Years ago, a friend told me that when a person gets drunk, they kill X-thousand brain cells, and the more times they get drunk, the more damage they do.
Is this true or false? In fact, what is drunkeness? What does alcohol do that causes slurred speech or staggering or obnoxious behavior or blacking out?
Drugs which kill brain cells are called neurotoxic; alcohol does not seem to be neurotoxic with short-term exposure (such as with occasional drinking and even short-term alcoholism). Chronic alcoholism may result in brain damage; a psychosis called Wernicke-Korsakoff syndrome is sometimes seen in people who have been drinking for decades. It involves severe memory loss, difficulty in learning, and other serious problems. But most people – even if they sometimes drink heavily – probably do not suffer brain damage from alcohol.
Humans have been getting drunk probably almost as long as they’ve been starting fires, but it was only recently that we gained any kind of understanding in what drunkenness is. Drunkenness affects the brain in several ways:
It increases the effectiveness of a natural neurotransmitter (a chemical in the brain which sends signals between nerve cells) called GABA. GABA is an inhibitory neurotransmitter, which means it suppresses the function of other neurons. The increased effectiveness of GABA probably explains the relaxation and reduced social inhibitions.
It reduces the effectiveness of another neurotransmitter called glutamate, which is an excitatory neurotransmitter – it intensifies the activity of other neurons. Glutamate is very important in memory and brain function, so the decreased glutamate activity associated with extreme drunkenness probably explains the ‘black-outs’ and memory lapses.
It impedes the function of some of the basic machinery of the brain – the “ion exchange pumps” that create the electric current used to send signals in the brain. This might explain a general decrease in brain activity. Aspects of drunkenness like slurred speech may simply be caused by reduced activity in the parts of the brain used for speech.
At high doses, it hinders the transport of calcium into neurons. Calcium is used in the brain to ‘encourage’ the release of neurotransmitters. It’s thought that this, along with a few other things, might explain why alcoholics experience withdrawal – they ‘get used’ to lower levels of neurotransmitters associated with chronic intoxication, and get sick when they stop drinking and the levels go up.
Roches - thank you very much - the information you provided is really interested, and it has served to relieve me of an old myth. I appreciate it. My attempts at googling yeilded lots of preaching and “don’t-drink-and-drive” sites and I gave up in frustration before finding the information I wanted.
Alcohol in high doses is neurotoxic both in short-term and long-term exposure. Some extracts from the Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy chapter on alcoholism:
So, what your friend told you those years ago is not strictly speaking true. Neurotoxicity only occurs at or above certain concentrations of alcohol. If you drink in moderation, each drink does not cause damage. For example, it takes a blood concentration of 300-400 mg/Dl to cause unconciousness, and >400 may be fatal. That is a serious amount of drinking for anyone (even U of M tailgaters:)).
For more information, you may want to try googling “acute alcohol poisoning” instead.
Related hijack I hope: So, a weekly beer or (not “and”) liquor binge just up to the extreme edge of staggering will not cause any long term effects?
Specifically, is this a cumulative thing, or does a week’s worth of healthy lifestyle “heal” the body for the next binge?
That’s the phrase I was missing - alcohol poisoning.
I did discover that if you google on drunkenness, you got a buttload of Bible sites. None of them were much help with my question. Anyway, thanks, paperbackwriter!
I’ll drink to that!
Oops! Just spilled my whisky. What was the question again?
V
Semi-anecdotal evidence ahead–
10 years ago I knew a psychiatrist who treated a person who drank a moderate to heavy amount of booze and also smoked a pretty good amount of pot. The patient was concerned that he/she might be losing a lot of brain cells/memory function because of the marijuana use. He/she wondered if he/she should cut out the pot smoking and stick with the boozing. My psychiatrist friend told the patient that in her opinion, the alcohol consumption was a far greater risk to brain cells than the pot consumption. YMMV.
I read somewhere that binge drinking is actually worse for you than daily moderate drinking. Alcohol does not accumulate in the body; after time, the body metabolizes it. However, the damage it does before that may be extensive. And extensive + extensive = bad news. No cites.
Intermittent binging is very rough on a body. The system has no time to adapt to the levels of ethanol, no chance to induce the microsomal enzyme oxidizing system to detoxify faster, and loses all of the positive effects of moderate alcohol use. Just as the body has recovered from the toxicity, the next binge repeats the cycle. Hard on the liver, hard on the GI tract.
The only healthy drinking is moderate drinking, people! This means a maximum of 24 oz. of beer a day, or 10 oz. of wine a day, or 3 oz. of 80 proof alcohol a day. And that’s for men. For women, reduce the amount by about 40%, as the average woman absorbs alcohol more quickly.
Drink more than that, regularly or episodically, and the odds of a bad outcome from drinking will greatly exceed the odds of a positive health benefit from said drinking.
And frankly, the health benefits of moderate drinking, while present, are barely a tenth as great as the benefits of eating right, or exercising regularly.
QtM, MD
Qadgop - A couple of guys I work with are convinced that their nightly indulgence in red wine is a real health benefit - from what you said, maybe it’s not the big deal that they make it out to be? I was thinking about adding wine to my diet (I’ve been following the South Beach plan for almost 3 months) but I’m not a big fan of red wine, so I haven’t yet. From what you said, I get the impression that I’d be better off taking my dog for a long walk every day rather than having a glass of wine with my dinner. Is that correct?
I believe that is correct, FCM. The available data does indicate that an individual would get a far greater benefit from a 30 minute brisk walk a day than from an alcoholic drink a day. But that datum is not sexy, so doesn’t get reported so widely.
However, there wouldn’t be anything wrong with taking said drink along with you while walking (check local laws first!).
I know its only one study, but check thisout.
:::looks in the mirror:::
Yes. I would say so.
[sub]Disclaimer: Strictly my opinion, based on past non performance of brain cells, some of which never recovered, caused by excessive extended alcohol use.[/sub]
But, I’m much better, now.
In one episode of “Cheers”, Cliff is seated at the bar describing the Buffalo Theory to his buddy, Norm.
“Well you see, Norm, it’s like this… A herd of buffalo can only move as fast as the slowest buffalo. And when the herd is hunted, it is the slowest and weakest ones at the back that are killed first. This natural selection is good for the herd as a whole, because the general speed and health of the whole group keeps improving by the regular killing of the weakest members.”
“In much the same way, the human brain can only operate as fast as the slowest brain cells. Now as we know, excessive intake of alcohol kills brain cells. But naturally, it attacks the slowest and weakest brain cells first. In this way, regular consumption of beer eliminates the weaker brain cells, making the brain a faster and more efficient machine. And that, Norm, is why you always feel smarter after a few beers.”
Hope this helps.