×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Scientist Seeks Investment For "Alcohol Substitute"

samzenpus posted about 5 months ago | from the bottoms-up dept.

Beer 328

First time accepted submitter MalachiK writes "A senior academic and former UK government drugs adviser reckons that pretty soon it'll be possible to enjoy the fun of being drunk without having to suffer the negative effects of alcohol. In a proposal reminiscent of Star Trek's synthehol, Professor David Nut has identified a number of molecules that he claims offer experiences that are subjectively indistinguishable from alcohol intoxication. Apparently a major advantage of using these more selectively psychoactive drugs is that the effects can be quickly reversed. It's not all good news though as Professor Nut seems to think that the drinks industry is using its financial and political clout to stop this sort of research being undertaken."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

328 comments

I believe this will be called... (0)

kachakaach (1336273) | about 5 months ago | (#45395739)

Synthahol.

Already Exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395799)

The drug "GHB" does exactly this.

Unfortunately, high doses can cause coma. And, it is illegal.

Re:Already Exists (5, Insightful)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 5 months ago | (#45396083)

The thing is that most of the "bad effects" of alcohol, e.g. lapsing judgment, are also the "good effects". It's all about context.

Re:Already Exists (2)

alvinrod (889928) | about 5 months ago | (#45396525)

A high dose of anything will cause negative effects, if not death. You can even kill yourself from drinking too much water [wikipedia.org] . The problem with some drugs is that the lethal dose isn't too far off from the common dose to experience the effect. Things like alcohol and GHB fall into that category, where the lethal dose is less than an order of magnitude than the effective dose, which make them somewhat dangerous.

Re:Already Exists (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396695)

That also depends on tolerance, though. As I type this I've consumed 12 drinks tonight, and will consume more. That could kill an inexperienced drinker, but as I'm of Irish ethnicity and have been drinking for years this sort of thing isn't unusual. I've met guys that can drink me under the table; easily 20+ drinks isn't beyond their reach, and without any falling down or embarrassing themselves.

Re:I believe this will be called... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396287)

yes, as stated in the summary

Re:I believe this will be called... (1)

xevioso (598654) | about 5 months ago | (#45396341)

Alcohol: The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems.

The same could not be said for something like "Synthahol."

You had me at ... (4, Funny)

bigjocker (113512) | about 5 months ago | (#45395747)

Professor Nut

Re:You had me at ... (5, Informative)

NettiWelho (1147351) | about 5 months ago | (#45396035)

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/oct/30/drugs-adviser-david-nutt-sacked [theguardian.com]

Professor David Nutt, the government's chief drug adviser, has been sacked a day after claiming that ecstasy and LSD were less dangerous than alcohol.

His claims are factual but go against official-opinion-on-the-matter(tm)

Re:You had me at ... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396175)

Nutt? Sacked!

Re:You had me at ... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396193)

When a government scientist gets sacked for stating an obvious fact you know things are fucked.

Re:You had me at ... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396505)

Separation of Science and State appears to be necessary

Re:You had me at ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396039)

And by "drinks industry is using its ... clout to stop this sort of research being undertaken", he means that he gets so drunk off their drinks that he can't continue his work.

Not all good (4, Insightful)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 5 months ago | (#45395755)

One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover. With no pain for indulgence, this could be much more addictive than alcohol, which is already very addictive.

Re:Not all good (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395795)

Then again, there will be no need to 'curb your drinking' when you can control the effects instead of the effects controlling you.

Re:Not all good (3, Insightful)

fey000 (1374173) | about 5 months ago | (#45395859)

Then again, there will be no need to 'curb your drinking' when you can control the effects instead of the effects controlling you.

The problem depicted is not that of hangovers, but rather that of excessive drinking leading to a severe lapse of judgment and restraint. This seems like a smart consideration to make.

I have seen drunks with little regard for their own or other's safety, and I would prefer if such behaviour stayed rare and infrequent. We already have problems with drug addicts behaving in undesireable ways, so let's take a moment to ponder if we want more alcoholics that behave in a similar manner.

Also, it should come with a redshirt.

Re:Not all good (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396441)

but rather that of excessive drinking leading to a severe lapse of liver function

FTFY. Nobody gives a damn about your headache, and honestly, nobody gives a damn if you've stopped beating your wife yet, but if he's figured out how to make people feel good without killing themselves, the entire Religious Reicht will be up in arms crying about how their god can't send you to Hell fast enough for having fun, so they have to do his job for him.

Re:Not all good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396269)

There are some efficient ways to avoid a hangover.
Make sure that you eat something and drink a lot of water after you have been drinking.
Stay up until you start to sober up and you won't feel the hangover at all.

Re:Not all good (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395845)

One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover

No.
If you're an alcoholic, the hangover is just a reason to start drinking early, not a deterrent. No hangover? I'll drink to that!

If you're not, then you don't really need to "curb" it, and the memories of the dipshit things you did will be just as much of a deterrent. In fact, since you'll have a clear head and fully remember all your antics from the night before, the lack of hangover would actually increase the chances you'd think twice before having that last six shots of Tequila.

As for the article, we already have alternates to booze and it's called Marijuana. But because it's not physically addictive and doesn't cause horrible health effects, that means it has an even higher potential for abuse and is thus even more "addictive". Legally speaking, that is. I have a feeling that anything this guy comes up with is going to end up in the same boat. Either it'll have some nasty side effects (like so-called 'bath salts') or it'll be "too good" to allow people to use.

Re:Not all good (2, Interesting)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#45396541)

No, there are certain people (mostly Asian) that have a genetic mutation involving how Ethanol Metabolizes that causes their hangovers to come on quicker and stronger. It's been proven that these people have significantly lower rates of alcoholism. It's been proposed that this common genetic mutation among Asians is a contributing factor to eastern societies relatively low rate of alcohol consumption.

Re:Not all good (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396757)

No, there are certain people (mostly Asian) that have a genetic mutation involving how Ethanol Metabolizes that causes their hangovers to come on quicker and stronger. It's been proven that these people have significantly lower rates of alcoholism. It's been proposed that this common genetic mutation among Asians is a contributing factor to eastern societies relatively low rate of alcohol consumption.

Spoken like a man that has only studied East Asia in books and journal articles, having never been there. They drink like fish and are stone alcoholics, too. Not sure where you're getting your information, but it's not from reality. Lying to save face is also extraordinarily common. Just look at Fukushima!

Re:Not all good (1)

couchslug (175151) | about 5 months ago | (#45396555)

"and is thus even more "addictive"

No, it isn't even comparably addictive. Words mean things and "higher potential for abuse" doesn't mean "addictive".

Re:Not all good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395855)

Relax.
This has none of the bad side affects of alcohol.
So no getting drunk, no mental impairment at all. What, you don't consider those bad side affects?

Re:Not all good (5, Insightful)

jrumney (197329) | about 5 months ago | (#45395949)

Psychological addiction is all in your head. You can get addicted to absolutely anything (including non-chemical things like gambling), and you can wake up one morning and quit cold turkey. The real danger from alcohol is the physical addiction. Alcohol is one of the few drugs that can be life threatening if a serious alcoholic suddenly can't get any. As long as the replacement drug is not physically addictive, then it is a big improvement.

Re:Not all good (2)

steelfood (895457) | about 5 months ago | (#45396279)

you can wake up one morning and quit cold turkey without any physiological effects.

FTFY.

There are psychological effects to quitting psychological addictions cold turkey. In fact, some of these can become severe enough to eventually manifest as physical symptoms.

As the practice of hypnotism has shown, the subconscious is very, very powerful and not to be so casually treated the way you do here.

Re:Not all good (3, Insightful)

Altus (1034) | about 5 months ago | (#45396475)

You do understand that alcohol withdrawal can kill you right? It's phyxical effects are more dangerous than heroin withdrawal. Not that psychological addiction should be scoffed at but alcohol addicicion is no small matter.

Re:Not all good (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396513)

Physiological addiction in most cases can be beaten by a short stay in an inpatient rehab center. Success rates are very high. But the real danger and the real long term worry is the psychological element of the addiction. It's what makes addictions so hard to beat, the day in day out avoidance of the addictive chemical/behavior (even after what you consider the "real danger" period is past). Note that psychological addiction is very much related to genetics and background, so only a limited percentage of people will suffer from it. This also contributes to the insidiousness of it; someone with a non-addictive background will simplify the addiction down into "no physical withdrawal, no big deal" logic you are echoing.

Re:Not all good (5, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 5 months ago | (#45396033)

One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover.

That is absolutely so. I haven't been drunk since shortly after college and it's because I hate how it makes me feel the next morning.

I don't know about the rest of the comment though. I don't quite understand why people feel that intoxicants are inherently bad. I don't use them, but I don't share the moral objection to them.

If someone can use an intoxicant and still manage their life in a way that is satisfactory to them, I don't believe that society needs to place artificial strictures on intoxicating substances.

Re:Not all good (-1, Troll)

eulernet (1132389) | about 5 months ago | (#45396765)

I don't believe that society needs to place artificial strictures on intoxicating substances

While I don't have any moral objection against intoxicants (since I believe that everybody should build their own experience), I disagree with your idea.

Firstly, alcoholism and addiction are mental illnesses, and a small percentage of people are concerned.
It may be 5% or more, so it directly impacts society.
Also, mentally ill people may tend to use more intoxicants than "normal" people (though I never met a "normal" guy), who knows ?

Secondly, I believe that society should protect people from themselves, because a lot of them are lacking in common sense.
For example, children or people who practice binge drinking.

Thirdly, all these substances are means to escape reality.
Escaping reality never makes people stronger.

Re:Not all good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396119)

One of the things that cause people to curb their drinking is that morning after hangover. With no pain for indulgence, this could be much more addictive than alcohol, which is already very addictive.

Bullshit. The universal way drinkers cope with a hangover is called "the hair of the dog". Gives those pesky gut bacteria that bred up on the ethanol and are now working on the methanol (causing the worst "hangover" symptoms) something to eat.

Re:Not all good (4, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#45396549)

This begs the question: If a drug has no pain for indulgence, and you can turn off the effect almost immediately with a counter-acting dose... Does it matter if you're addicted to it? Do we have a problem with people using drugs of their own free will if those drugs have no negative impact on their lives?

Pot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395761)

A little beer with THC would give you a certain similar buz and would actually mellow out people.
Stop looking, legalize it.

Re:Pot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395879)

That would be an "intoxicating liquor" with not too much stretch of the imagination. When Prohibition was repealed, the regulation of "intoxicating liquors" was left up to the states. I don't know if anybody has ever made this argument. I suspect the SCOTUS would shoot it down on the basis that "everybody knew" that "intoxicating liquors" meant "alcohol". When you've got a SCOTUS that thinks growing grain and feeding it to your own cattle is "interstate commerce", it's pretty obvious the Constitution doesn't matter that much to them anyway.

As someone with a high tolerance... (5, Informative)

neminem (561346) | about 5 months ago | (#45395763)

The effects of alcohol are occasionally fun to experience, but what aren't fun are a. attempting to get drunk and failing because it takes a lot, b. attempting to get drunk, overshooting and being too drunk, and c. even after drinking exactly the right amount, getting a hangover because you had to drink a lot to get there. I totally applaud this research.

That said, this is apparently also very old [livescience.com] , so I'm not holding my breath ever seeing this in reality. (That is a link to basically the same synopsis of the same guy's research, from 2006.)

Re:As someone with a high tolerance... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395993)

The trick is to drink quickly. It's frowned upon in some circles, but it's really the way forward if you enjoy the intoxication effects of alcohol, and anyone who denies this is very probably deluding somebody or other.

Try this some time: drink a couple of pints of beer (in the UK that's 2x568ml at typically 3-6% ABV), and do it in under 40 minutes. You'll get that pleasant drunk feeling, then an hour or two later you'll be ready for bed. You can, on the other hand, drink nice and slowly all day, never get to the intoxication level of the two quick pints, and you'll have a stinker of a hangover the next day.

The health damage comes from the amount of alcohol, not the intoxication (intoxicant-related physical injuries aside), so if you want to get a bit tipsy do it from a relatively small amount of alcohol in a short timeframe.

Re:As someone with a high tolerance... (2)

Trax3001BBS (2368736) | about 5 months ago | (#45396253)

That said, this is apparently also very old [livescience.com] , so I'm not holding my breath ever seeing this in reality. (That is a link to basically the same synopsis of the same guy's research, from 2006.)

Shows what he claims; the business of producing alcohol for consumption is blocking his research and efforts.
In a Nutt shell he's fighting Budwiser, just one of the many companies that would involve themselves in blocking this.

Already exists ! (5, Funny)

bob_super (3391281) | about 5 months ago | (#45395769)

"the effects can be quickly reversed"
It's called RU-486

*ducks*

Re:Already exists ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395953)

"the effects can be quickly reversed"
It's called RU-486

*ducks*

A Russian-built 486, eh?

Re:Already exists ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396237)

RU-486

Nope, Pentium.

Yes, but... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395773)

Will it taste as good as a nice bottle of Rum?

I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (1)

occasional_dabbler (1735162) | about 5 months ago | (#45395785)

Will Prof Nut's concoction taste this good?

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (3, Insightful)

DaveAtFraud (460127) | about 5 months ago | (#45395919)

Will Prof Nut's concoction taste this good?

I know it's a rhetorical question but can't stand not answering with a decided *NO*. I've tried both "near beer" and "non-alcoholic wine" and neither tastes anything like the real thing. They aren't even poor substitutes; they're horrible.

Professor Nut seems to think that the only reason people drink is to get drunk. He definitely needs to expand his circle of drinking companions as well as what he drinks.

Lastly, I would be afraid that his cure would be worse than the disease. This sounds like the next "date rape" drug.

Cheers,
Dave

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396143)

You mean he should travel outside of United Kingdom?

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396289)

Pure alcohol just tastes like burning (eg whiskey) so it's not like alcohol actually "tastes good". It's the other stuff from fermentation that makes beer taste good. So long as the substitute doesn't taste BAD and there's ways to reproduce all the other good taste from beer I could see it working.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (1)

khellendros1984 (792761) | about 5 months ago | (#45396585)

You'd also have to reproduce the burning and the scent to really replicate alcoholic drinks. Otherwise, you're just making a new drink, not necessarily a replacement for the old one.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (1, Insightful)

cecom (698048) | about 5 months ago | (#45396315)

Oh, please, spare us the pretentiousness. Of course the main reason people drink is to get intoxicated. That is why wine exists. You may like to pretend that you enjoy it purely for the taste, but that is horseshit. As a society we have cultivated a "taste" for wine/single-malt scotch/whatever simply to justify our alcoholism and to make it more varied and fun.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396543)

the main reason people drink is to get intoxicated.

In anglosaxon and nordic countries, this is true. That's not the case in mediterranean cultures. You should travel a little more before asserting your viewpoint as universal truth.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (1)

iMadeGhostzilla (1851560) | about 5 months ago | (#45396721)

As a thought experiment, imagine a bar where a glass of wine is being sold for $7 and a glass of this non-alcoholic-but-intoxicating-wine-substitute that has a slightly unpleasant taste but the same effect for $6. By your theory, most people would buy the latter, whereas I think it's easy to imagine that very few actually would do that.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (1)

SleazyRidr (1563649) | about 5 months ago | (#45396463)

Try Texas-Select Non-Alcoholic Beer. If you can stomach most American "Beers" then that one is pretty close to the real thing.

Re:I Have a Glass of 2006 Ribera del Duero Here... (4, Funny)

Trepidity (597) | about 5 months ago | (#45396037)

I have a can of Natural Ice here, and have a similar question to ask.

Less healthy? (1)

mrspoonsi (2955715) | about 5 months ago | (#45395821)

It is known that certain forms of alcohol (real ale, Wine) have anti cancer elements, drinking moderately extends life. With all this removed you are just left with the drug.

Perhaps the one which reverses the effect of being drunk has more promise (ready to drive home), but again if abused, as I am sure it would be, the kidneys still have to work, if the person is able to drink more it is perhaps less healthy.

Re:Less healthy? (2)

im_thatoneguy (819432) | about 5 months ago | (#45395929)

You only need to drink like 1oz of wine to get those benefits. You might as well just take a tablespoon of booze and get the best of both worlds.

Not just this research. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395825)

I've heard the drinks industry is allegedly involved against the decriminalization of pot. For obvious reasons.

I'd consider pot an already researched and much better alchohol substitute too, but each to their own.

Re:Not just this research. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395975)

We saw this first hand in denver, although it was on a smaller scale but from the mayor himself. Hickenlooper owns one of the biggest bars/brewerys in downtown denver and was very anti-pot before it got legalized in colorado. The mayor didnt even bother to show up to the duel proposed from the head of the legalization movement, the first time back in 2004, when he proposed to go hit for chug and see who was left standing to prove it was safer and should be legalized

Or, another idea for an alcohol substitute (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395833)

legalize weed.

neuropsychopharmacologists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395849)

"Prof Nutt is one of the country’s leading neuropsychopharmacologists..."
Would that word even fit on a Scrabble board?

Taste vs Effect (5, Insightful)

Lanforod (1344011) | about 5 months ago | (#45395875)

I don't drink Alcohol for the effect/buzz etc. I drink it for the taste. I love a cold beer, or nice rum n coke, a scotch on the rocks, or a glass of pinot noir, all depending on the situation. The buzz can be nice, but that's more what the teenagers drink for, IMO.

Re:Taste vs Effect (3, Interesting)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 5 months ago | (#45396499)

What's interesting is that the alcohol is such an important part of the taste of these drinks. I did an unfortunately large amount of research to find my wife a decent tasting NA beer to drink while pregnant (yes, I know there's still some alcohol in NA beer). And even the best of them (IMHO Thomasbrau, by Paulaner), just didn't taste right without the alcohol. I'd say the same of red wine where I did less extensive tasting and could find no NA wines that were even in the acceptable range.

Re:Taste vs Effect (3, Insightful)

chameleon3 (801105) | about 5 months ago | (#45396645)

I don't drink Alcohol for the effect/buzz etc. I drink it for the taste.

I love the taste of alcohol, too, but the buzz is part of the reason we got to liking it in the first place-- simple classical conditioning.

What about those who don't get drunk? (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395883)

No, really, what about those that alcohol has no effect over?

I currently drink once in a blue moon, just because I don't get drunk. I get from the state of "I'm drinking" to the state of "I have a passing hangover like the afternoon of the next day", and only after an hour of drinking. I drink vodka - about 400ml to get me feel something and at about 500ml I am practically sober with alcohol converted to god knows what, but do not experience any pleasant or unpleasant effects any more.

Re:What about those who don't get drunk? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395961)

No, really, what about those that alcohol has no effect over?

I currently drink once in a blue moon, just because I don't get drunk. I get from the state of "I'm drinking" to the state of "I have a passing hangover like the afternoon of the next day", and only after an hour of drinking. I drink vodka - about 400ml to get me feel something and at about 500ml I am practically sober with alcohol converted to god knows what, but do not experience any pleasant or unpleasant effects any more.

Bullshit. You are not somebody who doesn't get drunk. You are somebody who doesn't realize they are drunk. There are plenty of people like this out there. You're still drunk, you just don't know it. Try drinking 400ml of vodka, then ask an experienced cop to give you a sobriety test.

Nutt, not Nut (5, Informative)

Okian Warrior (537106) | about 5 months ago | (#45395889)

First of all, it's Professor David Nutt, not "Nut"

Second of all, it's the same Professor who was a British government advisor, who was sacked [theguardian.com] for "criticising politicians for distorting research evidence and claiming alcohol and tobacco were more harmful than some illegal drugs, including LSD, ecstasy and cannabis."

Seems like a scientist with integrity. Perhaps this is less the risible ramblings of a madnam, and more he's at the "...then they laugh at you" part of fighting the good fight.

(Unless, of course, you think LSD and cannabis are more damaging than alcohol and tobacco, in which case feel free to poke fun.)

Re:Nutt, not Nut (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396085)

Thank you, came here to make that point.

Yes, Prof Nutt is a remarkable sane, evidence based, thinking person. That's why he got fired by the UK government, he looked at the evidence and told the truth. That didn't mesh.

A large amount of the political pressure was from the then-hysteria over Ecstacy (MDMA), mostly led by the papers. One of his conclusions was that the sheer scale of usage, and the relatively few deaths (probably less than 10 high profile ones from memory) meant that it was statistically safer than many prescription drugs, and certainly safer than alcohol and nicotine, and that was without any controls on production and distribution whatsoever.

I tried Ecstacy once. Really pointless drug in my opinion (I'm a beer and a joint man), but you can't argue with his logic on that one. Don't discount him, he's one of the most realistic thinkers when it comes to humans and their enjoyment of psychoactives. I'd put him on a par with Ford and the motor car, if any of the current leaders in the field change society's approach to the issue it'll be him.

Re:Nutt, not Nut (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396123)

First of all, it's Professor David Nutt, not "Nut"

Second of all, it's the same Professor who was a British government advisor, who was sacked

So, one morning, on the bullettin-board it read: "Professor Nutt sacked".

RTFM - benzodiazepines (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396423)

Most of the articles skimp on this detail, but the Professor's magical substance is a chemical analog of benzodiazepines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzodiazepine [wikipedia.org]

They're well tolerated in the short term and often even used as part of alcohol detox treatment ... but in regular, long term use can be more seriously addictive and destructive. In other words, it'll work great for those occasional drinkers who don't need it and its no good for those heavy drinkers who could have benefited from a real "synthehol"

Get Proctor & Gamble on the Phone (2)

Pollux (102520) | about 5 months ago | (#45395901)

After their success with Olestra [wikipedia.org] , I'm sure they have eager investors on speed-dial with money to burn on the next artificial-vice-substitute.

We have to do this (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395905)

We need all the alcohol we can get to use for fuel. While we're at it, we need to come up with a substitute for food so food crops can be diverted to make food. Oh I know! Soylent Green!

and 3... 2... 1... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395937)

Politicians funded by the alcohol industry attack new chemical as 'most dangerous threat to humanity ever' and work to have it added to schedule 1 drug list

Higher alcohols... (5, Interesting)

jasno (124830) | about 5 months ago | (#45395957)

There are many substances that effect our bodies in ways that are similar or complimentary to ethanol. Many of those substances are already present in fermented products like wine and beer. Some of those are higher weight alcohols(i.e. - fusel oils) like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tert-Amyl_alcohol [wikipedia.org] or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tryptophol [wikipedia.org] . There are other components too, such as the chemicals found in hops. Most of these compounds do not metabolize into acetaldehyde so they do not result in a traditional hangover.

Speaking of drunk... (0)

TheSeatOfMyPants (2645007) | about 5 months ago | (#45395959)

Is /.'s server giving anyone else a hard time -- like logging them out with unusual frequency and/or not showing some of the paragraph breaks & spaces in preview/post mode that they visibly put there while typing? The last few days, I've been logged out 3-4 times, had to write "<br><br>" in my posts to keep random paragraphs from running together in preview/post, and force a non-breaking space in some places because similarly random spaces in my posts aren't showing up outside the text box. (No, I didn't change any settings...)

I think (1)

olip85 (1770514) | about 5 months ago | (#45395969)

you should drink for the taste and not the feeling. If you drink only for the feeling, you might be looking at problems no too far in the future..

Re:I think (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396159)

most alcohols are an acquired taste, isn't doing it for the feeling despite thinking it tastes horrible pretty much how every teenager starts?

Re:I think (2)

HornWumpus (783565) | about 5 months ago | (#45396735)

Those of us with German parents started acquiring a taste for beer well before our teenage years.

Germans have a product called 'kinderbeer'. Sweet and malty with a light hoppy flavor.

To say nothing of the kirshwasser in the whipped cream, wine in the sauce etc etc.

Synthehol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45395979)

Even the Picard wouldn't drink that crap.

Yeast (1)

forevermore (582201) | about 5 months ago | (#45396105)

Or maybe it's because it's very easy and cheap to get yeast to produce your alcohol for you. Might be ok as a replacement for distilled spirits, but imagine how expensive synth-beer would cost if manufacturers had to pay some chemical company for the added synthehol. Not to mention how it would be nearly impossible to replicate the flavor (think non-alcoholic beer).

Just pay alcoholics to breed (1)

fatphil (181876) | about 5 months ago | (#45396109)

I don't get hangovers. This is a genetic trait, shared by many serious alcoholics (rather than just opportunist ones like pop-stars), related to the balance between different alcohol-processing metabolic pathways in my body.

If you are interested in my genes, send me some money and your address, and I can stick a sample in an envelope for you. Group discounts negotiable. If you all accidentally raise sociopaths, or in fact if anything at all happens, I take no responsibility at all.

Re:Just pay alcoholics to breed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396345)

I also have the "no hangover" trait, and it's generally been a huge pleasure. I never really considered the danger that it can enable alcoholism, though. I'm going to have to watch out for that (serious alcoholism on 1/4 of my family tree). Thanks for the heads up.

Re:Just pay alcoholics to breed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396361)

I don't get hangovers.

Like all problems in life, yours can be solved by drinking more.

I have the opposite (1)

Powercntrl (458442) | about 5 months ago | (#45396487)

Little bit of alcohol and it's like insta-hangover for me. To make matters worse, I can't stand the vile taste of alcohol, no matter what it's mixed with. I used to think this was a bit of a curse considering how many social activities involve drinking, but with how expensive alcoholic beverages have become, maybe it's not so bad.

This Exists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396121)

Benzodiazepines, Phenibut, and pretty much anything that directly or indirectly affects GABA receptors. The problem isn't the side-effects; the problem is the very thing that makes it pleasurable.

For the taste (1)

Pithawat Vachiramon (3428413) | about 5 months ago | (#45396233)

People saying the love beer for its taste. Have you seen any stocked a fridge full of non-alcoholic beers?

Re:For the taste (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396449)

Have you sampled what passes for non-alcoholic beers?

Re:For the taste (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#45396653)

You either have no taste for beer or have not tasted the non-acoholic offerings if you think that they're in any way a nice substitute.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...