[ELK]

Follow the money. The AMA has dictated that substance abuse fits the disease model (or the disease model must be made to fit substance use... whatever placates you). The AMA did this with no empirical evidence. Alcoholism and substance abuse in general must be made diseases so that insurance will pay for whatever treatment DE hour is in vogue.
Addiction cannot be cured. Any charlatan or "professional" who asserts they can cure addiction cannot legally back up that claim. The man or woman who finds the cure to addiction will be damn near the Second Coming. They won't make a few million dollars on a book or in filling their center... they will make billions of dollars and better have some damn good security (since both the substance abuse TX racket and drug lords depend upon addiction for their profits... any magic bullet would surely be frowned upon). People stop using drugs when they choose to do so. Not when compelled into TX, not when facing charges (funny how this suddenly sparks an interest in rehab) and not when family members want them to quit. Education and support for those who want to quit is important. I also know that people might slip up, but substance abuse is not a disease UNLESS, because of semantics, you have a vested interest in substance abuse being deemed a disease.
Cancer can be caused agents in the environment that we either willfully or unknowingly are exposed to. However, you can't really wake up and decide to "quit" your cancer one sunny morning. Cancer just isn't that forgiving. Cancer is a disease; substance abuse is a self-imposed condition with symptomless that can lead to complications such as related diseases. But to call substance abuse a disease smacks of an apologist mindset and a desire to feed at the trough for some of that sweet insurance money and whatever the govt. will throw your way.
Addendum: All diseases are medical conditions, but not all medical conditions are diseases (e.g., nailing your hand to a board is not that same as contracting a flu or cold virus, experiencing the physical trauma of a catastrophic auto wreck is not the same as contracting AIDS or another STD, and a horrible chainsaw juggling accident is not the same as contracting some type of flesh eating bacteria). What is the vector for alcoholism or other substance abuse? Smacking your head with a hammer or sucking fumes that deprive you of oxygen are not diseases. Like long-term exposure to alcohol or other drugs, both activities may affect your memory, CNS or even kill you (and "huffing" is apparently addictive); imbibing/smoking/injecting a substance is the willful exposure of ones body to an outside influence that cannot reproduce in the human body... not far from my hammer to the brain analogy. Compulsion is not disease... unless you're looking to excuse behavior, control/change language and influence thought. Or get paid.

[Darwina]

Originally Posted by Lin W

I have been hearing it a lot lately. Saying it's a disease and it's the same as cancer.

I'm shocked at the uninformed responses to this post.

Of course alcoholism is not the same as cancer. And cancer is not one, but many different diseases.

But alcoholism IS a disease. It is not self-inflicted; it is not a moral issue. Alcoholism is recognized as a disease by the American Medical Association. Many alcoholics are in recovery, having received appropriate support and help. However, they still have alcoholism, as they would discover if they drank alcohol again.

Alcoholism is a progressive and if not checked, ultimately fatal disease. Most people with alcoholism cannot halt its progress by using "strength of will" alone. As with other addictions, the body becomes adapted to the substance, and suffers painful symptoms if it is withheld. The first step toward recovery is detoxification, and to be safe, this often has to be done under medical supervision and using medication.

Keep your moralizing for liars, thieves, and murderers. And let s/he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Darwina