Alcohol may permanently damage DNA, causing cancer

Aug 23, 2012

#Alcohol #Cancer #didyouknowPrint

EmailShare

inShare10 Comments

EKU | Fire Safety Degree  2 Programs Available. Classes open!   100% Online. Free Brochure here.FireScience.EKU.edu/Online

Stop Drinking Now  New Way To Help Drinking Problems.   Reduce Drinking In Just 8 Weeks! DrinkLessNow.com Ads by Google

ALSO SEE

• Is physical abuse the secret to China's Olympic success?

• Length of ring finger can tell you if you will survive cancer

Washington: Scientists have discovered that breakdown of alcohol by the body forms a substance that can damage DNA dramatically and increase chances of cancer, with people of Asian descent at a greater risk.

Researchers from the University of Minnesota found that when human body breaks down, or metabolises, the alcohol in beer, wine and hard liquor, one of the substances formed is acetaldehyde, a substance with a chemical backbone that resembles formaldehyde, a known human carcinogen.

Scientists also have known from laboratory experiments that acetaldehyde can cause DNA damage, trigger chromosomal abnormalities in cell cultures and act as an animal carcinogen.

“We now have the first evidence from living human volunteers that acetaldehyde formed after alcohol consumption damages DNA dramatically,” Silvia Balbo, who led the study, said.

“Acetaldehyde attaches to DNA in humans – to the genetic material that makes up genes – in a way that results in the formation of a ‘DNA adduct.’ It’s acetaldehyde that latches onto DNA and interferes with DNA activity in a way linked to an increased risk of cancer,” Balbo added.

“Alcohol, a lifestyle carcinogen, is metabolised into acetaldehyde in the mouth, and acetaldehyde is forming DNA adducts, which are known major players in carcinogenesis,” Balbo said in a statement.

Balbo pointed out that people have a highly effective natural repair mechanism for correcting the damage from DNA adducts. Most people thus are unlikely to develop cancer from social drinking, although alcohol is associated with a risk of other health problems and accidents.

In addition, most people have an enzyme called alcohol dehydrogenase, which quickly converts acetaldehyde to acetate, a relatively harmless substance.

However, about 30 per cent of people of Asian descent- almost 1.6 billion people- have a variant of the alcohol dehydrogenase gene and are unable to metabolise alcohol to acetate.

Reuters

That genetic variant results in an elevated risk of esophageal cancer from alcohol drinking. Native Americans and native Alaskans have a deficiency in the production of that same enzyme.

To test the hypothesis that acetaldehyde causes DNA adducts to form in humans, Balbo and colleagues gave 10 volunteers increasing doses of vodka (comparable to one, two and three drinks) once a week for three weeks.

They found that levels of a key DNA adduct increased up to 100-fold in the subjects’ oral cells within hours after each dose, then declined about 24 hours later. Adduct levels in blood cells also rose.

The study was presented at the 244th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society.

PTI

Intensify The War On Drugs -- In A Radically New Form

+ Comment now

56

 

16

 

 

1

 

1

 

0

 

By Andrew Bernstein

Drug Enforcement Administration special agents (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The War on Drugs must forcefully continue.

Whatever the Supreme Court's Obamacare Ruling, Here's a Free Market Healthcare SolutionCapital FlowsContributor

Open Immigration Will Greatly Slow America's Rush Toward An Entitlement StateCapital FlowsContributor

Toxic drugs destroy lives. No rational person wants to kill himself on drugs—or witness innocent others kill themselves in similar manner.

The first step of a rational, morally proper, and effective war on drugs is to fully legalize all drugs for consenting adults.

The government’s attempt to prevent drug use by legal prohibition is, morally and practically, a disaster. Full legalization will end this disaster and make possible a war on drugs both morally upright and practically effective.

Coercively preventing a consenting adult from ingesting his drug(s) of choice is a manifest violation of an individual’s right to his own life and body. The personal use—or sale—of drugs by or between consenting adults involves no initiation of force or fraud against innocent others; consequently, is not a crime. Currently, thousands of U.S. citizens are in prison for mere possession, use, or sale of banned drugs—and the sole crime is the government’s initiation of force against innocent individuals.

Such flagrantly immoral governmental policy leads to flagrantly impractical results.

For example, in 2010 the government spent $48 billion on its anti-drug crusade; between 1993 and 2003, roughly $180 billion. The result? According to the government’s 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, more than 22 million Americans, aged 12 or older, use illegal drugs. Overall rate of drug use was up almost a full percentage point over the 2008 survey. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget said in understatement: “DEA [Drug Enforcement Administration] is unable to demonstrate its progress in reducing the availability of illegal drugs in the U.S.”

Over decades, the government’s war on drugs has incarcerated thousands of U.S. individuals innocent of initiating force or fraud—and robbed hundreds of billions of dollars from productive taxpayers; it has perpetrated all these crimes—and accomplished nothing.

There are reasons necessitating such failure. If substance X is in demand, i.e., desired by many who can afford it, then money can be made supplying it. If X is legal, it is supplied by honest businessmen; if illegal, by criminals. Either way, X is supplied. No government can repeal the laws of economics.

But the full truth is vastly worse—for the state’s war on drugs is responsible for an enormous increase in violent crime. For one thing, it makes criminal drug cartels immensely wealthy. Bloody gang warfare inevitably erupts as rival thugs vie for control of locales assuring profitable sales. The result is an endless string of murders, including of innocent victims caught in the crossfire.

Page 1 2 Next Page »

Jass Stewart defends ‘legalize all drugs’ remark during state rep debate

State representative candidate in favor of legalizing some drugs

Zoom

Photos

Purchase this photo

Emily J. Reynolds/The Enterprise

Councilor-at-large Jass Stewart is sworn in during the inauguration ceremony at Brockton City Hall on Monday, Jan. 2, 2012.

  

ads not by this site

By Alex Bloom

Enterprise Staff Writer

Posted Aug 12, 2012 @ 06:00 AM

Related Stories

Democrat state rep. hopefuls debate

Business News

• Don't Let Frugality Define Retirement Quality of Life
• 10 Best Back-to-School Apps
• 168 Hours a Week of Retirement? Better Get a Job

Suggested Stories

• Body found behind Kohl's in Pembroke - Brockton, MA - The Enterprise
• Democrat state rep. hopefuls debate - Brockton, MA - The Enterprise
• Norton soldier dies of wounds from Afghanistan battle - Brockton, MA - The Enterprise

From the Web

• Can Obama Be Defeated by Romney? Surprising Poll Data RevealedNewsmax.com
• Paul Ryan Wife: Janna Ryan Pictures Zimbio
• Fourth California Bankruptcy Comes Knocking ProfitConfidential

Sponsored contentWhat's this?

BROCKTON —

State representative candidate and city councilor Jass Stewart has caused a stir with his comments on legalizing drugs.

“It gives the government an opportunity to regulate something that’s very difficult to defeat,” Stewart said in a Democratic candidates debate on Thursday which was taped at Brockton Community Access.

The debate was among the four Democratic candidates for the seat now held by Rep. Geraldine Creedon, D-Brockton, who is retiring at the end of this year. The primary election is on Sept. 6 and the winner will square off against Easton Republican Daniel Murphy. The district includes west Brockton and most of Easton.

The debate moderator, Steve Foote, chairman of the Brockton Democratic City Committee, and the three other candidates peppered Stewart with questions about his stand on drugs.

Stewart said the federal government should legalize some drugs – including cocaine and heroin – to remove the “black market” and so drugs can be controlled and taxed and the tax revenue used for education, rehabilitation and enforcement programs.

But he opposes the legalization of medicinal marijuana – an issue on the state ballot this November – saying marijuana is considered a gateway drug that can lead to users trying more drugs.

Legalizing some drugs, Stewart said, is a better alternative to continuing a costly and ineffective war on drugs while putting drug users away in crowded prisons.

“I’m not certain that anyone thinks that our drug policy is successful,” said Stewart, who first made the legalization remark during the July 19 taping of Foote’s “Democratically Speaking” local access TV program.

Stewart’s opponents were blunt in their reaction to the idea.

“When I first heard about it and watched the comments, my question was, ‘Are you kidding me?’” said Mark Linde of Brockton, chairman of the Southeastern Regional Vocational Technical School Committee.

“You will never hear that from me,” added Robert Sullivan, an at-large Brockton city councilor. He called the idea “insane” and “crazy.”

“Absolutely never,” he said.

Claire Cronin, an attorney who lives in Easton, said: “No way, no how.”

“The idea of legalizing all drugs is abhorrent to me,” she added.

Sullivan asked Stewart to further explain his stance.

Stewart said the U.S. has been fighting a drug war for generations.

“It’s a war that we’re not winning,” Stewart said. “We’re spending millions of dollars and losing many lives.”

On the state’s ballot question to legalize medicinal marijuana, Stewart said studies show it could lead users to further experiment with other drugs.

Next  »

Read more: http://www.enterprisenews.com/topstories/x181548456/Jass-Stewart-defends-legalize-all-drugs-remark-during-state-rep-debate#ixzz23Sa3ICqy

Uruguayan government proposes marijuana legalization bill

By Mariano Castillo, CNN

updated 3:08 PM EDT, Thu August 9, 2012

The government in Uruguay say the war on drugs has failed and have presented a bill legalizing the drug in the hope of controling its use.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• The Uruguayan government presented lawmakers with a bill this week
• It would allow the government to control and sell marijuana
• The bill did not specify how such a system would work

(CNN) -- With the intent of undermining the market for illegal drugs, Uruguay's government presented a bill to lawmakers that would legalize marijuana under a government monopoly.

The government of President Jose Mujica has argued that the war on drugs has failed, and that separating the market for marijuana from the market for harder drugs will have social and health benefits.

The bill was presented to congress on Wednesday, and includes no details of how legalization would be cultivated, regulated or sold. But it makes it clear that the government would be the sole manager of the "importation, production, acquisition ... commercialization and distribution of marijuana or its derivatives."

The idea was first announced in June, and at the time there were reports that such a law would require onerous identification and tracking requirements that consumers would object to.

Read more about how Brazil is fighting the war on drugs

The bill does not mention any requirements, presumably leaving it up to the congress to fill in the details.

Diego Canepa, pro-secretary of the presidency, said that current laws criminalizing the private sale of marijuana would remain in place, and campaigns warning of dangers of drug use would continue.

"No one is saying that marijuana is good. What is happening is that the foundation of the type of policy that we have followed for more than 50 years in this country have not had the expected results, and the worst thing that can happen to public policy is to not act when the evidence shows that persisting on the same path will not obtain different results," he said.

Consumption of marijuana is already legal in Uruguay, Canepa said. If passed, the law would make Uruguay the first country to produce and sell marijuana to its citizens.

While the bill itself was short on details of how such a system would actually work, it was accompanied by a 12-page letter that carefully laid out the argument for passage of the bill.

The goal is to create a government-run market that would "contribute to the reduction of risks and potential dangers that people who use marijuana for recreation or medical reasons face."

Read: Is Puerto rico the forgotten front in America's drug war?

Marijuana users put themselves in dangerous situations in the course of acquiring the substance, and expose themselves to other drugs that are more addictive and dangerous, the letter states.

The letter traces the history of drug use to pre-Columbian times, but focuses on the drug war of the last 50 years. The war on drugs has failed and had consequences that are worse than the drugs themselves, the letter states.

As evidence, the Uruguayan government points to a report last year by the Global Commission on Drugs, a body made up of several former presidents and other luminaries, who concluded that the war on drugs has failed to accomplish the goals it set.

Uruguay will not abandon its policy of combating drugs, but will do so through education of the harmful effects, rather than criminalization for marijuana, the letter states.

Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal substance in Uruguay, and drug traffickers net $30-40 million annual from the black market, the government said.