Talk:Alcohol (drug)

Proposal: Split out pharmacology

I have been working on expanding a discussion of the ADME of ethanol. Currently this article is at 7.5k words, with the expansion it would be past the 8k mark mentioned in WP:SIZERULE. The pharmacology overlaps with several other articles, such as Blood alcohol concentration#Metabolism, Alcohol_intoxication#Pathophysiology, Ethanol metabolism, Auto-brewery_syndrome#Metabolic_action. So I was thinking I would split out the whole section to a new Pharmacology of ethanol article. It doesn't seem too controversial as there are articles named like Pharmacology of progesterone, Pharmacodynamics of estradiol, etc. but maybe someone has an idea on what the exact scope of the new article should be (pharmacology, pharmacodynamics, or pharmacokinetics). Mathnerd314159 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

The article has grown since, with xtools reporting 8,601 words — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 14:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

Alright. Your comment doesn't really sound like enthusiastic support, but on the other hand 94.255.152.53's edits show no signs of stopping, so it is probably worthwhile. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 04:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

@Mathnerd314159: I support your idea of splitting out the pharmacology section into a new article titled Pharmacology of ethanol. As you mentioned, there are similar articles dedicated to the pharmacology of specific substances, including Pharmacology of bicalutamide, Pharmacology of antidepressants, Pharmacology of progesterone, and Pharmacology of cyproterone acetate – this would provide consistency with Wikipedia's organization. This approach would also help keep the original article on a manageable length and avoid violating the size guidelines. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 05:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I had a draft which was getting close to finished and now it is in mainspace. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 06:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

That's fantastic, Mathnerd314159! It's always exciting to see an article come to fruition. I look forward to checking out the new article on the pharmacology of ethanol. It will be a valuable resource. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 08:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

@Mathnerd314159: Also, the current article, Alcohols (medicine), covers a broader range of alcohols used in medicine, including isopropyl alcohol which is not meant for ingestion. Separating the information on ethanol would create a clearer distinction between its medicinal uses and those of other alcohols. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 05:40, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

"Abused" in lede

Since there's been some back and forth on whether to characterize alcohol as one of the most commonly used and abused substances in the lede, I figured I'd open a talk page discussion.

I feel it is WP:DUE to include "abused" in the lede. The objection that not all drinkers abuse alcohol is irrelevant, just as articles on cults and other fringe groups don't have to specify that not all people are members. The two statements are distinct; alcohol is one of the most commonly used substances, and alcohol is one of the most commonly abused substances. Both these are highly relevant. We could workshop some rephrasing if others would like, but the mention, supported by sources, should stay in the lede. EducatedRedneck (talk) 11:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for starting the talk page discussion. I felt it was an undue mention. Your analogy with fringe groups doesn't make sense to me. "All people" (with respect to fringe groups) is not analogous to "drinkers" (with respect to alcohol consumption); drinkers actively engage with the given thing (drinking alcohol) whereas a generic person would not engage with a fringe group. That the overwhelming majority of people who engage with alcohol by drinking do not abusively consume it is pretty significant. I also think that starting the lead off in a moralizing almost preachy tone by mentioning the abuse issue gives an unencyclopedic and activist vibe. Also note that similar articles about drugs e.g., Cocaine, Heroin, Meth do not do this in the first sentence. JDiala (talk) 12:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I'll allow that the metaphor isn't the best one, so fair point. Though I also point out you write, a generic person would not engage with a fringe group, so it seems similarly assumed that a generic drinker would not abuse alcohol.

Please correct me if I misunderstand, but what I'm hearing is that the construction of the lede implies that use and abuse are very closely associated. (Beyond abusers having to be users, that is.) That is, it could be interpreted as, "Alcohol is the most commonly [used and abused] substance", where a user is implied to be an abuser. I can see that argument. Would a rephrase to, "Alcohol is one of the most commonly used and most frequently abused substances" be an improvement?

The other part I'm hearing from you is about the prominence of its abuse. I feel it's due because of two factors: 1) It being among the three most commonly abused is notable, 2) Unlike the other drugs you mention (which do mention their illegality in the lede), alcohol is legal, so "abuse" is the term which indicates social ills from its use. Illegal drugs are (rightly or wrongly) assumed to have social ills from their use by default.

Finally, I don't really see any moralizing or preachy tone in the lede; it's just describing what is. (Well, except for the fourth paragraph. But we can workshop that later, if desired.) I look forward to hearing more of your thoughts; I think there's definitely room to tweak things so we can all be happy (or all be equally unhappy!) with the article. EducatedRedneck (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

I think it is important for the phrasing to determine what proportion of people engage with alcohol by abusively consuming it. If it is not a majority, it probably isn't worth listing in the lead. That being said, there are a lot of games you can play with the fractions. For example, in Long-term_effects_of_alcohol#The_World, there is the calculation that ~2/3 of male drinkers and ~1/3 of female drinkers consume harmful amounts. And drinkers are by no means a 50/50 split by gender, they are heavily biased male, so it seems safe to conclude that at least a majority of current drinkers are consuming harmful amounts, globally. This is also backed up by the estimate that current drinkers consume an average of 40 grams a day. And then of course there is the WHO statement that no amount is safe, and the drugscience chart. So, I would be very comfortable with a lead like "Alcohol is one of the most widely used and most harmful psychoactive substances globally. Even low levels of consumption are now recognized as harmful and often constitute abuse." This does disagree from "popular" sentiment, but this is just because most current drinking guidelines have not been adjusted to reflect the risks of cancer and nobody reads the science. There have been some updates like the Canadian guidelines but they've been suppressed due to alcohol industry influence or whatever. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 02:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Dry Drunk and Citations

Because an IP has twice removed the paragraph on "dry drunk", I figured I'd open a discussion here for it. The passage status-quo reads: Dry drunk is an expression coined by the founder of Alcoholics Anonymous that describes an alcoholic who no longer drinks but otherwise maintains the same behavior patterns of an alcoholic.

The IP has posted on one of their talk pages, The dry-drunk language of AA and the citations are fundamentally religious in nature and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. The citations used are from weak sources that have low bars to entry for their websites. Separately, they perpetuate harm by insinuating that quitting alcohol without AA is inappropriate.

The two references are WebMD, a notably secular source, and a published book. Neither of these appear to have any religious connection, and are completely appropriate. WebMD also seems like a decent source to me. I also don't see any way in which the wikitext insinuates that quitting alcohol without AA is inappropriate. I feel we should keep the passage as-written. EducatedRedneck (talk) 14:50, 2 September 2024 (UTC)

Seeing as it is an AA term, I think it is more appropriate to the alcoholism article. The issue is that the alcoholism section in this article has grown organically and is not properly summary-style. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 02:50, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

References

Bargirls

@94.255.152.53 is attempting to add a paragraph on bargirls to the section on alcohol risks. I feel this is not needed, as the only relevance is that proximity to alcohol increases risk in sexual encounters, which is already discussed elsewhere in the article. If anything, that's more about the connection between prostitution and health; the presence of alcohol seems to be only incidental. It may be worth adding a wikilink under the "Risky Sexual Behavior" setting which notes that prostitution is sometimes facilitated by settings which serve alcohol such as bars or nightclubs. This would allow a reader to go find out more without further bloating the article. What do others think? EducatedRedneck (talk) 00:06, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

In particular, the passage which was added about bars reads: These settings can contribute to increased risky sexual behaviors due to the influence of alcohol strikes me as WP:SYNTH. EducatedRedneck (talk) 00:10, 3 October 2024 (UTC)

This seems resolved. There is the quote "Studies suggest that the degree of alcoholic intoxication in young people directly correlates with the level of risky behavior, such as engaging in multiple sex partners." in the section and then the bar discussion later.

Probably the bar discussion would fit better under "Society and culture" than "Adverse effects" though - I would recommend moving it to the new article if you do the split. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 03:03, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I just want to point out that this is added under #Sexually_transmitted_infections_and_unintended_pregnancy which is a sub-section of #Social_issues, not #Adverse_effects. So it's part of: Draft:Alcohol and society --94.255.152.53 (talk) 01:13, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Moved the section on bargirls from #Sexually_transmitted_infections_and_unintended_pregnancy to #Occupational_risks because of its broader context. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 15:50, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Proposed Split

The prose of the article is, by my count, 15,489 words, well over the 10,000 word recommended maximum in WP:SIZE. An IP has been very prolific in adding to the article with good content, so I don't feel a trim would solve the issue without hurting the encyclopedia. Per WP:SPLIT, splitting seems like a good option. I propose the Social Issues and Society and Culture be split into a new article, perhaps called "Alcohol and Society" or the like. EducatedRedneck (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Support as proposer. EducatedRedneck (talk) 17:57, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

Tentative Support There are already an astonishing number of articles on alcohol on Wikipedia, see Index of alcohol-related articles and Template:Alcohol and health (which that same IP has helpfully expanded). Not to mention the confusion about which article is the overview of the overviews - this page? Ethanol? Alcohol (chemistry)? Alcoholic beverage? I really think some tree shaking is needed to consolidate the articles along lines that make more sense. Probably some renames too, like I think at this point I would just rename Template:Alcohol and health to Template:Alcohol. That being said, I don't think the split you propose would make the situation significantly worse, and it would fill in a link for the "Social issues" item of the template, so I have no objections to it. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 01:55, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

I merged the "I think at this point I would just rename Template:Alcohol and health to Template:Alcohol..." discussion to Template_talk:Alcohol_and_health#rename. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 01:15, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Support: I have contributed 60% of the content for the current article, dedicating hundreds of hours to this effort, including the addition of all unique sub-sections. To better manage and track my contributions, I have created the proposed article: Draft:Alcohol and society. --94.255.152.53 (talk) 22:49, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Outstanding! Thank you, .53! I'll poke around in the draft, see if I can come up with an interim lede. Once it's in article space, I'll put some summaries in this main article with links to the new one. EducatedRedneck (talk) 14:55, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Weak support it may be better to try to handle these topics together and in the same article as much as we can and that might mean doing a better job with a concise summary. But I also WP:AGF with the people working on this article that there is sufficient reliable material that this is really two topics and that the second topic can be presented neutrally without turning into some type of personal essay or WP:OR. Jorahm (talk) 20:26, 5 November 2024 (UTC)