Silas Loom
Hated by both sides
Wasn’t there a massive genetic bottleneck at some point way after the migration from Africa, presumably due to some near-extinction event? Perhaps the signalling drunkards slept though it.
Denormalisation of alcohol
- Thread starter Maurice Picarda
- Start date
Wasn’t there a massive genetic bottleneck at some point way after the migration from Africa, presumably due to some near-extinction event? Perhaps the signalling drunkards slept though it.
seeformiles
Lost in the wood
I think it just shows that all manner of primates are driven to seek alternate states of consciousness. Whether it’s bears making cider (so to speak) or dolphins passing round a puffer fish to get wrecked, we all like to get wasted at some level
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
Cocaine thread >>>
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
Not so much a catastrophic event as the fact it was only a small fraction of the human population that migrated out of Africa.
Modern African people have more genetic diversity than the rest of humanity put together.
AFRICAN GENETIC DIVERSITY: Implications for Human Demographic History, Modern Human Origins, and Complex Disease Mapping
Comparative studies of ethnically diverse human populations, particularly in Africa, are important for reconstructing human evolutionary history and for understanding the genetic basis of phenotypic adaptation and complex disease. African populations ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
story
Changing the facts
That’s exactly my point.
Not just primates. Not only primates. Animals. Animals like to get wasted. In no species does it confer any kind of advantage, quite the reverse in fact.
This Third Chimp hypothesis suggests that using some substance that incapacitates the user is then used by humans to demonstrate and test fitness? Nah.
Booze is used to get tipsy, make merry, lower inhibition so that ore abandoned merry making is facilitated.
Any Third Chimp (or whatever it is) who sees their potential stronger leader getting drunk to show off prowess only needs to be a little bit canny to get the upper hand. Pretend to drink, pretend to get drunk, then when the “fitter stronger” rival is drunk, take him out by means of being sober, with sharper wits and reflexes.
It’s illogical. Goes against common sense. And anyone who has experience (personal or second hand) with drinking problems knows that. It’s not common sense to use drink to achieve anything other than merrymaking.
seeformiles
Lost in the wood
Sorry, I meant to say all creatures as well. It’s a biological imperative along with shelter, food and sex - no matter what puritans may claim.
Silas Loom
Hated by both sides
Better Jared Diamond than pissed Maslow.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
I don't actually agree with the idea pissheads are somehow better. Some drugs were a status symbol, some were not. It just seems that particular avenue of research is strewn with footnotes about the relative effectiveness of trying to research it anyway like you said. So its damned near impossible to determine either way anyway.
Does seem a silly suggestion, the conversation had changed somewhat since I started replying to after I'd shifted half a tonne of gardening material and replied lol.
Cid
Proper break this time
Yeah, but I mean primates just in the sense of evolutionary recency. I.e you would have to argue that we lost the ability to metabolise alcohol, then regained it through this pisshead superiority mechanism.
I think I might also argue that alcohol use probably goes back further than the evidence shows. I mean it definitely does, because that's how archaeological evidence works, but kind of suspect its been an on/off thing throughout human history. Dependent on available resources of course. But... I mean you need honey. Or old fruit. And a container. It has to be one of those technologies that keep appearing.
Humberto
Callooh! Callay!
It doesn't scare me, it's patent nonsense to try and force people into pubs.
Humberto
Callooh! Callay!
Or forced to the black market or shite like Spice, imv.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
US states legalising have brought in huge tax revenues, while we have a budget issue. Seems fairly straightforward.
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
Exactly what I was going to say — the whole story is a confusion between phylogenetic and sociogenetic (and even ontogenetic, arguably). For drunkenness to be a phylogenetic adaptation would require that humans were making alcohol long enough in our past that there has been time for genetic adaption to take place. But we’ve only been making alcohol for something like 10,000 years, as I understand it. That’s a remarkable speed of phylogenetic change. “Ah,” the argument goes, “but maybe it’s other types of poison, rather than alcohol”. Really? So ancient tribes routinely and reliably had access to the type of naturally-occurring toxins that inebriate but don’t kill, and had this access in a sufficiently systematic way that it could form the basis for an actual phylogenetic alteration?
It makes much more sense to me that displays of ability to handle toxins would be result in sociogenetic adaptation, whereby the rituals of drunkenness would become inscribed in cultural practices.
I think discussing genes for alcohol consumption as a social status marker is something which is quickly going to enter the ream of conjecture. What is remarkable in terms of genetics is that humans and certain other species have adapted to derive energy from a product of fermentation that is, essentially poisonous (ethanol), so the genetic adaption would be enhanced survival prospects from deriving useful calories from rotten fruit (essentially), which, by virtue of being alcoholic can be stored for an incredibly long time.
I find it quite interesting that it has not been discussed much on this thread so far (unless I'm wrong - I skimmed it) is that unlike any other drug that I can think of, alcohol has a dual purpose as nutrition and is a tasty beverage which various cultures have refined the production of along those lines (eg the French and wine), therefore it occupies a unique position as both an intoxicant and a component of a mealtime. Food and drink are deeply ingrained in a lot of societies - try to tell an Italian that Carbonara has either mushrooms or cream in it if you want to know what I mean by this. Also, as mentioned above you can drink alcoholic beverages and not die, which is useful as this is not always the case with a water supply.
I genuinely love a lot of alcoholic drinks for the way that they taste and no, the non-alcoholic equivalents do not taste the same. Taste is sensory and pleasure in how things taste is something that may well be sneered at by some people, but I feel like this is something that comes in post industrial societies where food is incredibly abundant and inexpensive - we waste about of a third of the food we buy in the UK. NB - I am not in any way trying to disparage people who cannot afford food here, indeed in a society where food is so cheap, it is obscene that some people cannot afford to eat.
Also: fuck off with regulating homebrewing. Classist bullshit at it's finest.
Funky_monks
Neo-Rustic
You don't even need that, just like the bears, you can eat apples that have fallen off a tree and sat a bit in the autumn sunshine and they will be alcoholic.
It's a phenomenon that's used in cidermaking to this day. French cider (and some English, but not a lot), undergoes a process known as "keeving", whereby you simply collect the apples up and let them sit in containers whole until they start to ferment of their own accord, you leave them like that for a bit and then press them. It partly why French cider tastes a bit different - most English cider is scratted (apples are chopped mechanically or ground) and then pressed fresh. It is then allowed to ferment in vessels. Traditionally no cider (much like wine) has yeast added - there are plenty of yeasts on the skins of apples that work just fine. Plenty is still made like that.
PTK
Paul Kegan
I think that perhaps you should consider the difference between "encourage" and "force".
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
If its considerably more pricier to buy in a supermarket versus a pub, why? Apart from to encourage people have a drink in a government approved location to do so or be well off enough to not care about the price difference. Sounds rather focused towards those without much cash. Alcoholics have all kinds of income ranges. Same with minimum unit prices all it does is punish those who can't afford the effective fine for not going to a pub. Not sure social manipulation of those without much money sounds like a sound policy to me.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
I mean it won't matter to those that the price is irrelevant to, whether thats homebrewers or those with enough money for it to matter. I would also be interested to see how a pub beats selling a bottle of vodka for £17 a litre. Thats 40 shots, making it 42.5p for a single currently. Given it needs to be cheaper too and coke costs pennies thats a double for what a quid? Thats without the presumably decrease in price to beat the supermarket. So now I might as well just go in the pub and buy a bottle and go home lol. You presumably saw the absolute minimum requirement for food that was required for selling booze in some places being some basic or reused nonsense on the basis no one ate it. Failing that beers, ales, ciders, etc of all types are extremely simple to make at home up to 18% then freeze distilling can increase further.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
Absolutely its insane, remember working at McDonalds and them saying the cup cost more than the drink, when they gave much more of it, for a cheaper price than a pub did and also the pub could wash the glass the majority of the time. Is absolutely bonkers the price of soft drinks, been experimenting with various fizzy drinks, syrups, cordials, squashes, extracts etc to see what I could make, do still need to try more herbs, chilis to get more of a spike and maybe citric acid or something else but I have made some extremely tasty stuff for about 30p a pint and thats without scale or ice which bulks it and gives a more refreshing quality.
Making ginger beer was probably cheaper come to think of it given the quantity it made! Sure you could stall it at a low ABV without much issue too by simply under sugaring it then waiting for it to level off.
Last edited:
But it has had a real impact in a relatively short period of time in Scotland where alcohol has a significant negative impact on health/society.
(This is just the synopsis as don't have a log in to the BMJ.)
'Over a period of two years and eight months after the policy [minimum unit pricing] was rolled out in Scotland a 13% reduction was seen in deaths from alcohol consumption when compared with an estimate of the deaths that would have occurred without the legislation, using data from England. This is equivalent to avoiding 156 deaths a year, found the study by Public Health Scotland and the University of Glasgow, published in the Lancet.
The greatest reductions in deaths were seen in people living in the most socioeconomically deprived 40% of Scotland and in men.'
Minimum unit pricing in Scotland is associated with 13% fall in alcohol deaths, study finds
The introduction of minimum unit pricing in Scotland is associated with significant reductions in deaths from alcohol consumption, research has found. Over a period of two years and eight months after the policy was rolled out in Scotland a 13% reduction was seen in deaths from alcohol...
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
But it has had a real impact in a relatively short period of time in Scotland where alcohol has a significant negative impact on health/society.
(This is just the synopsis as don't have a log in to the BMJ.)
'Over a period of two years and eight months after the policy [minimum unit pricing] was rolled out in Scotland a 13% reduction was seen in deaths from alcohol consumption when compared with an estimate of the deaths that would have occurred without the legislation, using data from England. This is equivalent to avoiding 156 deaths a year, found the study by Public Health Scotland and the University of Glasgow, published in the Lancet.
The greatest reductions in deaths were seen in people living in the most socioeconomically deprived 40% of Scotland and in men.'
Minimum unit pricing in Scotland is associated with 13% fall in alcohol deaths, study finds
The introduction of minimum unit pricing in Scotland is associated with significant reductions in deaths from alcohol consumption, research has found. Over a period of two years and eight months after the policy was rolled out in Scotland a 13% reduction was seen in deaths from alcohol...www.bmj.com
Seems a little odd, were a lot of people dying directly from alcohol immediately upon consuming it up there? From what I understood the major drawbacks were the cumulative nature of alcohol consumption. Which seems unlikely to reveal itself over 2.5 years. It was also only 50p/unit which is barely above the figure I mentioned above and while it has gone up a few months ago that had inflation mentioned and the idea that those suffering with alcoholism and low wages are likely to just decrease spending on food versus spending less on alcohol. Who does that help? My grandfather died as a result of Korsakoff syndrome, destroyed his brain after going from orphan to WW2 pilot, to squadron commander or whatever it was basically because everyone else but his mate died (2 of his intake anyway idk the size but it was London if that makes a difference?). Then flew over Europe on commercial planes, sent both his daughters to Uni in the late 60s early 70s when that was almost a statistical anomaly. Later nearly burned his house down with him in it as a result of a chip pan fire and alcoholism/alcohol induced dementia and was in a carehome soon after, I only met him once, we played toy planes. So I do not take this lightly. But anecdotal evidence is not evidence, many people lived to advanced ages full of booze, tobacco and any number of class whatever drugs for a considerable time who should also be considered outliers.
Last edited:
Or maybe the lack of access to clean water led people to drink weak beer instead?
Parasitic Worms Plagued These Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs
Scientists peeled back the layers of history to find the afflictions of a bygone era.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
I mean that certainly was a huge factor in some areas, ethyl alcohol in Western civilization. Beer and wine were free of pathogens. And the antiseptic power of alcohol, as well as the natural acidity of wine and beer killed many pathogens leading to beer and wine being the primary drink for health in some periods of time.Or maybe the lack of access to clean water led people to drink weak beer instead?
Parasitic Worms Plagued These Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs
Scientists peeled back the layers of history to find the afflictions of a bygone era.www.popularmechanics.com
In the East for at least the past 2000 years, the practice of boiling water, usually for tea created similarly safer nonalcoholic beverages. Also, genetics played an important role in making Asia avoid alcohol as approximately half of all Asian people lack an enzyme necessary for complete alcohol metabolism, making the experience of drinking quite unpleasant. Much as lactose tolerance was higher in Europe versus Asia.
I agree that anecdotal evidence isn't evidence. The studied quoted isn't anecdotal though. It's from The Lancet and Public Health Scotland and published in the BMJ, will be based on data and have been peer reviewed. So the opposite of anecdotal I'd have thought.
newme
Giant in Pastyland now
It showed the excess deaths level over the covid period! Proving this was remotely related to the longer duration of alcohol deaths which would not show over a short period and attributing it to a booze hike of bugger all seems daft, especially since a lot of that time was people drinking at home more cos they couldn't go to a pub anyway which makes the minimum unit price even more relevant than it would have been. But still cheaper than going to the pub which likely showed them it was cheaper and so perpetuated the behaviour after it was possible to use the pubs. Which seem to be closing at an outstanding rate.
(Based on comparisons with England), it estimated there were 13.4% fewer deaths related to alcohol than would have happened without the policy, as well as 4.1% fewer hospital admissions. Why not compare it to Scotland YOY?
Also the BMJ itself published an article stating roughly 20% of alleged peer reviewed published research was a load of nonsense, but in better language.
Last edited:
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
I read Third chimpanzee - and I have to say - Jared Diamond doesnt half talk some bollocks. His argument that people get shitfaced in order to impress is, frankly, bizzare. Its such tosh, based on no evidence at all and ignores the glaringly obvious answer (that people find it pleaseurable and/or meets a deeply felt need to blunt life's spikes). It makes you question a lot his other arguments.
RD2003
Got a really fucking shitty attitude
For years now the narrative seems to have been about stopping people doing things. No matter what, they've got to be stopped for their own good.
The trouble is that those who are set on stopping everybody doing stuff seem to imagine that life is as good and fulfilling for everybody else as they perceive their own lives to be. Life never can be fulfilling for most, and that's where the whole, largely well-meaning project breaks down. Most people will never have satisfying lives, especially now that neo-liberal working norms are established,. There's no effective opposition, and so many people will inevitably seek an escape no matter what is banned or 'de-normalised.'
The trouble is that those who are set on stopping everybody doing stuff seem to imagine that life is as good and fulfilling for everybody else as they perceive their own lives to be. Life never can be fulfilling for most, and that's where the whole, largely well-meaning project breaks down. Most people will never have satisfying lives, especially now that neo-liberal working norms are established,. There's no effective opposition, and so many people will inevitably seek an escape no matter what is banned or 'de-normalised.'
The cost of providing the liquid is a tiny fraction of a pub’s costs. Most of their expenses is in wages, rent, rates and energy bills. So it doesn’t much matter what the liquid is they are supplying (unless it is something really expensive, of course) — it costs them largely the same, regardless.
lazythursday
Averagely-Known Member
Yep life isn't fulfilling and neoliberalism drives people to drink.
But this by itself isn't much of a class analysis of alcohol consumption - it doesn't take into account the corporations profiting off that misery, and your post is only looking at this in a very individualised way - not taking into account the broader harms done to communities through excessive consumption.
But I agree any policies to denormalise alcohol have to be part of a broader liberatory agenda not just finger wagging prohibition.
Similar threads
