• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Addiction - a lifelong 'disease?'

The term addiction has been applied to a plethora of behaviours in modern society. We have sex addiction, shopping addiction, gambling addiction, an addiction to food, and people who are addicted to games like world of warcraft and second life. However, the term has only been used in the modern sense since 1906 when it was used to describe a person who had become dependent on opium. The rapid adoption of the term in our modern society can probably be attributed to the elevation of the medical model in the Western world, where we pathologize anybody that does not conform to societal norms. In looking for a medical explanation for their behaviour we create a disease.

To move away from this model of pathologising, how about talking about dependence? Dependence is normal and can occur for not only Substances, but also Objects, Activities, and People (SOAP). Unlike addiction, which is dichotomous (i.e., your either an addict or you’re not), dependence is a continuous variable, and we all move up and down that continuum regarding different SOAPS over our lifetime.

I also propose that addiction is not a ‘medical’ problem, but a problem of excessive behaviours that are learnt, and thus can be un-learnt over time.
 
I agree that it is 100% down to individuals unique circumstances, instead of a predisposition to something when you are born, as in the cancer analogy.

Addiction, and other mental illnesses are not easily definable by the usual scientific means because the brain is so unique and so powerful, it will be a long time yet before we understand how it works and what causes which mental conditions, why and how. That doesn't mean that these conditions are fictionary, like God or the Tooth Fairy, it just means that we do not yet have the knowledge to understand how complex the human mind is.

Just because we can't explain it now, doesn't mean it doesn't exist at all. That's kind of like saying that we don't theoretically exist because nobody can figure out quantum mechanics, if that even exists.
 
Simple answer to this:

ADDICTION IS NOT A LIFELONG PROBLEM FOR MOST PEOPLE.

SOme people go through problematic phases but most do not deal with lifelong addiction.

The interesting fact in mainstream Western society and media is that if you were an alcoholic and then go to drinking 3 drinks a week, you are not considered an addict.

However if you smoke heroin for 3 months daily and were addicted and then go to smoking every once in a while you ARE considered an addict.

If this 'brandishing/labelling' was changed in society then addiction would for most people not be a lifelong problem as most people dont use hard on a daily base until their demise. Survival instinct kicks in for most.
 
some say its a cop out, but im a strong believer of mind over matter. ive been through some addictions that almost got the better of me. worst being meth. in my case i did need a wake up call, this being constant anxiety, growing debt, severe wight loss and a crazy case of hemorrhoids. the later being the biggest slap to the face. from that day i completely quit from being a 1 to 1.5g a week toker. it was fucking tough, and sure the craving still persist but i found other things to keep my occupied. hence my lack of involvment within this awesome community too.
 
Awww man, you've got the second most awesome avatar I've seen on the AU forum, and the other was a previous mod who's left.

Congrats on getting your meth problem under control.

The mind is certainly beautiful, a lot of people underestimate its power when you're talking about changing your life. Positive thinking itself does wonders.
 
^ in the same way that negative thinking ("only 2-3% of IV addicts ever recover") can work...the opposite of wonders.
this is a really great thread - thanks footscrazy.
 
I think people do need something like going to the gym to get addicted to, to keep off drugs. I have gone back to marijuana use because I have seen now without it I can't fight other addictions. I smoke daily again but not much at all, I find it far simpler to manage that addiction than what I would have from anything else and I have far more control.

I found last time I quit weed and almost everything else for about 6 months I really started feeling the need to use something more often and had a meth phase and have kinda been doing the same thing again at the moment but getting back into my buds.
 
i think the 2-3% of iv drug users are those who STOP the FIRST time they quit, i can honestly believe that 97/98% of users are in and out of sobriety/ their DOC for their entire life. ive been back and forth for a while now and it is interesting how the starter of this thread mentioned that once your "diagnosed" with addiction then it gets worse. and that seems to be true for everybody. but b4 i was an "addict" it went weed beer pills iv-pills iv-heroin crack iv-crack/heroin. so i would say i do believe in the concept of addiction and it being a disease. now somebody make a fucking pill so i dont have to go to aa meetings everyfucking day to not wanna kill myself and/or get high!
 
personally i believe "addiction" is if anything a psychological disorder and to call it a disease is fucking ludicrous. people to begin to rely on drugs once an everyday thing and when they cant get their drug of choice they simply saying "freak/sleep/anger..etc" anything but normal cause they cant deal. whether your physically dependent or not it seriously blows when dry. addicts can get better anytime they can muster up the will to do so. it was 100% that individuals choice in everything they chose to do that resulted in being addicted even if pressured to make some of those choices it doesn't matter IMO. shit look at Artie Lang.. that fucker just cant stop, but its not like that needle or line of blow was ever just a growing appendage of any sort that he had no idea was even their. No he sought it, bought it, shot it and blew it.

sorry for the rant i didnt read many of the posts but seing those with an actual disease and would do anything to cure it along with being a couple of the nicest, goodharted, friendliest people i have ever met and never did a thing to deserve their actual disease it annoys me when addiction is called such. theoretically if addiction were a disease its the only one you can give your self along with the luxary of being able to cure at any given moment one chooses. the remedy: man the fuck up and drop it if need be... life may suck for a while but you did it now you can fix it. OK DONE
 
addiction is not a disease

calling it a disease is such a cop out, its not like its some terrible affliction that we are born with and can do shit all about

if you change your habits from addict habits to sober habits and keep repeating these habits then it will create stronger pathways in your brain to keep repeating those habits

so we can always improve ourselves by confronting our innermost problems instead of running away from them (addiction)
 
Firstly great thread and great posts everyone.

Whilst I've never been truly addicted to anything I have had some friends who have battled addiction.
It's a hard concept to look in at, Before I knew anything about drugs the extent of my understanding of addiction is my mother who's gambling addiction took pretty much everything from my family.

I was young enough that being told my mother was addicted as a medical condition was a sufficient enough reason for me to have no resentment in any way as to me it was not her fault. But as I get older and have CHOSEN a life of drug use the path to addiction is something I've become interested in. Not that I ever want to be addicted to something, but I am curious as to how addictions reach the levels that they do.

I now see addiction as something that is caused by excessive use of a substance or activity. Take my mother for example, something that she knows the odds of winning at the pokies, and must have prior to becoming addicted realised that the amount was not healthy and that gambling was not the solution. At this point she should have seeked help opposed to doing it years later when she could not stop. For this reason my family does have the right to be annoyed, not that I really am as I have never seen money as a driving force to being a good person. But my father on the other hand still has an unreachable debt that he will never get out of due to an addiction that should have been addressed years earlier.

But now years later, my mum can go to the pokies once in awhile and have a gamble but is smart enough to never take cards as she still believes she will take out more money. However I'm not convinced of this, and this is where the labelling of an addict I think can be damaging. Sure it may be more difficult for people to enjoy doing only a little of something that they were previously addicted to do I definitely don't think it's impossible.

The fact that it is a relatively new term despite tobacco/cannabis/alcohol/psychadelics have been around for centuries/milleniums, to me indicates that it is currently a widely over used to term and still very much misunderstood. I'm not questioning the validity of Addiction only that the way it is seen of who is or who isn't an addict is complex and not enough is understood. As numerous people have said a lot of people replace one addiction with another weather it be from one drug to another, or AA, NA meetings themselves or even the internet. As I stated before I see addiction as something that is caused by excessive use of a substance or activity but the term addict is thrown around far too loosely and I think with this means more people ultimately do become addicted as they believed they were addicts when really it's just habit. Also excessive use of a substance or activity, I know people who go surfing every day they're not working but no one considers them addicted to surfing, they simply love it. Many of my friends go for a jog every day, not just for fitness but because it's an activity that they do daily but once again no one labels them addicts for doing something they like to do. Skin cancer is one of the biggest killers in Australia so you could argue that spending additional whole days at the beach in the long term is more likely to cause death then someone who's addicted to coffee or the gym (because it's indoors). Yet theres lots of cases of people who are addicted to the gym, but not for jogging or a sport?

Andy Murray trains for tennis EVERY day of the year including all christmas and all other public holidays. But no one considers him addicted because it's to achieve something. Maybe I'm getting off topic but everyone knows people who are addicts (primarily cigarettes) and whilst that on a health level is one of the worst things for you people don't seem to have a stigma towards it that they do with all drug addictions. People see the bad health affects from it and may dislike their friends smoking, but when people are getting high smoking weed every night they see it as much worse despite the evidence showing the contrary. I smoke cigarettes often, I didn't have my first smoke of a cigarette until I was 21, since then my smoking has slowly increased but I still rarely buy decks and when I do it's to mix with weed or if I'm already very drunk. But I smoke nearly every day as my housemate and work mates always offer them to me, my friends have been saying to me lately that they think I'm addicted to smoking, the only way to prove to them that I'm not would be to stop all together, but I don't need to justify and stop doing something I enjoy because of what they believe opposed to what they know. I guess my fear would be to become addicted, but to me I've never had truly craved something to which I would consider myself being at all addicted.

I don't believe that addictions can't be stopped. and I whole heartadly think the once an addict always an addict is a load of garbage. It's a prime example of something my father has told me since I was a kid because he was raised on this belief. But if it were true much more of the country would be addicts and it's simply not the case, I have no intention of ever ceasing drug use and I also have no intention of ever becoming addicted But I bet their would be people who would argue the contrary, people think that if someone doesn't stop taking a substance when asked to that they are in some way an addict. When no that is simply someone choosing to do what they like to do.
Is addiction really an incurable disease, meaning that after addiction all future drug use will become progessively more damaging?
Click to expand...
I believe for a minority life long addiction is a serious condition (I think condition is a better term disease) and for these select few I think any further drug use WITH the drug they were addicted to, yes it will progressively do more damage, but I know way too many people who have considerred themselves addicts at a previous point in time (mostly former meth addicts) who can now have it once in awhile without fear of falling back into addiction. This once again backs up my thoughts that it is only a small minority of "addicts" who can never go back and try whatever it was that at one point in their life they most likely loved.

EDIT: I just wanted to add that I think a prime example of addiction getting worse once being labelled an addict is best shown by an episode of southpark where Randy gets labelled an alcoholic after getting D.U.I, and once he finds out that it's a disease he gets much worse very quickly.
>>> Link of Randy getting his D.U.I for all you southpark lovers. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc0sA2WsCgY
 
Last edited:
It seems a lot of people like to aggressively attack addiction and/or addicts. I would guess these are the same people who would gather around the fire and cheer as "witches" were burnt at the stake.

There was a time when the frontal lobotomy was a legitimate medical procedure for all kinds of psychological disorders.

I don't believe it is a "disease", however it is not some fictional, make believe problem stemming from a bad attitude or lack of willpower. Addiction, not just drug addiction, is definitely a disorder.

It's easy to say that addiction is all in a persons head, or depressed people should just cheer up.

Unless you have experienced something first hand, it's pretty hard to understand it.
 
Interesting article......

The Role of Family History

Addiction is due 50 percent to genetic predisposition and 50 percent to poor coping skills. This has been confirmed by numerous studies. One study looked at 861 identical twin pairs and 653 fraternal (non-identical) twin pairs. When one identical twin was addicted to alcohol, the other twin had a high probability of being addicted. But when one non-identical twin was addicted to alcohol, the other twin did not necessarily have an addiction. Based on the differences between the identical and non-identical twins, the study showed 50-60% of addiction is due to genetic factors.(1) Those numbers have been confirmed by other studies.(2)

The children of addicts are 8 times more likely to develop an addiction. One study looked at 231 people who were diagnosed with drug or alcohol addiction, and compared them to 61 people who did not have an addiction. Then it looked at the first-degree relatives (parents, siblings, or children) of those people. It discovered that if a parent has a drug or alcohol addiction, the child had an 8 times greater chance of developing an addiction.(3)

Why are there genes for addiction? We all have the genetic predisposition for addiction because there is an evolutionary advantage to that. When an animal eats a certain food that it likes, there is an advantage to associating pleasure with that food so that the animal will look for that food in the future. In other words the potential for addiction is hardwired into our brain. Everyone has eaten too much of their favorite food even though they knew it wasn't good for them.

Although everyone has the potential for addiction, some people are more predisposed to addiction than others. Some people drink alcoholically from the beginning. Other people start out as a moderate drinker and then become alcoholics later on. How does that happen?

Repeatedly abusing drugs or alcohol permanently rewires your brain. If you start out with a low genetic predisposition for addiction, you can still end up with an addiction. If you repeatedly abuse drugs or alcohol because of poor coping skills, then you'll permanently rewire your brain. Every time you abuse alcohol, you'll strengthen the wiring associated with drinking, and you'll chase that buzz even more. The more you chase the effect of alcohol, the greater your chance of eventually developing an addiction.

Your genes are not your destiny. The 50% of addiction that is caused by poor coping skills is where you can make a difference. Lots of people have come from addicted families but managed to overcome their family history and live happy lives. You can use this opportunity to change your life. (Reference: www.AddictionsAndRecovery.org)
What Is Your Family History?

Most people don't know their family history of addiction very well. Addiction is not the sort of thing that most families talk about. Not too long ago you could have a raging alcoholic in your family and nobody would talk about it. Or they would make some quaint remark like, "Oh he drinks a little too much." There was so little people could do about addiction before that there was no point in talking about it.

But now that you can do something about addiction, a family history is worth talking about. Once you stop using and tell your family that you're in recovery, that's often when they will tell you about the family secrets. That's when family members will sometimes come out of the closet and tell you their stories.

Let your coping skills be the legacy you pass on to your children. Don't let your genes be the only legacy you pass on to your children. Your children are more likely to have an addiction because of your addiction. But their genes don't have to be their destiny. You can help your children lead happy lives by teaching them healthy coping skills – by being an example with your recovery.
Is Addiction a Disease?

Addiction is like most major diseases. Consider heart disease, the leading cause of death in the developed world. It's partly due to genes and partly due to poor life style choices such as bad diet, lack of exercise, and smoking. The same is true for other common diseases like adult-onset diabetes. Many forms of cancers are due to a combination of genes and life style. But if your doctor said that you had diabetes or heart disease, you wouldn't think you were bad person. You would think, "What can I do to overcome this disease?" That is how you should approach addiction.

Addiction is not a weakness. The fact that addiction crosses all socio-economic boundaries confirms that addiction is a disease. People who don't know about addiction will tell you that you just need to be stronger to control your use. But if that was true then only unsuccessful people or unmotivated people would have an addiction, and yet 10% of high-functioning executives have an addiction.

If you think of addiction as a weakness, you'll paint yourself into a corner that you can't get out of. You'll focus on being stronger and trying to control your use, instead of treating addiction like a disease and focusing on stopping your use.
Cross Addiction

You can become addicted to any drug, if you have a family history of addiction. If at least one of your family members is addicted to alcohol, you have a greater chance of developing an addiction to any other drug. Cross addiction occurs because all addictions work in the same part of the brain. If your brain is wired so that you're predisposed to one addiction, then you're predisposed to all addictions.

This is especially important for women who may come from alcoholic families, but who often develop addictions that go undetected, like addictions to tranquilizers, pain relievers, or eating disorders.

One addiction can lead to other addictions, and one drug can make you relapse on another drug. That's one of the consequences of a brain that's wired for addiction. Suppose you're addicted to cocaine. If you want to stop using cocaine then you have to stop using all addictive drugs including alcohol and marijuana. You may never have had a problem with either of them, but if you continue to use alcohol or marijuana, even casually, they'll eventually lead you back to your drug of choice. Recovery requires total abstinence.

How does cross addiction cause relapse:

All addictions work in the same part of the brain. Addiction is addiction is addiction. Therefore one drug can lead you back to any other drug.
Even moderate drinking or smoking marijuana lowers your inhibitions, which makes it harder for you to make the right choices.
If you stop using your drug of choice but continue to use alcohol or marijuana, you're saying that you don't want to learn new coping skills and that you don't want to change your life. You're saying that you want to continue to rely on drugs or alcohol to escape, relax, and reward yourself. But if you don't learn those new skills, then you won't have changed, and your addiction will catch up with you all over again.
Click to expand...

http://addictionsandrecovery.org/is-addiction-a-disease.htm
 
Not to be all semantic, but how is "addiction" being defined here? Physical dependence vs. withdrawal? People who have a never ending love affair with getting high? I can't really imagine my life without drugs. I know my dopamine and serotonin systems are configured in such a way that I find it hard to lead a consistently content and satisfied life. I've compensated with spirituality, healthy lifestyle, and moderate drug use; but the way I am, regardless if it's nature or nurture, seems very difficult if not impossible to change.

But on that note... humans evolved alongside altering substances and have always used them. I mean, look at someting as basic as alcohol. It's been with us for thousands of years and humans have been getting shitfaced on it the entire time. Maybe in a more balanced society that isn't so anti-drug, people would use drugs as healthy aids to lead happier lives? Maybe our neurochemical evolution is incomplete and still has its shortcomings, so using substances from nature is a kind of medicine that helps us?

Unless we're talking about straight physical addiction... then I don't know the answer. I just think the reasoning can't be so black and white. Addiction is not a disease. It's something that needs treatment but pathologizing it in such a concrete way seems off base. We should continue to try addressing why people are addicts instead of just assuming addiction is something to be stamped out. Maybe in a more balanced world people wouldn't become self-destructively addicted as they do?
 
You read a lot of posts on boards, more so American, that begin with wtte "firstly I'm not a Junkie, I took my meds as prescribed". These benzo, oxy or whatever addicts don't consider themselves "diseased".

A disease is not a normal state of physical functioning but everyone will get addicted to drugs if they take enough. Some people just choose something else to fulfill their life. They can be really "committed" to achieving at sport or "passionate" about painting, but they are not considered diseased.
 
Busty St Clare said:
I find it strange that someone is not cured even though they choose not to take drugs anymore. Perhaps what they have discovered is the same self control or limit that every other human exercises when they wake up each day. What if we decided that every human is born addicted and some people just find it easier than others not to use daily, just as some people can eat what they want and never put on weight? Surely most humans share the same pleasure centres. A person who once sped their car still remembers the thrill of driving fast but they have decided to stop as they grow up because they realise how stupid it is. We don't label these people irresponsible because of past actions, so perhaps we should give recovered addicts more credit for not using drugs.

Defining addiction as a disease does allow some addicts to justify their predicament. Like a fat person who shrugs off the fact that they have an under active thyroid without putting in any effort to exercise. The human mind is still very much a murky medical organ, one that is difficult to map, unlike the heart or kidneys. Memories and consciousness are as easy to define as your soul, yet we want to still use the terms disease and treatment in the same vein as other medical conditions simply because doctors all train in the same schools.

When does a addict become cured? It seems if you once had a habit you are never allowed to enjoy drugs again, least you be told you have relapsed. Why should a reformed addict be shamed into thinking he still has a problem if his current use is no different that a recreational user?
Click to expand...

Back in 97 I had a $500 a week meth habit I know I was spun (insane) I did a good job so far as I know
thax selective memory. I stay away from meth, it doesn't agree, and once bitten twice shy. My life felt
hollow & empty for sooo many many years following my quitting meth in 97. I just kept going, felt like
automatic much of the time but I did a decent job & my warranty return rate was very low, as always.
What will help You The Most to Quit is to Respect Yourself--I never bought the greater power thing for very long,
but I respect others & that means I can also Respect Myself. I never cheated when I quit cause I Refused to Look
at My Face in the mirror---mebbe the next day, but eventually It was gonna happen & I Refused to let it go for a lil bag
of dope. I had & have much more going for me that that & You do Too.
Can't tell ya how many pkgs of meth I forced myself to flush once I realized what had been going on during my
latest bout of insanity... You Can Do It & You can Win
 
I was reading an article a few months ago that said scientists can now very accurately guess things like who will become heavy drinkers from a brain activity scan at a young age.

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/10/25/brain-scan-predicts-addiction/ heres another article on predicting relapse

I think everyone has vices, its making them healthy and maintainable that's the hard bit because the unhealthy ones are almost always the easiest, most instantly satisfying and unhealthy. Giving myself too much spare time is my worst enemy.

Had a friend go into rehab for months after going into psychosis from meth. After months of learning how to live sober life, deal with shit without drugs, hearing the whole never doing drugs again/new beginnings type thing, its been like a month since end of rehab and i got msged asking for shards =\ It just doesnt feel like the right approach to me
 
Though it does help some I think the addiction as disease/recovery, but never recovered mentality is the single worst thing going for those who deal with quitting. I basically couldn't deal with the whole NA/AA/step type programs although it did amuse me to see all the people chugging coffee and chainsmoking one cigarette off the one before it and fearing missing a meeting like it was a drug itself. About six months in I had a realization that really I didn't need it and just didn't do drugs for a few years. For me at least moderation is no big deal. I didn't do drugs because I was addicted to them; I did them because I liked getting really fucked up. The one substance I would say I'm addicted to is cigarettes (but I like them too) and just really have no desire to quit. Maybe it's different for some I don't know, but I can't imagine HAVING to get to a meeting.
 
I think it would depend on the person, and what kind of addiction we're talking.

If you're someone who's prone to psychological dependencies, whether it be to drugs, shopping, eating or whacking off furiously for hours on end in bathroom stalls, I could see a potential life long problem come to the surface.

However, maybe a purely physical addiction could completely disappear after abstenance (the length of which depending on the drug). E.G. Someone who has been taking OxyContin purely medicinally for years.

If the cravings and the psychological dependency aren't present, I would imagine that all would be well after overcoming the physicall withdrawal symptoms.

Make sense to anyone aside from myself?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top