Playing with oxytocin receptors?
Why I am having the feeling that this will end up like Heroin which was originally invented as a "cure" for morphine addiction...
Sydney University boffins reckon there just might be such a thing as a sobering drug – and that it's something the body makes naturally. In joint research with the University of Regensburg in Germany, the researchers found that in drunk rats, the so-called “cuddle hormone” oxytocin ameliorated alcohol's effect on the drunken …
So potentially that's a drug that will produce general happy feelings, increase physical desire AND allow lots of alcohol to be consumed without feeling drunk? The perfect party drug, which therefore will be immediately banned by some puritanical know-nothing know-it-all in government.
Presumably since either Oxytocin OR alcohol are binding to the receptors in question, having Oxytocin AFTER you're already drunk won't sober you up as the title suggests. More like if you take it before, it will prevent you from getting drunk (I wonder what effets that could have on drunk-driving legislation!). Also, even though the alcohol can't bind to the receptors and make you feel drunk, it is still having it's usual other effects on the body (eg dehydration), the liver still needs to process it (so excessive quantities will still damage the liver) etc.
re: "they found that the [oxytocin "cuddle chemical"] reduces both consumption and cravings -- not only in rats, but also in humans"
So, if one is getting enough boudoir action to have elevated oxytocin levels, the need to escape into a bottle is reduced. Who'd 'a thought?
Actual medical treatments for alcoholism? Research? Drugs? No, no, no, the US court system has taught us that all you need is Jebus! That's why they order folks to take 12-step programmes, which might only have the same success rate as non-attendance, but at least they don't use any pesky scientific facts or suffer from earthly corruption.
rely on Jesus. However, the participants in the program have a limited pool of sober examples to choose from. Getting off drugs and alcohol is easy to do by yourself. Go to jail and dry out.
Staying off them is another matter that usually requires peoples help and understanding. That's where faith has a place. If you don't have a belief structure then you really have no right to criticize those who do. Your criticism is nothing less than hate speech.
Not that I've tried it but there are drugs like Ayahuasca that do something simliar to Oxytocin (Block bonding sites) but using or studying them in the USA is foolishly illegal.
@ Anonymous Coward your post contains so much fail it is hard to know where to start... at the beginning I suppose.
Getting off drugs and alcohol is easy to do by yourself. Go to jail and dry out.
Your suggestion that people should intentionally acquire a criminal record in order to go cold turkey on drugs or alcohol is highly irresponsible: a criminal record is in itself going to cause further problems which will only make life harder, thereby increasing the chances of falling off the wagon. Then of course there is the added problem that drugs and alcohol are available in many jails, which means being in jail does not force a person to dry out.
If you don't have a belief structure then you really have no right to criticize those who do. Your criticism is nothing less than hate speech.
skeptical i did not criticise having a belief structure: the criticism was that science and fact should not be overruled by a belief structure. That is not an unreasonable opinion to hold and it is certainly not hate speech.
Not that I've tried it but there are drugs like Ayahuasca that do something simliar to Oxytocin (Block bonding sites)
Does Ayahuasca block bonding sites? Yes. Are those bonding sites similar to the GABA receptors blocked by oxytocin? No, Ayahuasca does completely different things so your mention of it is irrelevant.
"If you don't have a belief structure then you really have no right to criticize those who do. Your criticism is nothing less than hate speech."
Criticism in of itself is not hate speech whether I am religious or not. Just as criticism of your government or the ruling political party does not make you a traitor. Open expression/criticism is necessary as a balance against the corruption that inevitably creeps into any established power structure, religious, political or corporate.
Not ALL 12 step programs rely on Jesus. However, the participants in the program have a limited pool of sober examples to choose from.
My apologies, step two refers to a "higher power" that definitely won't be inferred to be Jesus in a US-based structure, and I'm certain that the Twelve Traditions definitely have nothing to do with Christianity either. It's not like the 12-step programmes were created by a Christian institution or anything.
If you don't have a belief structure then you really have no right to criticize those who do.
Well that's a disgusting notion. All ideas are open to criticism except faith? That smacks of intellectual honesty, alright.
What you're basically saying there is "you're not allowed to disagree with us unless you agree with us, in which case you won't, and we don't have to hear any challenge to our ideas." Yeah, fuck that.
Your criticism is nothing less than hate speech.
Criticising an idea is the same as hating the people that hold it? You've got some really funny (twisted) notions of how the world operates, though this "hate speech" attitude reeks of the notion of the poor, oppressed, put-upon minority (75%) of the population that's religious.
I'll continue to criticise the institutionalised pushing of religion on the non-religious, thanks. If it was reversed I'm sure you'd be throwing a shit-fit about it.
In my view, this is oxytocin acting in its original functionalities such as water regulation rather than with its evolved social functions like social prominence, generosity, and trust.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019