7 ms·

How does alcohol influence the brain?

103 points by neurosphere 11y ago

lutusp 11y ago
The article uses the word "mind" in its title, but the article is strict neuroscience, i.e. it discusses the brain from a biological perspective. The word "mind" never appears again. The mind (psychology) is not the brain (neuroscience).
- arvinjoar 11y ago
  A bit of a nitpick (but I guess that's the HN spirit)? Just different levels of abstraction. The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them. Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy. Just like the execution of a program can be described in Machine Code, 1's and 0's or even as electricity, or any other layer of abstraction.
  - megalodon 11y ago
    I'm not so sure. The title should be relevant to the layer of abstraction used. You're talking of abstractions as if there is a beginning and an end level, but what if there isn't?
  - lutusp 11y ago
    > Just different levels of abstraction. From a scientific perspective, it's much more important than that. Neuroscience has empirical evidence, theories, and is a science. Psychology has anecdotes, no testable, falsifiable theories, and, for lack of empirical evidence, cannot be a science. > Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy. So is the director of the NIMH: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h Quote: "America’s psychiatrist-in-chief seemed to be reiterating what many had been saying all along: that psychiatry was a pseudoscience, unworthy of inclusion in the medical kingdom." > The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them. Yes, absolutely, and I think this will eventually happen within neuroscience. But focusing on the mind, something inaccessible to empirical investigation, is not the road to that goal.
- dang 11y ago
  Ok, we'll s/mind/brain/, but please let's not have an off-topic thread about this.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    The HN title now differs from the article's actual title. How is discussion of an article's text 'off-topic', particularly when the discussion is entirely cogent and on point? If an article uses a word in the title, it should also occur in the text. Anyway, if you're concerned about effective downmodding, you should probably head over to https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=brazzledazzle https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=brazzledazzle where their last comment was a personal attack.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      The request was there because this [1] response was entirely predictable. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10877103 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10877103 It's great to see lutusp back. It's a shame he comments on psychology articles. His comments on any other subject are interesting, fascinating, useful.
      - jsprogrammer 11y ago
        What, exactly, do you see wrong with that response?
sketchet 11y ago
Interesting read, drinking makes it easier to be addicted to other things. I wonder how strong of an effect this would be.
xchaotic 11y ago
The article is interesting on a chemical level and explains the biochemical reactions really well. What I am really interested in is a higher level study on overall social and cognitive results of moderate drinking. I bet you 'll find plenty of anecdotal opinions with claims that small amounts of alcohol help with coding and also social awkwardness
- agumonkey 11y ago
  I've told that before, but I'll say it once more. Some people are badly calibrated. Two drinks don't make us drunk, they make us normal. I'm not incapacitated, not foolish, not violent, just in tune with the others. Alcohol is the bit of jitter that make the system not corner itself.
  - uniformlyrandom 11y ago
    No, it just makes you a bit dumber so that you stop noticing the discomfort. * Edit: that is not necessarily a bad thing.
    - agumonkey 11y ago
      I'm probably 80% sharp (the other 20% being prolongated mental efforts that I'll assume I wouldn't bear, and that I cannot test in social situations anyway). Mentally, not motor skills (I wouldn't take the wheel for instance). And far more sharper than without drinking since my mind would be busy with self conscious / anxious thoughts. It just silence a worried part of the mind so the other can breath.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
  - tptacek 11y ago
    The term for this is "self-medication".
    - agumonkey 11y ago
MichaelTerry 11y ago
I take it you mean what influence alcohol has on the brain. It´s effect is to constrict the blood vessels going to the brain with the consequence that less oxygen can get there which gives you that woozy feeling when you imbibe too excess.
- agumonkey 11y ago
  There's more to it. I have blood/c.v problems, I feel when blood flow is constricted, and when it happen I'm not woozy, I'm crippled. Like a piece of dead wood.
PavlovsCat 11y ago
Am I wrong to read this as alcohol being some kind of actual gateway drug? Not in the sense that it brings you in contact with other drugs, but more susceptible to addiction to them? > The fact that repeated alcohol exposure reduces production of this receptor means that over time, drinking disrupts the brain’s normal brakes on dopamine release. In rats, this is known to speed up the development of addiction to anything from cocaine, to sugar and food. All of this points to a somewhat worrying reality – in consuming alcohol, people make their brains increasingly sensitive to the experience of reward that comes with substances like alcohol, drugs and food, which gradually makes people more desperate to seek them out.
kefka 11y ago
I started to read said article, and then realized that I normally am not inebriated as the article only tests for. I am not a binary sober/inebriated. Again, it's "Alcohol(in some form) is Good" and then "Alcohol(in general) is bad." Just like Eggs. And just like Butter. All these scientists can test for is gross amounts, and not the small.
fallingfrog 11y ago
I feel like this article is misleading in some of the details, for example some of the neurons that are quieted are inhibitory neurons, so the net effect is to make other neurons more activated.
- neurosphere 11y ago
  The notion that some of the neurons silenced by alcohol are inhibitory neurons is actually the explanation that researchers have proposed for why stimulating glycine receptors produces an increase in dopamine release. The idea which is shown in a diagram in the article is that silencing GABA-releasing interneurons (which are inhibitory) with glycine consequently disinhibits dopaminergic neurons.
fallingfrog 11y ago
If you start looking at their references the arguments start to fall apart- for example, that photo of reduced glucose uptake was not associated with reduced cognitive performance and the authors of the paper suggested that perhaps an alternative energy source to glucose was being utilized.
- tcj_phx 11y ago
  Alcohol is an energy-rich molecule... I think one of its metabolites is preferentially burned by the body. There was a study published about 2 years ago that found heavy drinkers' brains burn lots of acetate.
fallingfrog 11y ago
And the part about the rats hitting the dopamine lever is wrong too. If the rats were in a rich environment with other rats to interact with they would overwhelmingly prefer straight water to water with cocaine. It was only rats in an empty box with literally nothing else to do that would get addicted- in other words rats which were already in significant psychological pain. I need to find the reference for that..
- pstuart 11y ago
  This one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park
- neurosphere 11y ago
  The idea of whether rats with exciting lives would indeed be less likely to become addicted to cocaine / morphine is quite controversial, and there have been some failures to replicate that original study (references here: 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9148292?dopt=Abstract https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9148292?dopt=Abstract and 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2616610?dopt=Abstract https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2616610?dopt=Abstract). I think the argument is that social isolation can and probably does make animals and humans more prone to drug addiction, but it's definitely not the only factor, and both animals and humans with good lives can still become hooked.

103 points by neurosphere 11y ago

The article uses the word "mind" in its title, but the article is strict neuroscience, i.e. it discusses the brain from a biological perspective. The word "mind" never appears again. The mind (psychology) is not the brain (neuroscience).

arvinjoar 11y ago
A bit of a nitpick (but I guess that's the HN spirit)? Just different levels of abstraction. The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them. Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy. Just like the execution of a program can be described in Machine Code, 1's and 0's or even as electricity, or any other layer of abstraction.
- megalodon 11y ago
  I'm not so sure. The title should be relevant to the layer of abstraction used. You're talking of abstractions as if there is a beginning and an end level, but what if there isn't?
- lutusp 11y ago
  > Just different levels of abstraction. From a scientific perspective, it's much more important than that. Neuroscience has empirical evidence, theories, and is a science. Psychology has anecdotes, no testable, falsifiable theories, and, for lack of empirical evidence, cannot be a science. > Basically, I think you're painting a false dichotomy. So is the director of the NIMH: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h Quote: "America’s psychiatrist-in-chief seemed to be reiterating what many had been saying all along: that psychiatry was a pseudoscience, unworthy of inclusion in the medical kingdom." > The dream would be to be able to put all these levels of abstractions together, and have good mappings between them. Yes, absolutely, and I think this will eventually happen within neuroscience. But focusing on the mind, something inaccessible to empirical investigation, is not the road to that goal.
dang 11y ago
Ok, we'll s/mind/brain/, but please let's not have an off-topic thread about this.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  The HN title now differs from the article's actual title. How is discussion of an article's text 'off-topic', particularly when the discussion is entirely cogent and on point? If an article uses a word in the title, it should also occur in the text. Anyway, if you're concerned about effective downmodding, you should probably head over to https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=brazzledazzle https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=brazzledazzle where their last comment was a personal attack.
  - DanBC 11y ago
    The request was there because this [1] response was entirely predictable. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10877103 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10877103 It's great to see lutusp back. It's a shame he comments on psychology articles. His comments on any other subject are interesting, fascinating, useful.
    - jsprogrammer 11y ago
      What, exactly, do you see wrong with that response?

sketchet 11y ago

Interesting read, drinking makes it easier to be addicted to other things. I wonder how strong of an effect this would be.

xchaotic 11y ago

The article is interesting on a chemical level and explains the biochemical reactions really well. What I am really interested in is a higher level study on overall social and cognitive results of moderate drinking. I bet you 'll find plenty of anecdotal opinions with claims that small amounts of alcohol help with coding and also social awkwardness

agumonkey 11y ago
I've told that before, but I'll say it once more. Some people are badly calibrated. Two drinks don't make us drunk, they make us normal. I'm not incapacitated, not foolish, not violent, just in tune with the others. Alcohol is the bit of jitter that make the system not corner itself.
- uniformlyrandom 11y ago
  No, it just makes you a bit dumber so that you stop noticing the discomfort. * Edit: that is not necessarily a bad thing.
  - agumonkey 11y ago
    I'm probably 80% sharp (the other 20% being prolongated mental efforts that I'll assume I wouldn't bear, and that I cannot test in social situations anyway). Mentally, not motor skills (I wouldn't take the wheel for instance). And far more sharper than without drinking since my mind would be busy with self conscious / anxious thoughts. It just silence a worried part of the mind so the other can breath.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- tptacek 11y ago
  The term for this is "self-medication".
  - agumonkey 11y ago

MichaelTerry 11y ago

I take it you mean what influence alcohol has on the brain. It´s effect is to constrict the blood vessels going to the brain with the consequence that less oxygen can get there which gives you that woozy feeling when you imbibe too excess.

agumonkey 11y ago
There's more to it. I have blood/c.v problems, I feel when blood flow is constricted, and when it happen I'm not woozy, I'm crippled. Like a piece of dead wood.

PavlovsCat 11y ago

Am I wrong to read this as alcohol being some kind of actual gateway drug? Not in the sense that it brings you in contact with other drugs, but more susceptible to addiction to them? > The fact that repeated alcohol exposure reduces production of this receptor means that over time, drinking disrupts the brain’s normal brakes on dopamine release. In rats, this is known to speed up the development of addiction to anything from cocaine, to sugar and food. All of this points to a somewhat worrying reality – in consuming alcohol, people make their brains increasingly sensitive to the experience of reward that comes with substances like alcohol, drugs and food, which gradually makes people more desperate to seek them out.

kefka 11y ago

I started to read said article, and then realized that I normally am not inebriated as the article only tests for. I am not a binary sober/inebriated. Again, it's "Alcohol(in some form) is Good" and then "Alcohol(in general) is bad." Just like Eggs. And just like Butter. All these scientists can test for is gross amounts, and not the small.

fallingfrog 11y ago

I feel like this article is misleading in some of the details, for example some of the neurons that are quieted are inhibitory neurons, so the net effect is to make other neurons more activated.

neurosphere 11y ago
The notion that some of the neurons silenced by alcohol are inhibitory neurons is actually the explanation that researchers have proposed for why stimulating glycine receptors produces an increase in dopamine release. The idea which is shown in a diagram in the article is that silencing GABA-releasing interneurons (which are inhibitory) with glycine consequently disinhibits dopaminergic neurons.

fallingfrog 11y ago

If you start looking at their references the arguments start to fall apart- for example, that photo of reduced glucose uptake was not associated with reduced cognitive performance and the authors of the paper suggested that perhaps an alternative energy source to glucose was being utilized.

tcj_phx 11y ago
Alcohol is an energy-rich molecule... I think one of its metabolites is preferentially burned by the body. There was a study published about 2 years ago that found heavy drinkers' brains burn lots of acetate.

fallingfrog 11y ago

And the part about the rats hitting the dopamine lever is wrong too. If the rats were in a rich environment with other rats to interact with they would overwhelmingly prefer straight water to water with cocaine. It was only rats in an empty box with literally nothing else to do that would get addicted- in other words rats which were already in significant psychological pain. I need to find the reference for that..

pstuart 11y ago
This one? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rat_Park
neurosphere 11y ago
The idea of whether rats with exciting lives would indeed be less likely to become addicted to cocaine / morphine is quite controversial, and there have been some failures to replicate that original study (references here: 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9148292?dopt=Abstract https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9148292?dopt=Abstract and 2. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2616610?dopt=Abstract https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2616610?dopt=Abstract). I think the argument is that social isolation can and probably does make animals and humans more prone to drug addiction, but it's definitely not the only factor, and both animals and humans with good lives can still become hooked.