• Welcome Guest

    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
    Fun 💃 Threads Overdosed? Click
    D R U G   C U L T U R E

Do You Believe Addiction is a Disease, Or... [POLL!]

Addiction is...

  • Total voters
    365
the reason that the "but, i have a disease!" is so popular is that it gives people a way out. they believe that they were born their addiction, therefore they are not responsible for their own behaviour, which is a load of shit.
we believe that substance addiction is a disease because we WANT to believe it.
it makes us feel better to think that our problems are beyond our control. we humans desperately search for something else to blame things on.
you always see the 'recovering addicts' on TV. how often do you hear about people who had a drug or alcohol problem and quit on their own, without any treatment? even though it happens all the time, you don't see it often. these people don't feel the need to run to the media.

disease concept is also so popular is because of greed and $$$$$$$$$$$$
substance abuse treatment programs are usually private agencies that are run for profit.
there is so much rivalry among treatment centres/rehabs. they will say practically anything to keep up their cash flow. they use over-statement & exaggeration to convince people they need treatment there or else they'll die or whatnot.
convince them they can't do it on their own.
It is true that an addict in long binge or a junkie in misery from withdrawal can't reasonably be expected to get up and walk away.
but drug use is a choice, the drug is not literally making you use it.
AA and NA say that addiction is a disease. There is no cure, apparently. the addict must never have another drug or sip of alcohol. many use the disease as an excuse to relapse. it is simply a personality/character flaw that can be altered. you just have to want to, & realise you CAN.
in some cases it is a disease or a genetic defect, some people are born with naturally less dopamine than others, but that still doesn't make it a literal disease.
CANCER is a disease.
after yrs of drug use, users alter their brain chemistry dramatically. i most certainly have, i felt as though meth was my only hope in living, i depended on it. but not for a second did i blame my brain chem that i've fucked up. true it was the only thing that made me happy.
but, i will blame myself, nobody & nothing else.
 
you make some good points claire and I agree with you on most of them.

I think that having a genetic predisposition to addiction by itself is not a disease. Making the choice to abuse drugs is not a disease.

But after abusing an addictive substance for a long time, experiencing the biological and psychological changes that make your DOC more important to you than life itself, and then continuing that abuse beyond the point where any sane person would venture.... it becomes more than just poor judgment. It's an illness. You are not healthy.

At that point, it share so many similarities to a disease that it just makes sense to call it a disease. Like that old saying... if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck... then it's a duck.

Addicts typically have lost all hope that they can recover. Their own repeated failed attempts reinforce their belief that they do not have what it takes to beat their addiction. In truth, they do have what it takes. But they have to believe it. It's much more effective to convince them that a power outside themselves can beat their addiction. That's why the 12 step programs work. That and the support they get from people who have gone through it themselves.

This does NOT mean that an addict is not responsible for the decisions that led to their addiction. But we're human and we all make mistakes.

That's my $.02
 
eon_blue said:
True, but it's still a disease.

I could have diabetes and still choose whether or not to take my insulin, or follow a proper diet. Having the disease doesn't dictate my actions, it only works to define the consequences of any actions I choose to take.
Click to expand...

So you're saying if you stop taking insulin for a week or 10 days diabetes goes away?
 
Addiction is classified in the DSM IV as a mental disease, I agree with this statement, but I also tend to agree that a lot of times this is used as an excuse... I think the context of one's situation helps classify whether they have an addiction "disease" or not
 
I can't be certain, but I'm fairly certain DSM IV classifies them as DISORDERS not DISEASES. A disease is something foreign to the human body (besides a bodily malfunction, like auto-immune), a disorder is domestic, based in the mind, primarily. I could be wrong though. Addiction is NOT a disease, it IS a disorder.
 
disease disease....
my feeling with meth are not different than my feeling with my eating disorder and i consider that a disease, not a disorder... i
 
Last edited:
I've beat one addiction that addiction lasted for about 15 years, if I believed it was a disease I probably wouldn't got out of it..

A disease makes it sound like an excuse to not face upto it and say this is down to MY will power. And make a personal choice to quit.

If I said I'm diseased I would be prone to say I couldn't help it if I failed, and make it more acceptable and excusable to fail.
'he can't help it,,,, its a disease ' sort of stinking thinking.

Instead of

' he fell of the wagon again, maybe one day he will find the WILL POWER to quit .'

Its just a matter of word play on puts responsibility on the object of the addiction and the other on the person themselves.

I decided to quit my addiction to alcohol, I wasn't diseased I had and have a choice. so as I quit, on the disease theory, does that mean I'm disease free now? Or does it mean I still have the disease and if I CHOOSE to go back, that it not my fault cause it is a disease.

Disease my ass.. Addictive personality and susceptibility defiantly but give me responsibility and free will anytime, and not blame the object of my addiction for my choices.
 
i understand the theory of "disease = lack of responsibility" but to me my addiction is on a level that consumes me physically and mentally 24/7. it's a self induced disease but so is lung cancer if you smoke three packs a day for twenty years. it's not a way for me to justify my behavior or seek sympathy, it's simple what i see it as being.
you can of course cure yourself from many diseases simply by using will power and doing what you're supposed to do. but disorder or addiction doesn't imply the complete hold it has on a person physically and mentally to me.
 
claire22 said:
DSM IV is full of shit & needs to re-classify what a disease is.
Click to expand...

lmao, sure, because you say so....

No offense, but I think you're a little shy in the credentials department. I swear, only an addict can be so egocentric as to think that they're even remotely qualified to argue the conclusions of an entire field of well-studied medicine. It really is rather amusing.
 
It's not as if I was a useless junkie who dropped out of school at 13. I studied Psychology for 2 years, we studied this disease-disorder debate for a whole semester. This isn't coming out of nowhere.
 
eon_blue said:
I swear, only an addict can be so egocentric as to think that they're even remotely qualified to argue the conclusions of an entire field of well-studied medicine. It really is rather amusing.
Click to expand...

quoted for truth
 
i'm not a doctor, but---
what i GATHER from my therapist/programs i've been in is that DSM isn't really used by anyone but insurance companies who use the guidelines to determine whether or not they're going to have to pay for shit, and professors in their introductory psych classes to teach the basics of different conditions.
there's definitely some value in DSM since obviously it's a collection of determinations that come from years of thought and research done by extremely intelligent and educated professionals, but it's really the end all be all.... ask an anorexic to explain what an eating disorder and ask a therapist to explain it, and the the anorexic 's explanation is going to have a lot more insight and truth to it than the therapist.
 
I don't have the time to read this thread but I say "no" it's not a disease.

Here is my personal experience that tends to lead me to beleive it's not a disease:

In my very late teens and early 20's I was an a pretty severe alcohol abuser. By today's loose definition, at least by anyone in AA's standards, I would have been considered an alcoholic.

At the time I definitely had NO control over how much I drank once I started drinking. If I had 1 beer I was having 20. There is NO WAY I could have 1 or 2 beers and just relax and leave the rest alone if there was more to be drank.

Through a long series of events, basically through the process of maturing, through reversing the psychological damage that had been done to me in childhood... I became a changed person.

I went through a period of complete abstinance from alcohol.

For the past 8 years or so I have drank socially (although I do get drunk about 1x/year- in my own home, preplanned, and always safely).

Now I can have bottles of liquor, beer, wine, in my house and not touch it for weeks or even months. I can drink 1 drink or 2 drinks and not crave any more alcohol. I can even drink 1/2 of a drink and not think about drinking more.

When at parties I drink 0-2 drinks if I am driving (which I usually am) and very, very seldomly drink any more than that even if I am not. If I am at a party at my own house it's the same thing- 0-2 drinks 9 times out of 10.

There is no 'physical trigger' set off in my body once I put alcohol in my system.

I used to drink like a massive drunk because I had massive problems. I still have problems but over time they have lessened, plus I have developed other coping skills to deal with my problems so I don't drown myself in booze.

When I was 19 and I was at a keg party I would drink more beer than anyone else there PLUS I would also drink 1/2 pint of whiskey. I would often wind up wondering away from the party by myself and wind up in a blackout in a different town (taking the train to other places), often dangerous areas even if I was sober. I would wind up shitfaced and trapped 25 miles from home with no way to get home as the trains were closed and I was in a blackout, all sorts of drama and troubles on a routine basis.

Now.... sorry..... no drama or troubles connected to alcohol with me. No 'compulsion' to drink once I start drinking, NONE! Before, forget about it.... there was a constant compulsion whether I had drank anything or not.... because I was a tourmented soul.

Now I drink in 1 year the ammt of alcohol I used to drink every other night (the only reason I didn't drink nightly is because I drank so much the hangovers were terrible and I felt too sick the next day/night so I would drink every other day).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top