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
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.
Everyone is calibrated differently, which makes drugs have pretty different effects on people.
I, for instance, feel in every respect worse after two drinks than 100% sober. Every effect is negative: All the things people like you talk about when they consider it a social lubricant feel completely alien to me. Now, for me, alcohol is pleasant starting at the equivalent of 6 shots of hard liquor in the first half an hour. However, drinking a lot doesn't really produce bad effects the day after: When most people feel terrible, I feel great. At the same time, I've never felt like having a drink: Not even a mild compulsion when in a bad mood, or wanting to celebrate. Given that, social drinking is right out, and I end up drinking very little.
A friend of mine enjoys drink one, and falls asleep after two drinks: A night out drinking is right out. So mild social drinking is the way to go there.
Another feels energized by drinking, and can spend an entire night awake by just continuous application of wine. She drinks about a bottle of wine a day, and then binge sometimes. But, against all odds, when pregnant, was able to just not drink at all with no apparent signs of dependence: If anything, she was happy after, since all those months of not drinking made her tolerance lower, so she could get drunk faster. Alcohol just agrees with her.
All of this comes not from the basic chemical interactions of alcohol with the brain and the liver, but due to higher level interactions, like brain structure. Similar things happen with other drugs: A substance that might feel wonderful for someone might be horrible for someone else, even when the basic chemical interactions are exactly the same for everyone. If we understood those high level interactions better, imagine how much people could be helped, compared to the things we do with antidepressants.
Sure, if I felt no benefits I wouldn't even talk about it. I'm the opposite, without these drinks, mundane discussions, which means relating to the people talking, not having an intellectual challenge, is borderline impossible.
I too feel no negative effects the morning after. I wake up earlier and eager for the day. Still surprises me ..
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.
I do it at parties, especially when I don't know lots of people.
On the other hand, if you feel like you're dysfunctional most of the time, and you're regularly keeping yourself slightly buzzed to mitigate that, you might have a problem.
I've been thinking about this topic a lot recently, as I've been self-medicating depression and anxiety with Kratom leaf powder.
In my opinion, the line between self-medication and proper medication is ethically blurry. Yes, clearly it's better to have a doctor supervising your treatment, but it's also important to find relief from debilitating psychic pain. It can be incredibly frustrating when the best psychiatry has to offer simply isn't good enough.
If someone is dependent on "recreational" drugs to soothe their pain, it's labelled a "crutch" and seen as a weakness. If someone is dependent on prescribed drugs (SSRIs, etc.) then it's just considered proper psychiatric treatment.
I agree that if someone is keeping themselves "buzzed" to mitigate dysfunction, there is definitely a problem. The solution, however, is often unclear. Could this person find relief "naturally" (exercise, diet, therapy, etc.)? Could a regular regimen of a different drug help, and if so, which one would be best? Would a drug that's currently illegal help more than drugs which are currently legal?
The state of medicine in 2016 is clearly strong, but psychiatry has a long way to go. I applaud the work MAPS is doing to promote the medicinal application of psychedelics, I'm encouraged by the research being done with Ketamine, and I'm eagerly watching the development of ALKS-5461, an antidepressant that incorporates Buprenorphine (an opioid).
We should take no risks with the healthy and take many more with the seriously unhealthy. Of course, laity are subject to the Dunning-Kruger effect far more than medical authorities when it comes to estimating potential self-risk. Specifically, an expert will typically arrive at the conclusion of sigmoidal benefit w.r.t. some treatment, whereas a newbie just sees convex potential at first, -> bandwagoning.
I don't mean to imply anything about you in particular, but I think encouraging self medication through recreational drugs may form harmful opinions towards drugs as far as struggles with addiction goes.
