<p>latetoschool: I chuckled when I read your description of corporate behavior at business functions after one or two drinks. I once worked for a prestigious global firm. We would have offsite conferences for the global team, and the usual routine for the rather large London group was to have 8-10 drinks in one sitting. Behavior was outrageous as you might expect. I would stop at one or two and then fake it by ordering club soda and lime - otherwise, I faced constant comments about why I wasn’t drinking. I was AMAZED at the amount of alchohol consumed in one sitting. But they would all be at the early morning meetings the next day, looking a little bleary eyed but fine. No consequences though since the US leader of our team was right there with them the night before. So, the consequences for drinking vary by the the culture of the company your’e doing business with. I’m really glad to be out of there…</p>
<p>LOL, MomofWildChild are you sure??? 300 glasses a DAY? Were you, um, drinking when you read the article? Or when you wrote the post? You made me laugh out loud, and now my daughter thinks I’m demented.</p>
<p>Wonder what does 600 glasses a day deliver? Immortality? If so, sign me up. :)</p>
<p>Momof Wild Child - I read the same WSJ article today and then ordered three bottles of Reservatrol for myself (vs trying to go with the 300 glasses of wine). Hey, if it can help fat mice run, it can surely do something for me…</p>
<p>“The JAMA study was about adolescents. I believe the point was that the earlier kids start smoking marijuana the more likely they are to move on to harder drugs.”</p>
<p>I read some study in which it was made pretty clear that the gateway drug for illegal drugs was nearly always alcohol.</p>
<p>“gateway drug for illegal drugs was nearly always alcohol.”</p>
<p>Oh wow. Oh wow. I mean, how obvious is that??? Oh wow!</p>
<p>I hadn’t really thought of it, but yeah, that is SO true!!! I got drunk for the 1st time in 8th grade. The other stuff didn’t happen til at least 2 years (and many drunken episodes) later.</p>
<p>Well, that just about settles it!</p>
<p>lts, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt that your ‘birds of a feather’ comment was not an insult. My comment was based on people I’ve met in 30+ years of being married, living in Toronto, Boston, and Manhattan, hundreds of partners of my H in large law firms in each city and in the corporation for which he is now General Counsel, in the college campuses where I’ve worked, in the schools where my 4Ds have attended, parent groups I’ve worked with for 20 years, volunteer groups I’ve been in for 15 years, and in the dozens and dozens of people I’ve met through my own practice, with whom I’ve developed friendships and subsequently, socialized. It’s a myriad of different strata of society. </p>
<p>I am absolutely fine with individuals making a personal choice not to drink. It’s none of my business. However, I find your value judgments about other adults’ decision to drink, even a social drink or a glass of wine with dinner, completely off the wall. Your description of a decision to not refer one woman for a job opportunity, and the comment about another that you’ve been “making fun of her for YEARS”, referring to her as ““the drunk”, even though, in all fairness, I don’t think any of us have actually witnessed her in the precise state of being drunk”, is, honestly, quite immature, in my opinion, and certainly not professional. </p>
<p>Drinking in moderation is not something which should influence anyone’s ability to do their job well. It’s also not something which should be a cause of concern for their co-workers or their superiors.</p>
<p>Alwaysamom, I think it is extremely immature and unprofessional for a 50-something career woman, with a law degree no less, to babble the details of her latest employment evaluation, as well as the unpleasant details of her failed marriage and pending divorce, a glass of wine or two into a dinner that was arranged as a business meeting. That’s evidence of extraordinary poor judgment, and no way am I going to refer such a person to a job, or anything else that can in any way be associated back to me. And I think it’s equally immature and unprofessional for a woman to stumble around tipsy, drink in hand, lipstick smeared, etc. at professional venues. Now that I think about it, some of the people who have been making fun of her along with me are actually drinkers themselves. </p>
<p>Sometimes I think that those who use alcohol don’t know or understand how they appear to those who do not drink. But then, there’s probably no particular reason why they should care. I am guessing that as long as one can bumble along in an alcoholic haze, it probably doesn’t matter. Most likely one or two more drinks, it all becomes irrelevant.</p>
<p>Please supply us with your study, mathmom, as I supplied the study I referred to. I’m sure we’d all like to read it. Thanks.</p>
<p><a href=“The Phoenix - The Independent Campus Newspaper of Swarthmore College since 1881”>The Phoenix - The Independent Campus Newspaper of Swarthmore College since 1881;
<p>This story from the Swarthmore newspaper talks about spills on the floor in the room where a “wet” Halloween party was held (the concern was of candy and sugary drinks spilled accidentally by the large crowd while eating, drinking, and dancing). Although the word “vomit” is used once in the story, the type of damage to the floor that concerns the Swarthmore administrators seems to be of a totally different nature than what we heard earlier in this thread about the problems at Williams and the unnamed school which had “feces in the microwave”. Although there is drinking (and excessive drinking) at every school, the scope of the problem seems to be worse at some schools than at others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was put together by the National Academy of Sciences. The part about gateway drugs and dependence is in Chapter 3.</p>
<p>
from:
<a href=“http://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/[/url]”>http://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/</a></p>
<p>Maybe I’m reading your quote wrong, but I believe it says: <the factors=“” that=“” best=“” predict=“” use=“” of=“” illicit=“” drugs=“” other=“” than=“” marijuana=“” are=“” probably=“” the=“” following:…=“”></the></p>
<p>Even though this study is seven years old, it also points to marijuana use as being the “best predicter” of other illicit drugs.</p>
<p>Edit: Oh I see, I did read it incorrectly. I’ll read the chapter of the study when I have time later, thanks. I still have a hard time believing cigarettes and alcohol use leads to marijuana use let alone other drug use though. As we’ve discussed, pot has only one purpose, getting high, whereas cigarettes and alcohol have other purposes. I have been a drinker all my life and never had the urge to get high from marijuana, for example. I also smoked in my twenties.</p>
<p>Well then what is the purpose of smoking cigarettes?</p>
<p>Maybe in your social scene, the kids drank and smoked cigs but didn’t get high. In many high school & college social scenes, they go hand in hand. The same kids both drink and get high, and often cigs too.</p>
<p>^^^ That’s another downside to underage drinking - the underage smoking that tends to go with (generalizing here). I’m amazed at the numbers of otherwise intelligent young people who make the decision to smoke with the knowledge available to them today.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s rocket science, exactly, that people who use marijuana do it to GET HIGH. I can’t give you a good reason for smoking cigarettes, but I sure know it’s not to get stoned. No one is saying people can’t drink and/or use tobacco and also use marijuana. I notice mini hasn’t weighed in on this discussion, maybe because, to quote him: “I never met a drug I didn’t like.”</p>
<p>I tried to get high smoking pot, but never was good enough at inhaling. But I did try! I smoked it as part of the social scene. Never was interested in smoking cigarettes though.</p>
<p>I know the study is pretty old, I did think it was interesting. My conclusion was that the whole concept of gateway drugs is kind of silly. Some people are interested in mind-altering experiences and will tend to experiment maybe with harder and harder drugs - partly I think due to their propensity for risk taking and partly probably due to genetic factors that make addiction more likely or getting high more effective. I’m not speaking here as a scientist at all and can quote no studies other than the above and personal experience for my conclusions. </p>
<p>And for what it’s worth I think I’ve channeled my somewhat addictive personality into the internet - not sure that it’s healthier than alchohol the drug of choice in my parents and grandparents generation.</p>
<p>I haven’t weighed in because I don’t see anything to weigh in on. I think I already gave my pseudo-anthropological opinion that (tautologically speaking) people get high because they like to. And why, historically, alcohol has been treated (in the west) differently than other drugs. As to tobacco, it is a product of early 20th century technology (mechanized rolling machines); smoking on the scale we saw it in the middle of the 20th century was unlike anything else experienced around tobacco in human history.</p>
<p>But what is it you’d like to know? ;)</p>
<p>“I’m amazed at the numbers of otherwise intelligent young people who make the decision to smoke with the knowledge available to them today.”</p>
<p>I wonder about that too!</p>
<p>As for people smoking pot to get high, well of course that’s why they do it. But, if you are somehow implying that this is a less noble reason to do something, I don’t agree. I distinctly remember being quite proud of that fact that I didn’t smoke…cigarettes. It seemed like such a waste, because there was the health risk without any noticeable benefit. No one gets high from cigs - they are only avoiding unpleasant addiction effect by giving in to the addiction. We used to pride ourselves for not smoking the dangerous drug (tobacco), and only smoking the one that gave us benefits. It seemed like a really smart decision at the time!</p>
<p>I’m just saying that’s how we saw it as teenagers. I remember it well.</p>
<p>More taxes on sin products if we must pay for their rehabilitation and mini’s wages.</p>
<p>I agree with that in concept. Except…who decides what is classified as a ‘sin’ product? Would hard liquor be conisdered sinful but not beer and wine? By that logic, cigarettes would be considered ‘sin’ but not pot, since cigarettes have been proven to cause lung cancer but pot has no connection. (Of course, it’s a moot point since it’s illegal anyway.) What about donuts, candy bars, sodas? (which contribute to obesity, heart disease, etc.) What about meat? (which has been proven to increase risk of heart disease, cancer, osteoporosis)</p>
<p>To a vegetarian who doesn’t eat junk or drink or smoke or use any drugs, and thus has a (statistically documented) much lower risk factor for most degenerative diseases, pretty much most of the standard American diet would be considered sinful.</p>
<p>So, maybe a good idea in theory, but it’ll never work. Too much of a grey area.</p>
<p>I went to an interesting discussion last night on ADD by Harvard expert John Ratey and he talked about how the dopamine pathways are the same ones that are affected by the attention system ( which actually is pervasive through out many areas of brain)
( dopamine pathway is also affected by addictive substances and behaviors)
Interestingly- although I definitely have widespread ADD - I have not become addicted to any of the medications or drugs that I have used over the years-even though there is a connection to ADD and addiction.</p>
<p>Ive also been fascinated by the level of schizophrenics that smoke tobacco
<a href=“http://www.americanlegacy.org/522.htm[/url]”>Legacy for Health - American Legacy Foundation; ( 70 to 90% of schizophrenics smoke compared with 22% in general population)</p>
<p>I am currently on medication however- although it is difficult to remember to take it- which is true for many with ADD- which is why they are always looking for things like the patch that just came out- so it is hard to understand reasoning that ADD medication will* create* addictions.
If you can’t remember to take something- how can you be addicted?</p>
<p>However- I have become addicted to exercise- if I don’t go to the gym at least every other day- watch out!
<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/business/yourmoney/06WIRE.html?ex=1372824000&en=72072fa0c83d3791&ei=5007[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/business/yourmoney/06WIRE.html?ex=1372824000&en=72072fa0c83d3791&ei=5007</a>
and this article might be interesting to those on the thread wondering about frequent posters</p>