• DPMC Moderators: thegreenhand | tryptakid
  • Drug Policy & Media Coverage Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Drug Busts Megathread Video Megathread

When It Comes to Addiction, Drugs Are Not Really the Problem

neversickanymore

Moderator: DS
Staff member
Joined
Jan 23, 2013
Messages
30,627
When It Comes to Addiction, Drugs Are Not Really the Problem
By Stanton Peele / AlterNet April 29, 2016


Columbia University neuropsychologist Carl Hart has written a bestseller, High Price, comprising two related parts: his research with drugs showing that drugs’ effects are secondary in relation to the rewards associated with them (pay addicts enough and they quit), and his experience of life in the Miami ghetto, in which the introduction of crack to the community, and crack’s ultimate disappearance from it, had no impact on the social depredations pervading that community.

The bottom line of both experiences: drugs are not the problem.

But we never learn that. In fact, we have a government industry led by Nora Volkow, the acclaimed director of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, based on the propaganda that drugs are bad (note the term “drug abuse” in the title of her agency).

For Volkow, drugs change the brain to make people irresponsible and immoral. Ergo, when Volkow and her ilk cure drug addiction—the never-ending yellow brick road extending infintitely into the past and future—we’ll solve all of our social problems!

Oh, since Volkow was appointed director of the NIDA, in 2003, both heroin and prescription painkiller addiction and death rates have hit record levels. This remarkable achievement was at one time considered impossible, since it was felt that the two narcotic addiction habits substituted for one another, such that a decline in one inevitably produced a rise in the other.

The U.S. government, at its website, crows that Volkow’s “groundbreaking discoveries about the brain have revolutionized our understanding of drug addiction, enabling us to respond effectively to the problem.” Meanwhile, Volkow has performed the modern anti-miracle of creating simultaneous painkiller and heroin epidemics!

How did she do it? By explaining that drug use causes people to behave in criminal, antisocial ways no matter the conditions under which they live, to wit:

It is not enough to say that addiction is a chronic brain disease. What we mean by that is something very specific and profound: that because of drug use, a person’s brain is no longer able to produce something needed for our functioning and that healthy people take for granted, free will.
Volkow is the anti-Hart. Whereas Hart says “drugs are not the problem,” Volkow says “people's lives are not the problem—drug use and addiction are.”

Which brings us back to the crack scare, drug predators, and the Clintons.

Remember that Bill Clinton’s choice for drug czar was general Barry McCaffrey—itself a bizarre comment on our country’s century-long insanity about drug use. McCaffrey was anti-medical marijuana, a great D.A.R.E. backer, and—along with Bill and Hillary—he opposed needle exchange programs. Thus the Clinton administration’s policy led to tens of thousands of AIDS deaths among IV drug users.

Meanwhile, the Clinton drug policy excluded those convicted of even marijuana possession from receiving welfare, food stamps, or public housing. The logic: "If you use drugs, you’re not a real American.” This approach fed into Clinton’s role in the mass incarceration of African-Americans.

Do you see the pattern yet, a pattern from which we can never seemingly extricate ourselves, no matter how self-destructive the consequences? Yes, the biggest addiction of all is the one the U.S. has with its dysfunctional views of, and policies toward, drugs. This dysfunction, this addiction is, of course, rampant in the current political discourse. Drug use is a disease that only more treatment and scientific cures for addiction can solve!

Do you remember New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s viral video about his classmate who became addicted to drugs, left his family, and died alone in a motel? Do you recall the drug his friend used and died from? It was Percocet. Christie (and every other politician) calls for these three things in relation to the Christie’s friend’s story:

) Don’t imprison drug addicts. Fair enough. But Christie’s friend was never arrested or jailed. Of course, he wasn’t using a per se illegal drug.

2) PROVIDE MORE TREATMENT! Umm, only Christie said recounted how, over a decade leading to his death, his friend was “in and out of rehab.”

3) Limit access to narcotics. Really? If we hurt ourselves, have an operation, or our children have their wisdom teeth removed or break their leg, they shouldn’t get painkillers?

Why don’t we limit painkillers for you? As for me and my family, we prefer to pick and choose. My two-year-old grandson was born with malformed fingers requiring a difficult operation, after which he received painkillers. A two-year-old! Surely, he is a prime candidate for addiction—no drugs for him!

Okay, I’ll stop dilly-dallying. The correct answer is: 1) drugs will always be with us, we have to learn how to use and control them as an ordinary part of our lives; 2) we need to create, par Hart, communities and a world in which people find it worthwhile to live.

continued http://www.alternet.org/drugs/when-it-comes-addiction-drugs-are-not-really-problem
 
To put it quite simply for myself it was a specific set of circumstances that I allowed to occur as a heroin addict that furthered the life of me being a heroin addict. I had set aside my life goals, I was in a relationship with an addict (not as much of a problem as it should have been) but more important I vowed not to leave her until she was clean. Once we both got clean together I focused on my life and once that happened it was easy to get off and stay off methadone/opiates.

It should be noted that I do not suffer from any type of mental or emotional issues, I just couldnt leave someone I loved to suffer due to something we discovered together... but that is who I am I was ready to throw my life away for someone to discover theirs. I did this 2 times in my life and both people are coincidentally in better places now (not conceded enough to think i did it but I think through relentless care and support both people "found themselves" on their own)

But yeah its my personality that lead to addiction, my personality that lead me to value my ex's life over my own, and my personality that got me clean and keeps me that way. It definitely wasnt the drugs that kept me addicted or the methadone that got me clean, both had a role in the life they were furthering but neither "did it on their own"
 
I wonder, did they ever try the "pay someone 5 dollars and see if they wouldn't take a hit" thing with physically-addicted heroin addicts who were going through withdrawal? Or was that just something they did with psychostimulants like crack and meth

To me it doesn't seem particularly complicated...I think addiction is (primarily) environmentally-mediated but there is also a pharmacological component.
 
wouldnt agree at all try stoping (1000) valium 10mg habbit a week at that time no matter how much i would off been paid it just wouldnt happen its so dangerous ,could off died having mini fits and heart rate was 169BPM with no tapper i just stopped and was told basicly a well it will b out ur system in another 3 days n kept me in hospital , was chucked out with nothing and ended up back on them i had 2, then decided i need help here went 2 my GP and was instantly prescribed 30mg diaz a day 15mg zopiclone a night and still 60mg codeine phosphate 4 times a day , now after almost a year im still at 22mg diaz a day 7.5 zopiclone a night and the same codeine phosphate as i need for pain i do not abuse pain meds
 
I wonder, did they ever try the "pay someone 5 dollars and see if they wouldn't take a hit" thing with physically-addicted heroin addicts who were going through withdrawal? Or was that just something they did with psychostimulants like crack and meth

To me it doesn't seem particularly complicated...I think addiction is (primarily) environmentally-mediated but there is also a pharmacological component.

I think what's also important though to keep in mind is that the crack and meth users he has worked with did not choose to continue consuming their drug of choice until death. There was a notable pattern established where these patients would dose to a certain amount (which did not spiral upwards out of control, but rather, a plateauing was noted) and then virtually always chose to go with option B afterwards.

His book documents the studies in question in more detail, and frankly, I was blown away (as was Dr. Hart apparently) because the pre-conceived notion that they'd never stop using to the point of death from overdose if the drug was always available turned out to be categorically untrue.

Having gone through countless forced withdrawals from a costly opioid habit (mainly Morphine, Hydromorphone, Diacetylmorphine and Oxycodone) as well as a couple of occasions where I had to also withdraw from benzos at the same time (Xanax), I simply cannot imagine what manner of willpower would suffice to stop myself from using when it's available in order to stave off acute withdrawal symptoms. Either way, this is a great topic of discussion that should warrant further experimentation by those of us not hamstrung by an agenda bias (we sure as hell could use the data to aid us in reforming applicable laws and policies into a comprehensive plan backed by empirical data and absolutely zero superstition).
 
Top