more closely now, assuming I'm actually sober at the same time which isn't likely as I'm mostly a social drinker. It all makes sense now!

  31. Re:Already Exists by ozmanjusri · · Score: 4, Informative

    Cannabis:

    In summary, enormous doses of Delta 9 THC, All THC and concentrated marihuana extract ingested by mouth were unable to produce death or organ pathology in large mammals but did produce fatalities in smaller rodents due to profound central nervous system depression.

    The non-fatal consumption of 3000 mg/kg A THC by the dog and monkey would be comparable to a 154-pound human eating approximately 46 pounds (21 kilograms) of 1%-marihuana or 10 pounds of 5% hashish at one time. In addition, 92 mg/kg THC intravenously produced no fatalities in monkeys. These doses would be comparable to a 154-pound human smoking at one time almost three pounds (1.28 kg) of 1%-marihuana or 250,000 times the usual smoked dose and over a million times the minimal effective dose assuming 50% destruction of the THC by smoking.

    Thus, evidence from animal studies and human case reports appears to indicate that the ratio of lethal dose to effective dose is quite large. This ratio is much more favorable than that of many other common psychoactive agents including alcohol and barbiturates (Phillips et al. 1971, Brill et al. 1970).

    http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/LIBRARY/mj_overdose.htm
    http://www.oregon.gov/pharmacy/Imports/Marijuana/StaffReview/ReschedulingCannabis-NOTES_3-10.pdf

    --
    "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
  32. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by G-forze · · Score: 2

    coca cola you add to the scotch it still tastes like ass.

    That's your problem right there. You destroy good scotch by adding cola.

    --
    "There's someone in my head but it's not me." - Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon
  33. Dont want to be drunk, I want the taste! by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 2

    What I'd really need is a prefect replication of beer and whine without alcohol ... I love the taste but personally dont care about the alcohol much.

  34. Re:Already Exists by fauxjargon · · Score: 2

    Which is why brownies were invented.. Can't stand green dragon, I don't react well to simultaneous alcohol and pot consumption. However, thanks to drug testing in my industry, I am no longer able to indulge. I think the number one problem we will see with legal marijuana is the lack of a test that distinguishes between intoxication and recent use. Imagine if alcohol gave positive test results for weeks after consumption. Even if pot is legalized in my province I won't get to enjoy it because of my employer. My employer has some ground to stand on, as I work in a safety-sensitive position and although there's no problem with me drinking after work because I will test negative in the morning - if I were involved in an accident and tested positive for THC nobody would be able to prove I wasn't high when I caused the accident.

  35. Re: Already Exists by gzuckier · · Score: 4, Funny

    I have a high tolerance Tonight I have consumed many drinks and nothing hs happenef to n y et I am still siber and fyully sgt jcnn

    --
    Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
  36. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    Having a meal with Guinness is redundant.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  37. Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

    Yes, Guinness can be filling. That's what I have when I eat at D'Arcy's and wind up taking half the meal home.

    Well, it isn't just the Guinness, their portions are American sized. But yeah, two or three pints and who needs dinner?

    --
    Free Martian Whores!