Genevieve F Dash1, Christal N Davis1, Nicholas G Martin2, Dixie J Statham3, Michael T Lynskey4, Wendy S Slutske1. 1. From the, Department of Psychological Sciences, (GFD, CND, WSS), University of Missouri- Columbia, Columbia, Missouri. 2. Queensland Institute of Medical Research (QIMR) Berghofer, (NGM), Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 3. Department of Psychology, (DJS), Federation University, Ballarat, Vic., Australia. 4. Department of Addictions, (MTL), King's College London Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many adult drinkers consume far beyond the binge threshold. This "high-intensity drinking" (HID), defined as 2 (HID-2) and 3 (HID-3) times the binge threshold, is of public health interest due to its role in acute alcohol-related harms. Research on HID has mostly been limited to college-aged young adults, focused on contextual factors, and neglected the potential role of genetic influences on the propensity to engage in HID. METHODS: Structured diagnostic interviews assessing past-year alcohol involvement were conducted with 3,785 individuals (1,365 men, 2,420 women; Mage = 32, range = 21 to 46), including 3,314 twins and 471 nontwin siblings from the Australian Twin Registry. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to compare HID-2 and HID-3 to binge drinking on demographic correlates, drinking characteristics, and drinking-related consequences. Biometric modeling was conducted to estimate the role of genetic, common, and individual-specific environmental factors in HID propensity. RESULTS: Among past-year drinkers, the prevalence of HID-2 and HID-3 was both 22%, with men disproportionally represented. The frequencies of drinking, intoxication, and binge drinking significantly increased across the heavier drinking categories, which also evidenced higher average consumption quantities and higher rates of alcohol-related consequences. The propensity to engage in HID was significantly heritable (A = 37% [95% CI: 28 to 46%]), with individual-specific environmental influences accounting for the remainder of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: This study convincingly demonstrates that HID is not restricted to college-aged young adults, but also can be highly prevalent among those of working age, and that the propensity to engage in HID is partially explained by genetic influences.
BACKGROUND: Many adult drinkers consume far beyond the binge threshold. This "high-intensity drinking" (HID), defined as 2 (HID-2) and 3 (HID-3) times the binge threshold, is of public health interest due to its role in acute alcohol-related harms. Research on HID has mostly been limited to college-aged young adults, focused on contextual factors, and neglected the potential role of genetic influences on the propensity to engage in HID. METHODS: Structured diagnostic interviews assessing past-year alcohol involvement were conducted with 3,785 individuals (1,365 men, 2,420 women; Mage = 32, range = 21 to 46), including 3,314 twins and 471 nontwin siblings from the Australian Twin Registry. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were conducted to compare HID-2 and HID-3 to binge drinking on demographic correlates, drinking characteristics, and drinking-related consequences. Biometric modeling was conducted to estimate the role of genetic, common, and individual-specific environmental factors in HID propensity. RESULTS: Among past-year drinkers, the prevalence of HID-2 and HID-3 was both 22%, with men disproportionally represented. The frequencies of drinking, intoxication, and binge drinking significantly increased across the heavier drinking categories, which also evidenced higher average consumption quantities and higher rates of alcohol-related consequences. The propensity to engage in HID was significantly heritable (A = 37% [95% CI: 28 to 46%]), with individual-specific environmental influences accounting for the remainder of the variance. CONCLUSIONS: This study convincingly demonstrates that HID is not restricted to college-aged young adults, but also can be highly prevalent among those of working age, and that the propensity to engage in HID is partially explained by genetic influences.
Authors: Michael Livingston; Jonas Raninen; Tim Slade; Wendy Swift; Belinda Lloyd; Paul Dietze Journal: Addiction Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Ke Xu; Henry R Kranzler; Richard Sherva; Carolyn E Sartor; Laura Almasy; Ryan Koesterer; Hongyu Zhao; Lindsay A Farrer; Joel Gelernter Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2015-06-03 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Po-Hsiu Kuo; Michael C Neale; Brien P Riley; Bradley Todd Webb; Patrick F Sullivan; Jen Vittum; Diana G Patterson; Dawn L Thiselton; Edwin J van den Oord; Dermot Walsh; Kenneth S Kendler; Carol A Prescott Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Danielle M Dick; Jacquelyn L Meyers; Richard J Rose; Jaakko Kaprio; Kenneth S Kendler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2011-06-20 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: A C Heath; K K Bucholz; P A Madden; S H Dinwiddie; W S Slutske; L J Bierut; D J Statham; M P Dunne; J B Whitfield; N G Martin Journal: Psychol Med Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Emma C Johnson; Celine L St Pierre; Jacquelyn L Meyers; Fazil Aliev; Vivia V McCutcheon; Dongbing Lai; Danielle M Dick; Alison M Goate; John Kramer; Samuel Kuperman; John I Nurnberger; Marc A Schuckit; Bernice Porjesz; Howard J Edenberg; Kathleen K Bucholz; Arpana Agrawal Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Jennifer E Merrill; Holly K Boyle; Gabriela López; Mary Beth Miller; Nancy P Barnett; Kristina M Jackson; Kate B Carey Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2021-05-17 Impact factor: 3.928