Addiction and Recovery

By Bob Gaydos

Thanksgiving ushered in the triple-threat season, so-called by many people in recovery because of the heavy emphasis on celebration … and drinking. It’s a time for extra caution and heightened awareness of the easy access and, sometimes, emphasis on alcohol in order to protect one’s recovery.

    But it’s also a time when people not in recovery often find out, often from friends or family, that their drinking is not normal. It’s problematic. Possibly dangerous. 

   With New Year’s revelry upon us, it may be a good time for anyone wondering about his or her drinking behavior to take a self-assessment.

There are a few tests available and I’ve offered a couple previously in this column, but in the interests of time I’m presenting the shortest one here. It’s the AUDIT, offered by The World Health Organization and is the most widely used alcohol use assessment tool in the world. AUDIT stands for alcohol use disorders identification test. As always, be honest for the best result.

The AUDIT questionnaire:

Please circle the answer that is correct for you

1. How often do you have a drink containing alcohol?

• Never
• Monthly or less
• 2-4 times a month
• 2-3 times a week
• 4 or more times a week

2. How many standard drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when drinking?

• 1or2
• 3or4
• 5or6
• 7to9
• 10 or more

3. How often do you have six or more drinks on one occasion?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

4. During the past year, how often have you found that you were not able to stop drinking once you had started?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

5. During the past year, how often have you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

6. During the past year, how often have you needed a drink in the morning to get yourself going after a heavy drinking session?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

7. During the past year, how often have you had a feeling of guilt or remorse after drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

8. During the past year, have you been unable to remember what happened the night before because you had been drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

9. Have you or someone else been injured as a result of your drinking?

• No
• Yes, but not in the past year
• Yes, during the past year

10. Has a relative or friend, doctor or other health worker been concerned about your drinking or suggested you cut down?

• No
• Yes, but not in the past year
• Yes, during the past year

Scoring the audit

Scores for each question range from 0 to 4, with the first response for each question (eg never) scoring 0, the second (eg less than monthly) scoring 1, the third (eg monthly) scoring 2, the fourth (eg weekly) scoring 3, and the last response (eg. daily or almost daily) scoring 4. For questions 9 and 10, which only have three responses, the scoring is 0, 2 and 4.

Scoring the AUDIT

The range of possible scores is from 0 to 40, with 0 indicating an abstainer who has never had any problems from alcohol. A score of 1 to 7 suggests low-risk consumptions, according to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Scores from 8 to 14 suggest hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption and a score of 15 or more indicates the likelihood of alcohol dependence (moderate-severe alcohol use disorder).

If your score concerns you, there is help available. Talk with your primary care doctor. Call an Alcoholics Anonymous hotline in your area. Call a mental health crisis hotline if one is available.

Excessive alcohol use is now classified as a mental disorder by health officials, somewhat in response to the stigma attached to the word “alcoholic.”  However, most recovering members of Alcoholics Anonymous have no problem with identifying as such. In any case, it is not a moral failing. It can be treated. First, it has to be acknowledged.

Again, be honest. And have a safe and sober new year.

rjgaydos@gmail.com

By Bob Gaydos

    While I’ve been spending the holidays toning up my chopsticks skills (Tuesday-Korean; Wednesday-Japanese; Thursday-Chinese vegan), the rest of the world has apparently been going to hell in a handbasket.

      Let’s see if I can catch up. Elon Musk, the president-non-elect, learned that even the richest man in the world can’t force a few hundred career politicians to shut down the United States government over the holidays. His sidekick and ceremonial president, Donald Trump, learned that those same politicians wouldn’t give him a free credit card by suspending the debt ceiling in order to keep the government open. Worthwhile lessons for all involved, including the American people who would have suffered the most.

     Not to be distracted by reality, Trump also fantasized about annexing Canada as the 51st state, seizing the Panama Canal from China and buying Greenland from Denmark. Canada, Panama, China and Denmark were not amused. The Danes, in fact, wondered what the going price might be on a somewhat worn U.S. democracy. The Mexican president had already told Trump to cool it on the tariff talk.

    Meanwhile, Russian president, Vladimir Putin ignored Trump’s election campaign claim that he’d end the war in Ukraine as soon as he was elected, never mind got sworn in. Didn’t happen. In fact, North Korea sent in some troops to help Russia fight its increasingly costly war and Putin, struggling with losses in Ukraine, abandoned his buddy Assad in Syria and let rebel forces take over the government there virtually overnight.

    Meanwhile, the other Korea, the supposedly Democratic one, saw its president declare martial law, then back down swiftly after massive demonstrations, broke out in the streets, only to eventually be impeached. But wait, there’s more. The acting president appointed to bring order from the chaos refused to appoint judges to overhear the impeachment proceedings against the martial law president. So the acting president was impeached. I have no idea where this is going, and I’m not sure the Koreans do either.

     Meanwhile, Russia’s not-nearly-as-efficient-as -everyone-thought military machine was suspected in the downing of an Azerbaijan  passenger jet that crashed in Kazakhstan, killing 38 people on board. Analysts suggested a missile from Russia’s air defense system struck the plane.

     Those Russian missiles had been used to shoot down drones flown from Ukraine. There was no word on whether the Russians were suspected in the sudden disappearance of all those hundreds of drones that were mysteriously flying over New Jersey for the past couple of weeks. And our government still wasn’t saying anything at all about them — the drones, not the Russians — except that we shouldn’t worry.

     So I’m going to try not to.        

     At least I don’t live in Mozambique where more than 6,000 prisoners, including Isis terrorists, escaped from prison as part of nationwide civil unrest over widespread voting irregularities in the country’s recent presidential election. And boy doesn’t that sound familiar?

       France avoided the bloodshed, but after a vote of no confidence removed the prime minister, a new prime minister has named a new government, fate as yet to be determined.

     So these are apparently the times that try our souls, people. But I wonder, where are the songs of protest? We Shall Overcome! Never mind where all the flowers have gone, where are the Woody Guthries, Pete Seegers, the Bob Dylans for Pete’s sake! 

     Tik-tok and Beyoncé and Taylor Swift don’t cover all the disharmony.

      President Joe Biden just formally recognized the bald eagle as the official national bird. Long overdue, I’d say,  and fitting. But that proud, beautiful bird needs a new “Yankee Doodle Dandy,” one for the 21st-century. Please!

       Meanwhile, I’m going to keep working out with my chopsticks.

By Bob Gaydos

Ray Ferrier (Tom Cruise) is watching for his children at his house when something strange is happening in the sky over the Bayonne Bridge. “War of the Worlds,” 2005.

 “We interrupt this program for a special news bulletin. The aliens have returned to New Jersey. … and, apparently, everywhere else.“

   Eighty-six years after Orson Welles created widespread panic with his Halloween radio broadcast of HG Wells’ “War of the Worlds,“ with spacecraft, piloted by non-humans launching attacks all over New Jersey, strange spacecraft are now being seen again, all over the skies of New Jersey. 

    Well, actually, this time they are real, not the center of a well-done radio drama that played on the imagination of listeners. But this time, there are no attacks. That we know of.

     However, the government, which is to say all the agencies responsible for policing and protecting the skies above the United States of America, are acting like this is a radio drama.

    Hear no evil, see no evil. Your eyes aren’t seeing what they’re seeing. Forget those video tapes. These objects, supposedly drones, represent no known threat. There are no foreign actors involved. But we don’t know what they are. Or, if we do, we’re not telling you. Trust us.

     Yeah, folks, it’s the wrong time for that trust us approach. Especially with large drone-like objects that first manifested over New Jersey now showing up in the skies over New York, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and even on the West Coast.

     For a month now, reports of unusual drone activity have been filling TV news reports with the same basic information: Average citizens see the drones, some take pictures, some take videos, and all wonder what’s going on. They contact public officials, who wonder what’s going on. They contact federal agencies who are supposed to know what’s going on and they tell us don’t worry, there’s no evidence of a threat. Period. Oh, yeah, also don’t shoot at whatever they are because it could be dangerous. So it sounds like they know what’s going on, but don’t want to tell us, which is frustrating, if not scary, or they don’t know what’s going on and don’t want to tell us which is scarier.

     So naturally, conspiracy theories crop up about aliens (most people I talked with felt aliens would be too smart to bother with us). One other theory I found interesting was that it was a “psyops” operation by the government or some group to either divert our attention from some real news (governments around the world are collapsing, the incoming Cabinet nominees are a disaster), or to frighten us into giving the incoming administration more powers to deal with perceived threats. 

  The latter would be accomplished by the likes of Elon, Jeff, and all the other Trump-happy billionaires and their tech savvy minions with their AI, driverless cars, super chips, spaceships and Metasphere. What’s a few big drones?

    Now, as usual, it may turn out to be something more down to earth and troublesome. I heard one of those New Jersey mayors talking on TV about a briefing in which some federal officials said something about radioactive material going missing at Newark Airport. Coincidentally, about a month ago. Nobody knows where it is. Federal government likes to keep track of where this stuff is. If you’re searching, you would start in New Jersey and spread out to New York, Pennsylvania, and Connecticut. After that, wherever the clues lead you. That would include closing down runways at Stewart International Airport in the Hudson Valley for an hour.

    What this would mean is that our government has such mega drones, ready for use for such reconnaissance and search operations. Good to know. Not good to know is that some potentially hazardous material managed to somehow disappear from one of our airports. Maybe that’s what the government really doesn’t want us to know. 

   If that’s the case, I think someone made a bad decision in trying to act as if what we were seeing wasn’t happening. If you tell us what’s going on just maybe someone will have seen or heard something that could help find the stuff you’re looking for. Isn’t that how the FBI works?

   Then all the TV reporters could go back to pretending they’re covering the news.

    Apropos of nothing really, the New Jersey connection with aliens and “War of the Worlds” was repeated in 2005 when Tom Cruise starred in the movie version of the HG Wells novel. It was set in Bayonne, N.J., featuring shots of the beautiful Bayonne Bridge.

     Also, Orson Welles apologized to the nation after he scared the bejezus out of people with his Halloween broadcast. Whatever happens with the radioactive material, if that’s what’s going on, President Biden should do the same. Tell us what you know, Joe. Heck, at this point, aliens would be a welcome relief.

By Bob Gaydos

Pete Hegseth … taking the pledge

  If it swims like a fish, smells like a fish and drinks like a fish, you’ve got a drunken fish. Or, in this case, Pete Hegseth.

   The evidence is everywhere, starting with the fact that Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of defense is running around apparently telling everyone that if he is confirmed as head of the most powerful military organization on the planet, he would stop drinking completely. He’s even telling people who didn’t ask him about his drinking. In fact, I’m not sure anyone asked him to stop drinking, but apparently he thinks it’s a good idea, if not a job requirement, for the secretary of defense to abstain completely from alcohol.

    Like an alcoholic. Which Hegseth apparently does not think he is because he told his colleague, Megyn Kelly, on TV, “It’s not hard for me because it’s not a problem for me.” He added: “This is the biggest deployment of my life, and there won’t be a drop of alcohol on my lips while I’m doing it.”

    Pete, Pete, Pete. Take a seat. First of all, if “it” is not a problem for you, then there’s no reason for you to abstain completely from drinking. I’m sure some secretaries of defense have had a glass of wine at some fancy dinner, someplace or other with no one raising an eyebrow.

      But if you’re swearing off, there must be some reason. Usually, that means a lot of other people have suggested or outright said you have a drinking problem.

    I’m not making this stuff up out of thin air, Pete. I’ve been writing a column about addiction and recovery for 17 years and I’ve interviewed literally dozens of members of Alcoholics Anonymous. They agree that people who don’t have a drinking problem (1) don’t accidentally wind up at AA meetings and (2) don’t feel the need to swear off drinking totally in order to get a good job or not get kicked out of the house or fired.

    Or, as The New Yorker reported, get carried to your room at a Memorial Day veterans event in Virginia Beach in 2014 because you were “totally sloshed.” Or,  had to be held back from joining female dancers on stage at a Louisiana strip club.

  Or go on the air to host a morning show on Fox TV smelling of alcohol, as colleagues reportedly complained.

   Or, as reported, be removed from leadership positions at two military veterans organizations amid allegations of financial mismanagement, inappropriate sexual behavior and, yes, drunkenness.

   I guess that’s why you’re promising to be abstinent if you’re put in charge of the Defense Department, Pete, a job for which, by the way, you are also clearly unqualified.    

    And, Pete, as long as we’re being honest here, there’s that painful note your mom sent you six years ago: “I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego.

   “You are that man (and have been for years) and as your mother, it pains me and embarrasses me to say that, but it is the sad, sad truth. I…say… get some help and take an honest look at yourself.”

    That’s the kind of behavior which experience tells usually involves alcohol. 

    There’s no time like the present, Pete. Your mom is right. Get some help and take an honest look at yourself.

     You sound like a macho guy, Pete. Do yourself a favor. Find an AA meeting, walk in quietly and take a seat and listen. You don’t have to say anything. They don’t even want to know your last name. A lot of macho guys have told me it was the hardest thing they ever did.        

     And the best.

                   ***

    As long as we’re on the subject, in the past, I’ve posted several different questionnaires used to assess whether a person has a problem with alcohol. The shortest one is the AUDIT, offered by The World Health Organization and is the most widely used alcohol use assessment tool in the world.

      AUDIT stands for alcohol use disorders identification test. This test is for Pete and anyone else wondering about a drinking problem. As always, be honest for the best result.

The AUDIT questionnaire:

Please circle the answer that is correct for you

1. How often do you have a drink containing alcohol?

• Never
• Monthly or less
• 2-4 times a month
• 2-3 times a week
• 4 or more times a week

2. How many standard drinks containing alcohol do you have on a typical day when drinking?

• 1or2
• 3or4
• 5or6
• 7to9
• 10 or more

3. How often do you have six or more drinks on one occasion?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

4. During the past year, how often have you found that you were not able to stop drinking once you had started?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

5. During the past year, how often have you failed to do what was normally expected of you because of drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

6. During the past year, how often have you needed a drink in the morning to get yourself going after a heavy drinking session?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

7. During the past year, how often have you had a feeling of guilt or remorse after drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

8. During the past year, have you been unable to remember what happened the night before because you had been drinking?

• Never
• Less than monthly
• Monthly
• Weekly
• Daily or almost daily

9. Have you or someone else been injured as a result of your drinking?

• No
• Yes, but not in the past year
• Yes, during the past year

10. Has a relative or friend, doctor or other health worker been concerned about your drinking or suggested you cut down?

• No
• Yes, but not in the past year
• Yes, during the past year

Scoring the AUDIT

   Scores for each question range from 0 to 4, with the first response for each question (eg never) scoring 0, the second (eg less than monthly) scoring 1, the third (eg monthly) scoring 2, the fourth (eg weekly) scoring 3, and the last response (eg. daily or almost daily) scoring 4. For questions 9 and 10, which only have three responses, the scoring is 0, 2 and 4.

    The range of possible scores is from 0 to 40, with 0 indicating an abstainer who has never had any problems from alcohol. A score of 1 to 7 suggests low-risk consumptions, according to World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines. Scores from 8 to 14 suggest hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption and a score of 15 or more indicates the likelihood of alcohol dependence (moderate-severe alcohol use disorder).

    If you’re concerned about your score, reread the above message to Pete. Again, be honest. And have a safe and sober holiday season.

By Bob Gaydos

President Joe Biden, and son, Hunter.

  This week, in the category of “Wow, I didn’t see that coming,” we have President Joe Biden pardoning his son, Hunter.

  Way to go, Joe. Finally, a Democrat realized it was suicide to bring a knife to a gun fight.

    As has become predictable, Biden received all sorts of self-righteous criticism from some fellow Democrats and the so-called mainstream media for pardoning Hunter, after saying that he wouldn’t. Democrats are supposed to be better than that, goes the argument. What about all those things he said about Trump? It just legitimizes all Trump’s pardons, etcetera.

    Nonsense. 

    There’s not a father worth his salt in the world who would not, if he were also president of the most powerful country in the world, pardon his son while the opportunity still existed, especially considering the charges the son was convicted of and the extraordinary political and public pressure by Republicans over the years to harm the father by persecuting this son.

    Not pardoning Hunter would have been unforgivable.

     As the president said in announcing the pardon, “No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son — and that is wrong. There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough.”

     Indeed.

     The criticism of Biden, especially from the media, but also from some members of his own party, rests largely on the foolish belief that, even though Republicans have refused to play by the so-called rules of bipartisan government since about the time Ronald Reagan was elected, Democrats are still supposed to be the good guys and take the high ground, do the right, moral thing.

    Look where that got them in 2016 and this year. Two well-qualified women candidates for president rejected by an electorate that preferred a lying racist, amoral buffoon. A buffoon, by the way, who is a convicted felon, adjudicated rapist, twice-impeached, adulterous former president who went out of his way to do favors for family members and loyalists, be it pardons, lucrative financial deals or well-paid, low-expectation jobs.

     So spare me the breast-beating. And spare me the holier than thou “reporting” on the pardon. Most of the stories say Hunter Biden was convicted on a gun charge or a firearms charge or weapons charge and for tax evasion. He was actually  convicted of lying on a firearms application form about his drug addiction. He also pleaded guilty to failing to pay taxes that he later paid with penalties. Not uncommon occurrences and not a major threat to society. Also, obviously a result of his addiction to drugs and alcohol. Usually, these don’t wind up being felony charges. But when one political party has it in for the other political party, sometimes unusual things happen. 

    President Biden addressed his remarks to “reasonable“ persons. The few who existed in the Republican Party have left. The MAGA cultists who buy Trump’s game, hook, line and sinker don’t qualify. But I suspect that if some of those “just following the story” reporters would track down a few so-called “typical“ Trump voters who were upset about the price of eggs, a lot of them would say they were OK with a father pardoning his son.

   In this case an 82-year-old father with an extraordinary career of service to his country who has tragically lost another adult son to brain cancer and a young daughter and previous wife in an automobile accident.

      And maybe, if those reporters want to chase a presidential family story, they can ask the president-in-waiting what qualifies Charles Kushner, father-in-law of Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, for the position of ambassador to France.

    On his way out of the White House in 2020, Trump pardoned Kushner, who served two years for a variety of charges he pleaded guilty to, including tax evasion, illegal campaign donations and witness tampering.

     The witness tampering involved a scheme Kushner dreamed up to get even with his brother-in-law, who he found out was cooperating with the feds in an investigation.

       Kushner hired a woman to lure his brother-in-law to a motel room in New Jersey in which a hidden camera was installed and recorded everything that happened in the room. Kushner then sent the recording to his sister. This display of brotherly love apparently qualifies Kushner to handle America’s diplomatic relations with one of our key allies, France.

       Actually, with Trump, rather than not seeing it coming, one pretty much expects such news. And there’s the problem.

      Biden‘s got a little less than two months left in office. Can’t wait to see what other surprises he has in mind.