Understanding self-harm, self-injury, and self-destruction

1. Alcohol (ethanol) enters the body through the oral cavity (i.e., the mouth). The inner surface of the oral cavity is mucosal tissue to keep the cavity lubricated and it is capable of absorbing alcohol into the bloodstream. This absorption is considered “insignificant”.

2. Alcohol flows down the oesophagus to the stomach where 10-20% of ethanol will be absorbed into the bloodstream. Alcohol enters the bloodstream via the mucosal tissue of the stomach wall, and travels straight to the liver. Alcohol can take 5-10 minutes to reach the brain because of the ethanol absorbed via the stomach. If you drink alcohol on an empty stomach, the pyloric sphincter [gateway between the stomach and the small intestine] is going to be more open, and the alcohol is going to immediately enter the small intestine after reaching the stomach. If food is also present in the stomach, the sphincter will open and close at a rate that allows food to enter the small intestine gradually, therefore if alcohol is also in the stomach, it will gradually enter the small intestine.

3. Alcohol flows through the pyloric sphincter into the small intestines where most alcohol absorption occurs. Human intestines are attached the to the posterior abdominal wall by a fold of membrane called the mesentery. Alcohol is absorbed into the mesentery via veins and then travels to the liver.

4. One function of the liver is that it detoxifies toxic elements into non-toxic elements before passing it to the heart and then the rest of the body. The liver sustains considerable “abuse” from a variety of toxic elements and chemicals, and therefore it needs to be capable of full regeneration. NOTE: Many diseases and exposures can harm it beyond the point of repair. These include cancer, hepatitis, certain medication overdoses, and fatty liver disease.

In the liver, ethanol is met with an enzyme called alcohol dehydrogenase and converts ethanol into acetaldehyde [ass-eh-tal-de-hide]. This chemical is more toxic than ethanol, so the liver uses another enzyme to convert acetaldehyde into acetate, which is non-toxic to the human body. NOTE: the amount of alcohol consumed + the timeframe it is consumed [and a variety of other factors] will influence the ability of the liver to effectively convert acetaldehyde all the way into acetate. The liver can’t handle the entire workload effectively therefore ethanol (before being metabolised) will go straight from the liver to the bloodstream and make its way directly to the heart.

NOTE: Genetics will play a role! Certain people do not produce the liver enzymes in enough quantity to properly breakdown ethanol.

5. Blood leaves the liver through the hepatic veins. The hepatic veins carry blood to the inferior vena cava—the largest vein in the body—to the right side of the heart. The heart will beat and send the incoming blood to the lungs to oxygenate and expel carbon dioxide as we breath out. This is how ethanol can be on your breath. Inside the lungs, at the very end of the bronchioles, are hollow air sacs called alveoli where there is a gas exchange. Ethanol evaporates through capillaries into the air sacs and exhaled out of the body. Breathalysers can detect the quantity of ethanol in a person’s system based on the quantity of ethanol in our breath.

6. Not all the ethanol will expel from the body via the breath. The rest will flow back to the heart, with newly oxygenated blood, and then get pumped all the way up to the brain and around the body. NOTE: Ethanol is water soluble. It will be distributed to every cell in the body except bone and fatty tissue [some will enter fat cells but not easily]. Ethanol will interact with every other cell i.e., every organ, gland, nerve, muscle etc.

7. Ethanol will affect and compromise protein synthesis inside muscle tissue. Therefore, if you have been training at the gym, running, swimming etc., your muscles will not effectively be able to repair.

8. Once ethanol has reached the brain, it will cross the blood-brain barrier and begin to affect chemical messengers [neurotransmitters] in the grey matter of the brain. It affects serotonin, dopamine, gamma-amino-butyric-acid (aka GABA), glutamate, endorphins etc. The person will experience pleasure, euphoria, lowered inhibitions [related to dopamine], lowered cognitive ability (e.g., decision making/problem solving, emotion regulation) and lowered coordination and reflexes.

The more ethanol ingested, the more dopamine is secreted and communicated between neurons (i.e., nerve cells). One of dopamine’s functions is to make you feel pleasure or ‘rewarded’ for doing things that are good for humans, hence, from an evolutionary perspective, we are likely to do them again to help us thrive in our environment and social world. Dopamine is secreted when we:

• eat healthy foods (but also recently developed processed foods that are high in sugar and salt)
• exercise
• achieve goals
• be productive (e.g., finish a task like cleaning, cooking, work-related tasks)
• master new skills (e.g., learning an instrument or a new talent), and
• have positive and stimulating social interactions

Ethanol influences so much dopamine secretion and communication that the brain becomes unable to make responsible decisions cognitively. The simultaneous experience of euphoria and lowered cognitive ability means we are more likely to be “happy” about making irresponsible decisions.

Increased dopamine is how drinking alcohol “blocks” unpleasant emotions like fear, stress, anxiety, and insecurity. When we don’t feel these unpleasant, yet necessary, emotions we will behave in ways that are dangerous, abnormal, potentially embarrassing, and generally problematic.

Another significant brain region affected by ethanol is the hypothalamus and the pituitary glad [together known as the hypothalamic-pituitary axis]. These structures control the entire hormonal system. The hypothalamus monitors the body, and it will send instructions to the pituitary gland based on information it receives from the hypothalamus. The hypothalamus is aware that ethanol is flooding the brain and it starts adjusting the secretion of hormones via the pituitary gland.

One of the instructions it gives the pituitary gland is to start modulating the adrenal glands to secrete cortisol (i.e., stress hormone) and epinephrine and norepinephrine (i.e., adrenaline).

Now, our cognitive capacity is diminished, inhibitions are lowered, and we will experience a rush of stress hormones and adrenaline coursing through the body. Cortisol and adrenaline will provide a boost of energy. It will increase the heart rate, blood pressure, body sweat, sugar levels in the bloodstream, and enhances the brain’s ability to use glucose. Glucose is a “fuel” source for brain functioning, including the generation of neurotransmitters. Behaviourally, we can see this in children when we say they are “hyperactive” because they’ve ingested too much sugar.

The pituitary gland will also slow the secretion of anti-diuretic hormone (aka. vasopressin). A diuretic is something that makes us urinate. If the anti-diuretic hormone (also called vasopressin) slows down, then we won’t be “holding on” to water as effectively, hence we begin to urinate more. People call this “breaking the seal”.

9. South of the body, blood is pumped into the kidneys via the renal artery which spreads through the renal cortex. The blood is then filtered into urine and expelled from the body. The lowered anti-diuretic hormone will dilate (become wider/bigger or more open) blood vessels in the kidneys which means more blood gets passed through and filtered, but it also means we lose a lot more body water which leads to dehydration. Vasopressin is essential in the control of osmotic balance, blood pressure regulations, and kidney function, therefore, when vasopressin is lowered, we are losing essential water and minerals/electrolytes. Electrolytes are involved in urination because the kidneys need them to make the process of filtering blood more efficient.

The loss of water and electrolytes will contribute to a hangover. Electrolytes play a role in cellular water absorption so if we are losing more water than we are bringing in, and we are losing the electrolytes that support the absorption of water, we become dehydrated very quickly.

10. The Hangover

Symptoms: nausea, fatigue, diarrhoea, vomiting, paranoia, anxiety, anorexia (i.e., loss of appetite), increased thirst, muscle weakness, irritability, sweating, increased blood pressure, and headache.

The exact cause of a “hangover” is not yet known however variables affecting the hangover are:

• individual differences such as sex, size, body fat, genetics etc
• lack of sleep
• general health
• drinking behaviour e.g., frequency, duration, quantity
• food intake before and during
• water intake before and after
• your body’s ability to metabolise alcohol i.e., excessive amounts of acetaldehyde due to fewer enzymes to metabolise alcohol in the liver before entering the bloodstream
• general behaviour while drinking e.g., poly-substance use, dancing, sexual activity, risk-taking behaviours etc.

Strategies for Controlled Drinking

• Setting personal drinking limits and sticking to it
• Alternating alcoholic drinks with soft drinks i.e., one alcoholic drink then a water, soft drink, or juice
• Have a meal before drinking
• Switching to low alcohol drinks
• Having regular alcohol-free days/weeks/months
• Identifying high risk situations for heavy drinking and creating a management plan

Engaging in alternative activities to drinking

Hello readers! A few of the cognitive styles below were mentioned in my last post. As humans, we have a tendency to forget things so a bit of revision can be useful.

Many people have cognitive processes that result in overall unhelpful thinking styles that they tend to apply globally across situations and which may result in emotional distress (such as depression or anxiety) or unhelpful behaviours (such as anger or avoidance). Some of the most problematic thinking styles are listed in the extract below.

Mental Filter: This thinking styles involves a “filtering in” and “filtering out” process – a sort of “tunnel vision”, focusing on only one part of a situation and ignoring the rest. Usually this means looking at the negative parts of a situation and forgetting the positive parts, and the whole picture is coloured by what may be a single negative detail.

Jumping to Conclusions: I’m sure you’ve heard people say on television, “Don’t jump to conclusions” or “The truth is we just don’t know yet”. We jump to conclusions when we assume that we know what someone else is thinking (mind reading) and when we make predictions about what is going to happen in the future (predictive thinking).

Personalisation: This involves blaming yourself for everything that goes wrong or could go wrong, even when you may only be partly responsible or not responsible at all. You might be taking 100% responsibility for the occurrence of external events.

Catastrophising: Catastrophising occurs when we “blow things out of proportion” and we view the situation as terrible, awful, dreadful, and horrible, even though the reality is that the problem itself is quite small. A helpful restructuring of this cognition is to ask yourself if the situation will still be awful, terrible, or dreadful in a month. There may be ongoing consequences or stress involved if you lose a job or a relationship ends, so validate the experience you are having but also take a look at the big picture. What’s the worst that could happen? Why is the worst so “bad”? And if you are being realistic about the issue, reach out for some help if you can.

Black & White Thinking: This thinking style involves seeing only one extreme or the other. You are either wrong or right, good or bad and so on. There are no in-betweens or shades of grey.

Should-ing and Must-ing: Sometimes by saying “I should…” or “I must…” you can put unreasonable demands or pressure on yourself and others. Although these statements are not always unhelpful (e.g. “I should not get drunk and drive home”), they can sometimes create unrealistic expectations.

Overgeneralisation: When we overgeneralise, we take one instance in the past or present, and impose it on all current or future situations. If we say “You always…” or “Everyone…”, or “I never…” then we are probably overgeneralising.

Labelling: We label ourselves and others when we make global statements based on behaviour in specific situations. We might use this label even though there are many more examples that aren’t consistent with that label.

Emotional Reasoning: This thinking style involves basing your view of situations or yourself on the way you are feeling. For example, the only evidence that something bad is going to happen is that you feel like something bad is going to happen. I live with anxiety and it can be debilitating at times. I use my “wiser thinking” or “rational thinking” to evaluate whether I am operating from an emotional mindset. You might ask yourself: “What’s the evidence?”, “Does the past necessarily predict the future?”, “Am I angry or fearful right now because that might be clouding my judgement?”. It can be helpful to talk to someone who isn’t caught in your emotional headspace, or perhaps wait for the emotion to subside to think about the situation again.

Magnification and Minimisation: In this thinking style, you magnify the positive attributes of other people and minimise your own positive attributes. It’s as though you’re explaining away your own positive characteristics.

(CCI, 2008)

Not long ago, words like “triggered,” “gaslighting,” “narcissist,” and “neurodivergent” belonged almost exclusively to therapists’ offices and psychology textbooks. Now they’re everywhere; in workplace training sessions, community organisations, TikTok comment sections, and casual conversation between friends over coffee. That shift has brought some genuinely important changes. But it’s also introduced some problems worth taking seriously.

The real wins

It would be unfair to dismiss this cultural shift outright. There are meaningful gains. More people today can identify manipulation, coercive dynamics, and emotional harm than any previous generation. Mental health conversations have been destigmatised in ways that would have been hard to imagine twenty years ago. People who were historically silenced, particularly those from marginalised communities, finally have language that validates their experiences and gives them permission to leave harmful situations. That’s progress

But then there’s “concept creep” (pathologising the ordinary or “diagnostic inflation”)

Psychologists use the term “concept creep” to describe what happens when a word originally defined by strict clinical boundaries starts expanding to cover increasingly ordinary experiences. And that’s precisely what happened with “trauma.”

Clinically, trauma refers to experiences that overwhelm the nervous system i.e., genuine threats to safety, severe harm, events that exceed a person’s capacity to cope. These days, the same word is regularly applied to being disagreed with, having a relationship end, receiving criticism, or simply feeling uncomfortable. Events like relationship breakdowns, job loss, or failure can be genuinely devastating, and for some people, under some circumstances, they absolutely do meet the clinical threshold for trauma. The distinction isn’t really about the type of event. It’s about the impact on the nervous system and the person’s capacity to integrate the experience.

When everything qualifies as trauma, the word stops doing useful work. Worse, it can actually undermine the resilience people need to navigate a genuinely difficult world.

The nervous system problem

Here’s where it gets important. In actual “clinical” trauma, the brain’s threat-response systems activate intensely. Memory processing is disrupted. The body mobilises for survival in ways that can leave lasting marks.

Discomfort is different. It involves real emotional activation, it’s not pleasant, but cognitive flexibility remains available. The capacity to think, reflect, and choose a response is still intact.

When people learn to label ordinary emotional discomfort as trauma activation, the consequences compound. If discomfort feels equivalent to harm, avoidance becomes a logical response. But avoidance prevents the gradual building of tolerance. And without tolerance, the world gets smaller.

Trauma as identity and social currency

In some online communities, there’s an uncomfortable dynamic worth naming: being “highly traumatised,” “chronically triggered,” or “deeply misunderstood” can confer real social benefits — belonging, validation, moral authority, and attention.

This doesn’t mean the experiences aren’t real. But when distress becomes central to someone’s identity, letting go of that distress can start to feel like losing themselves. Recovery, paradoxically, becomes threatening.

The fragility trap

In certain environments, fragility functions as a kind of protection. If I am highly sensitive, others must accommodate me. Challenge becomes inappropriate. Accountability becomes unsafe. The person is shielded, but the cost is enormous.

Resilience, both psychologically and biologically, develops through graded exposure to stress. We become capable through encountering difficulty, not by avoiding it. Systems that never face adaptive pressure weaken over time. This is simply how human development works.

Why this moment matters

Several things are converging right now. Social media algorithms reward extreme emotional narratives. Identity formation increasingly happens in digital spaces that amplify distress. Institutions have frequently overcorrected towards protective language in ways that, whatever their intentions, can inadvertently signal that discomfort is dangerous. And while there’s been important growth in awareness of systemic injustice, the corresponding emphasis on individual agency has sometimes been lost.

We’ve swung from “suppress your emotions entirely” to “your emotions define reality.” Neither extreme serves people well.

Holding the middle ground

What good support actually looks like isn’t dismissing people’s experiences, it’s deepening them. The distinction that matters is between trauma-informed practice and what might be called trauma-indulgent practice.

Trauma-informed means understanding that harm genuinely impacts nervous systems, avoiding shame, recognising power imbalances, and creating safety. It’s grounded and necessary.

Trauma-indulgent means treating all discomfort as harm, reinforcing avoidance, allowing emotional reasoning to override reality, and quietly removing personal responsibility from the picture. It feels compassionate in the moment but tends to leave people worse off over time.

In practice, holding the middle ground means validating what someone feels while gently asking whether something was truly unsafe or simply hard. It means acknowledging difficulty while also reinforcing capacity. It means introducing a reality that doesn’t get much airtime in online spaces — that we can’t always control how those around us speak or behave, but we can build our own tolerance and capacity to regulate.

The question underneath everything

There’s a deeper ethical question running through all of this: are we reducing suffering in the long run, or just distress in the short term?

Protecting people from discomfort today, if it increases fragility tomorrow, is not a kindness. But exposing people to challenge without adequate safety and support risks re-traumatising those with genuine wounds.

The balance isn’t complicated to describe, even if it’s genuinely difficult to hold: safety, combined with graduated exposure, combined with a genuine sense of agency.

Anyone supporting others through difficulty needs a calm nervous system, a high personal tolerance for distress, and the capacity to sit with being perceived as insensitive when holding a difficult but necessary line. Clear values and genuine boundaries aren’t optional extras — they’re the model.

The world remains economically uncertain, socially polarised, and digitally relentless. People will encounter disagreement, rejection, imperfect institutions, and others who handle things badly. Preparing people for a world where everyone is perfectly considerate is not just unrealistic — it’s a disservice.