quote:

---

It's called AWOL, short for Alcohol Without Liquid, and it's coming to New York City this weekend.

Manufactured in Britain, the machine allows people to inhale a mist of alcohol mixed with oxygen through a tube or vaporizer, absorbing it into their lungs.

One hit costs about $10, and lasts about 20 minutes.

---

Weird.

It sounds so... Star Trek?

[ August 22, 2004, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: Elizabeth ]
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
I'd like to see some studies backing up that it has the effects they claim. And no long-term side-effects -- seems like it might trigger respiratory allergies, asthma, cause problems in smokers and others with compromised lung tissue.

That said, what the heck is wrong with ingesting alcohol the old-fashioned way? (In moderation and using good sense, of course.) This seems to be yet another way for people to have something without its natural consequences. Yeesh.
 

---

Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
 
I guess I'm showing my age when I question what the point of this is. I like beer, in fact I treasure a well crafted beer but I don't like being inebrieted. Perhaps I'm missing the point.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
Rivka,
Wouldn't it numb your lungs or something? When my mom has a toothache, she swishes vodka around the tooth. (basically her version of Anbesol) I agree that there has to be an effect.

And, like Punwit, I enjoy the taste of a drink, if I am going to bother having it.
 

---

Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
 
This is the saddest (sad not as in pathetic, but upsetting) thing I have seen for a long time. It's merely a step onward what I see all the time, though. People drink, not because they like the social part or taste of alcoholic drinks, but merely because they like to get drunk and stupid.
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
I'm pretty sure your lungs have no sensory neurons. So they're always "numb," in essence. And I agree, I want to taste the stuff on the way down. That would be why I bother to buy stuff like Frangelico. It sure ain't for the price!
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
It reminds me of college, when we had "straw parties." Someone would mix a nasty batch of grain alcohol and juice, and we would pass around these long tubes and sip out of them.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
I made up a drink a long time ago called the White Monk, Rivka: It is a White Russian with Frangelico instead of kahlua.
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Mmmmm.
 

---

Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
 
The point is to get drunk with less alcohol. If a hit only lasts twenty minutes, it will also help people to sober up faster. Also, some people do not like the taste of alcoholic beverages, but want the high. I would not use this regularly, but it does sound interesting to try. Alcoholic nasal sprays will be next.
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
I have never had sufficient alcohol to get more than tipsy, and never wanted to.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
But Danzig, wouldn't each person react differently, as people do with imbibed alcohol? Wouldn't weight, etc. change the effect?
 

---

Posted by TMedina (Member # 6649) on :
 
There are no long term studies to evaluate the physical effects on the body or how it affects behavior during consumption.

Likewise, we are unable to determine how this will impact behaviors regarding the decision to drink and similar choices. For example, will people be inspired to drink more, thinking they will sober up faster?

I have gotten cookie-tossing drunk on occasion - usually by accident, once intentionally.

-Trevor
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 

quote:

---

That said, what the heck is wrong with ingesting alcohol the old-fashioned way?

---

::is glad that rivka isn't from any precolombian mesoamerican civilizations::

I'm not really troubled by this; I've known plenty of people who drank for the effect rather than the taste. My friends in high school weren't buying keystone for the taste, I'm sure. I personally don't like to get drunk, or even tipsy. I like the taste of quite a few alcoholic drinks, and will happily sip at one, but if I start to feel at all tipsy I'll generally quit. Given that, I won't be using this machine, but I don't begrudge others the experience if they want it.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
Would it still be processed through the liver? Or would it go straight to the bloodstream. Because the bypassing of the liver would be a good thing.
 

---

Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
 
I haven't bothered to read the article, but I would be somewhat worried about the danger of alcohol poisoning. The level of alcohol in the blood stream is, in most people, limited by their ability to hold down that much liquor in their stomachs. Hard core alcoholics and those who do "forced loadings" (like a frat parties involving giving alcohol to people who are too inebriated to drink more without assistance) are basically the only ones currently in serious danger of alcohol poisoning.

This delivery method would seem to have the potential to get way too much alcohol into the system too quickly. And there's no puking up the excess if it's in your lungs, neh?

Also, given that lungs are important for breathing, one might worry (as rivka was saying) about damaging effects, alergic reactions, etc.

Again, if you hurt your lungs doing this, it's too late. You can't just puke it out like people do when they take in too much by drinking.

Seems like a stupid idea that really ought to get FDA approval first or something.

Sheesh!
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
Straight into the bloodstream, I'm sure. That was one of the advantages of the whole mesoamerican beer enima technique too.
 

---

Posted by Theca (Member # 1629) on :
 
I would say bypassing the liver is a bad thing, not a good thing. One of the major jobs of the liver is filtering all the blood from the abdomen to screen out metabolic poisons. There aren't any good studies on what these liver bypassed, rapid alcohol boluses are doing to peoples' brains and bodies.

It just sounds like a terrible way to get people more fixated on sudden highs and quick fixes.

Reminds me of huffing, actually. I can see all sorts of potential for misuse and increased morbidity/mortality. I wonder what we'll be saying about this in a year or two.

[ August 22, 2004, 08:27 PM: Message edited by: Theca ]
 

---

Posted by Danzig avoiding landmarks (Member # 6792) on :
 
I do not know enough about how it works, but I imagine that yes it would be different for each person. Probably more dangerous too; it is basically the same difference between drinking the original Coca-Cola and smoking the same amount of cocaine freebase. Eating (or drinking) a substance is usually if not always the best form of ingestion. Your body is smart, and will throw up lots of stuff that is toxic if it can, including alcohol. Inhaling the vapors means it cannot throw up the alcohol if it is too much.

Personally, other than trying this once or twice to see how it compares, I think I will stick with only drinking moderate amounts of alcohol that tastes good. Alcohol is just not as fun a drug as it used to be.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
Good point abut the puking, Bob. And the general poisoning. Yes, I think more and more that this is not a good thing, and I , too, wonder what we will read about it in a year or so.

And Noemon, a link to the beer enemas, please. Never heard that one.
 

---

Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
 
I hate puking.
 

---

Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
 
I'll see if I can dig up a link Elizabeth. I've read about it, but only in offline magazines and journal articles, I'm afraid. Still, I'll see what I can find.
 

---

Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
 
The beer enema thing leads me to posit that the terms: It's just the beer talking and He's talking out of his a**. are more analogous than I originally thought.
 

---

Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
 
I searched the enema thing and could only find two types of sites: porn and "how to" for Bondage/Sado-masochism fans.

Interestingly, the consensus appears to be that such practices are very dangerous and it's "tough to gauge the right concentration and how much is absorbed."

Then there'll be one person giving actual instructions -- whether they are just making it up or not I couldn't tell.

But seriously, if absorption through the rectum is that dangerous, I can only imagine what it might be like as an inhalant.

I'm not really sure how well alcohol is absorbed through the lungs, though. But this just seems like a very stupid idea.
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
I agree, Bob. Why ruin a good Cabernet?

Seriously. To me, drinking is a ritual to be done with friends. Picking a good(or decent) wine, making a really good Margarita. That is part of the good life for me, not the buzz.(though that is obviously what I am going for, I guess, or i would drink everything alcohol free) You learn when you have had enough, you stop way before you have to drive, you act in a responsible manner.

My husband tends bar, and I would hate to see him passing out that thing.

This just seems so sad, really. And I really do worry about the medical side effects. As you say, why no FDA approval?
 

---

Posted by Verily the Younger (Member # 6705) on :
 
So people are smoking their booze now? It seems kind of stupid to me to develop a special method to get drunk without even getting to enjoy the drink first. Can hedonism get any worse? Personally, I'd rather have a method to drink more alcohol without getting drunk. (I love wine, but I can't drink more than a couple of glasses before I get tipsy.)

quote:

---

I hate puking.

---

quote:

---

A strong beer was produced in Mesoamerica made of fermented maize and agave. Another drink was made from fermented honey and the bark of the balche tree. Bishop Landa recorded that alcoholic beverages were drunk at every ritual occasion, and early paintings and figurines by Maya artisans show drinking activities. Leaves from the wild tobacco plant were also used to create hallucinatory effects. Stronger than modern domestic tobaccos, these leaves were rolled into cigars and smoked for pleasure and for divination (see picture #6).

During the classic period, these substances were not always administered orally. Several painted pottery vessels graphically depict the use of an enema apparatus in apparently ritual settings. The direct introduction of alcoholic or hallucinogenic substances into the colon would result in an immediate absorption by the body, thereby hastening the effect.

---

quote:

---

It sounds so... Star Trek?

---

More like A Clockwork Orange (dystopian) than Star Trek which is more positive in its outlook about humankind's future.

Whoever said "creepy" is right.
 

---

Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
 
S'okay, was my own choice to read it.

I always had no sympathy for my residents when they got puking-drunk. It was self inflicted, unlike a stomach bug or food poisoning (unless you're eating cheesy poofs off the ground).
 

---

Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
 
ScreechOwl,

I was really thinking of the synthenol. How they took all the bad stuff out of food and drink.
 

---

Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
 
And how you could choose to feel the inebriation or not.
 

---

Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
It is huffing: inhaling solvent vapors for a high. Current laws concerning huffing should apply.

And the machine is illegal under federal regulations. As a new drug-delivery system, it must first be tested for safety&efficacy through clinical trials, just as eg nicotine gum and nicotine patches were.
Tobacco companies were forced to cease marketing nicotine inhalers by the Food&DrugAdministration for lack of clinical trials.

Tobacco industry profits were high enough to both finance clinical trials and self-insure liability for cigarette sales. Yet they still backed off manufacturing nicotine inhalers at least in part due to opening up entirely new liability issues even if they had been able to get such inhalers past the FDA approval process.
I'd be extremely surprised to hear that any insurance company would be foolhardy enough to provide liability coverage in the US for a bar offering alcohol huffs, or for the manufacturors of such machines.

Then there are federal and state criminal laws delimiting the forms of alcohol which are allowed to be sold as well as how alcohol may be served. While a vigorous (read absurdly expensive) defense might allow a huff seller to evade prison, there ain't no chance of financially surviving a civil suit after mishap.

I very much doubt that a huff bar could pass OccupationalSafety&Health regulations inre eg solvent vapors. Or even local fire codes applicable to commercial food&entertainment venues: alcohol&oxygen is an easily ignitable and explosively combustible mixture.

A huff bar probably couldn't pass federal, state, and regional EnvironmentalProtection standards & regulations inre air pollution by commercial businesses.

[ August 22, 2004, 11:54 PM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
 

---

Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
Um, not THAT old-fashioned! Yikes, I never heard of that method of alcohol ingestion before. And I have to say, I kinda would have preferred to remain in ignorance.
 

---