Good morning.

I am 31 and I scrolled through the pics on facebook from ten years ago and looking at current pictures of people I have no or barely contact to these days and I gotta say I am glad I hopped off that boat a few years ago.

Most of the people I know and hang out with back then were in the “Turbojugend”, kind of a fanclub of Turbonegro and all they (and I) did was get wasted to punk music. Looking back it was fun and don’t regret my early 20s but I am so glad I am not that person anymore.

I still have contact to a few of them and most of them are now 35+ year olds and still drink, party the same way they(we) did ten years ago.

It seems like they are having a blast but I noticed nothing changed. They are the same people they were ten years ago. I noticed it this weekend when I decided to go out to party again and oh man it was enough. I left four hours into the party. Since I don’t think the whole experience was wack. Drunk people yelling in my ear “REMEMBER BACK THEN? THOSE WERE THE YEARS” etc. some dude licking my cheeks smelling like he puked 20 minutes ago (he did) and other people yelling they got erection (song from Turbonegro).

If I look at the pictures they post every weekend I see exhausted people and emptyness. It’s actually so sad… dunno I don’t want to shame them, they are enjoying their lives.

It’s just crazy what alcohol does and the thing is, in this group “Turbojugend” alcohol is so normal. It’s really crazy.

  • @OpenStarsEnglish
    22•2 months ago

    I like to think of it like this: there’s nothing wrong with alcohol itself, it’s just a drug. It’s what you use it for (escapism?) that fucks you up.

    • @Laser@feddit.deEnglish
      6•2 months ago

      Oh, there are definitely some things wrong with alcohol itself, as for basically any psychotropic substance. I can’t think of one with absolutely zero downsides.

      I don’t want to say you should abstain from all substance, in fact I don’t either, though I don’t drink anymore. But current academic consensus is that alcohol is rather harmful compared to other substance (and, in fairness, less harmful than others) and not only is it problematic itself, but also our approach towards it as a society.

      Saying there’s nothing wrong with it shifts blame to the affected individual. Meanwhile, companies are raking in billions from sales and not being held accountable for the damage they cause.

      • @OpenStarsEnglish
        2•2 months ago

        Even water can have harmful side effects - you can drown, or get bloated, or dilute your body’s store of catalysts, you can over-work your kidneys, etc. Granted, water has fewer side effects than most things you could put into your body:-).

        Alcohol can be used well though - e.g. half a serving not even every day has been shown to have fantastic benefits, especially when it is red wine and the recipient is male (though it is unclear whether that is any better than just red grapes, although even if not, the latter can get quite expensive). e.g. it can help to alleviate stress, and lowers blood pressure (ofc it can also raise stress if used improperly, e.g. if you combine drinking with driving).

        You are correct ofc in the pedantic sense that caution is warranted, as with any drug - I am not saying otherwise, and I would have communicated more properly with less room for misunderstanding if I had said not that there is “nothing wrong with alcohol” but rather more that “the issue has less to do with the alcohol”, compared to the escapism. e.g. OP said things like this:

        I see exhausted people and emptyness.

        Which in addition to alcohol people could achieve this state by over reliance on games, work, religion, family or other things if likewise improperly applied. Ian Danskin (Innuendo Studios) has a fascinating albeit quite long video explanation relevant to this topic showing a variety of ways someone can fuck up their own life + that of everyone else around them. e.g. Brexit did not involve alcohol, nor did electing Donald Trump, nor does climate change or capitalism need alcohol to kill us all and perhaps end humanity’s tenure on planet Earth. But “escapism” did in fact do all of those things (being a necessary component when if not fully sufficient all on its own to be the sole cause), and thus is a far worse culprit to be aware of than a mere few ounces of some drug.

        TLDR: don’t lose sight of the forest for the sake of the trees: alcohol is nowhere close to the primary danger in this discussion. Though yes, as with any drug, caution is advised, good point.

        • @Laser@feddit.deEnglish
          1•2 months ago

          Even water can have harmful side effects - you can drown, or get bloated, or dilute your body’s store of catalysts, you can over-work your kidneys, etc. Granted, water has fewer side effects than most things you could put into your body:-).

          Water however is something the body absolutely requires and if it’s fit for consumption (e.g. clean, not distilled, etc) has no downsides when consumed in the required amount. There’s no metric that gets better without drinking water compared to with. Also, the possibility of drowning in isn’t limited to water, but rather a property of all(?) liquids.

          Alcohol can be used well though - e.g. half a serving not even every day has been shown to have fantastic benefits, especially when it is red wine and the recipient is male (though it is unclear whether that is any better than just red grapes, although even if not, the latter can get quite expensive). e.g. it can help to alleviate stress, and lowers blood pressure (ofc it can also raise stress if used improperly, e.g. if you combine drinking with driving).

          I’m not aware of any such studies living up to current scientific standards, which is why the WHO now states that there’s no safe level for consumption. https://www.who.int/europe/news/item/04-01-2023-no-level-of-alcohol-consumption-is-safe-for-our-health note that this is mostly about cancer only, not the other detrimental effects:

          there are no studies that would demonstrate that the potential beneficial effects of light and moderate drinking on cardiovascular diseases and type 2 diabetes outweigh the cancer risk associated with these same levels of alcohol consumption for individual consumers.

          For studies showing a positive effect, it has recently been claimed that there are issues with how the control group, consisting of people who don’t drink, is selected, which this quote on the article hints at:

          “Potential protective effects of alcohol consumption, suggested by some studies, are tightly connected with the comparison groups chosen and the statistical methods used, and may not consider other relevant factors”

          Because often, the group of non-drinkers contains ex-drinkers who stopped drinking because of the negative health impact from drinking. So you’re comparing a moderate to light drinker (selective from the first group) to the average of the second group, which is problematic because of the previously mentioned fact.

          Escapism is part of the human nature, and so is the desire to do drugs, the latter not even exclusive to humans. Both are fine in moderation.

          Again, idc about it very much, but shifting away all responsibility from the substance and by extension, the profiteers, towards the sometimes uneducated users is just wrong, and creates a stigma for those who are affected by a dependence on alcohol and its effects detrimental to health. A substance that can have these effects just be at least partially to blame.