Coming from an all-Asian background, I just wanted to say that it also depends on the individual. Nobody in my family drinks except me (they’re done after 2 drinks MAX), but I can hold quite a few. My face does get flushed though, especially if it’s the first drink after a break.
I knew a few people working in Asian countries who’d hit the bars/pubs after work to drink with their colleagues and/or bosses and/or customers – it seems to be a business custom there, and believe me, they get pretty effin’ pissed. Maybe it’s something that can be at least partially overcome?
Come again ? Asian cultures certainly *did *brew alcohol, and drink it. The rowdy drunk samurai cliché far predates Perry’s ships, for example ;). And according to the ever usefull Wikipedia : “The earliest evidence of alcohol in China are wine jars from Jiahu which date to about 7000 BC” (cite). So there’s that.
If you ask me, there’s likely no “because” in this matter - they lack it because they’re descendants of people who lacked it, and it passed down genetically. You might as well ask why Asians don’t have blue eyes. You could also just as well ask the question “how come we have that enzyme in the first place ? Do we have any biological need to process large quantities of what is, in essence, a dangerous poison ?”.
That’s what a friend who’s been to Japan told me as well - by 6 or 7 PM it wasn’t uncommon to see very sharply dressed businessmen pished right out of their skulls all across town.
If I’m reading this right, ADH activity/ability to metabolize alcohol are not different among Indians and whites as they are between whites and East Asians.
I lived in China for two years and was surprised to see how true this is.
Most of the Chinese guys I worked with had the “alcohol allergy”, though they drank anyway. They did, indeed, overcome it more or less, though their faces turned quite red.
Perhaps you missed my previous mentions of the fact that Asians did in fact make their own alcohol, which is the reason I’m so confused about this. I don’t understand why these drinks would be made for thousands of years in a certain region, yet a significant (correct me if I’m wrong) percent of the population doesn’t even have the proper enzymes to digest it.
I’m asking why that is. I certainly know that there are a number of different alcoholic drinks across Asia.
I think the answers might lie in my first post. Alcoholic drinks have been brewed pretty much everywhere for a very long time. It was only in Europe, though, that its consumption was so widespread. Everyone drank. All the time. For kids, there was a direct transition from boob to booze. The everyday drink would have been something like modern day Kvass with a very slight alcohol content, but that’s a lot different to drinking tea all day long.
Having spent the last twenty years (very nearly) immersed in the Vietnamese-Australian scene, I can say that the rough figure of “50% of Asians can handle booze like Westerners, and 50% can’t” given to me by these guys seems to be pretty accurate.
Of course, allowances have to be made for the social settings: White Australians are more likely to drink one or three drinks daily, but Vietnamese folk will be teetotal for months at a time, then quickly demolish a bottle of Cognac at a wedding. So a drunk Asian might still have a Westerner’s physical response to alcohol - it’s just that he’s straight out sloshed.
Alcohol tolerance is probably a byproduct of other genetic traits, likely at least a few that work in a complex manner, as it can not in itself prove sufficient to explain the differences both within and between racial/ethnic groups.
But as a rule (from my years of bartending experience,) yes it is true that Asians (mostly East Asians, but nearly as true with South Asians) on average have a lower alcohol tolerance than Europeans, with Africans being in the middle, though much closer to Europeans.
Again, you can’t predict this on an individual basis, but for a large enough group the pattern emerges.
Correction : they do have the proper enzyme to digest it. What many lack is the particular version of the enzyme that digests it really fast.
Now, your question is “if they’ve used the stuff for so long, how come they didn’t evolve to handle it faster”. But evolution doesn’t work that way - random traits get passed on when they cause a significant increase in the survival rate of those who have them, or because they’re considered more attractive in general. Maybe in the East, not being able to hold one’s liquor wasn’t such a big deal that it precluded one from getting it on. On the contrary, perhaps ;).
Besides, getting as drunk on less substance could be considered a positive characteristic, neh ?
Lack of agriculture. If you’ve ever tried making a fermented beverage then you know it takes a bit of practice and experimentation to get this right. An agricultural society will often possess a year-round gross excess of food which can be wasted on experimentation; a hunter-gatherer society does not. Small emergency caches of food are not the same thing.
Maybe it’s the biology, too. On top of the fact that they don’t possess an excess of fermentables, they surely would be dissuaded by the fact that the product appears to be poison to half the population.
You made the statement that “Asia was so much more advanced so much earlier than Europe”. Except, wine drinking got started where civilization got started - the MidEast. The Mesopotamia valley was civilized 1000 years before China, ;;and the original Indus valley civilization was also much later. (Even Egypt was around 500 years later.) So, the basis for your supposition is incorrect, assuming you by “Asia” you meant the part far from Europe.
Greater advancement is irrelevant, at any rate. As someone else posted, western societies tended to use alcohol, and eastern societies were more prone to boiling, but I don’t believe many had access to truly clean water. Advancement in water treatment occurred in modern times. (The Romans and the Cretans had the most sophisticated water systems of ancient civilizations, at least as far as baths and waste elimination go.)
Northeast Indians (where the grapes grow) by and large weren’t hunter-gatherers – they were farmers of long standing and considerable skill. Their caches that I referred to earlier weren’t small caches of emergency food – they were large enough to keep the Pilgrims going.
I haven’t seen it. Back in the European Late Neolithic the ritualistic consumption of alcohol and the fine-ceramic drinking beakers associated with it spread rapidly over vast areas, indicating a great social importance of intoxication. Later on, we do know that wine-drinking was among the most prestigious activities among Germanic tribes. So, the warrior elite of Europe did drink alcohol, more or less often. Did the peasants, slaves, women or children drink any type of alcohol? Don’t think so.
Since we’re talking about enzymes that are coded by several different genes, there will be a range of expression. Some people will be very sensitive, others will show some signs of sensitivity due to either lower production or production of less effective forms of the enzymes. The 50% estimate is, I think, an overestimate created by lumping anyone who has a reaction to alcohol that is more sensitive than the European population norm.
From my social circle, including 60–100 people from work who I’m more or less obliged to drink with, I’d say that abnormal sensitivity to the point where the person either doesn’t drink at all or limits intake to 1 or 2 drinks to avoid symptoms is around 1 in 4. People who flush but can still drink more than a couple of servings might bring the high sensitivity figure to about 1 in 3. In Japan there’s a social obligation to drink, so the people who can’t drink at all stand out, and the flushing usually makes it very obvious who the sensitives are in a crowd.
There are still plenty of Japanese guys I’ve met who can match me drink for drink, and I’ve got more favorable genetics and a good 10–15 kg of body weight to boost tolerance on my side.