drug preference theory

[aliengrrl]

i would love to know how our preference for particular drugs is determined. there seems to be many factors.
i do think that most people who love meth/amphetamines feel coke is inferior and vice-versa. but i have some friends who are just general stimulant junkies. i prefer meth to any other drug.
i first used opiates to deal with menstrual cramps. i was took one perc 10 and i passed out blissfully. later i took tylenol #3s for about 5 days for cramps, and they started to make me sick. pretty much opiates make me puke alot. i've only done oxys twice and both times i puked alot and felt no euphoria.

 

[stardreamer]

Why do some people enjoy certain sports and not others, certain foods but not others, certain movies but not others.
I think the underlying answer is either very simple or very complex, but wholly the same.
Unfortunately I don't have it.

 

[quale]

Interesting question. Im sure a quite amusing discussion of drug of choice in relation to musical affininity could be started. Probably more appropriate to another forum however...at least for me the psychedelics/e like compounds produce much stronger musical affinity than narcotics.
Sure I tend to like harder music on narcotics but on an LSD trip the music means the world while I would even let someone play John Cage for another line of coke.
Now for the question of differnt personality types liking differnt drugs all I can offer is what appears to be the unfounded speculations of people with initials after their names.
The suggestion was that stimulants were drive enhancing reward mechanisms, the phrase used was the pleasures of the hunt or something like that. In other words they stimulated subsystems which generated more immediate craving (run faster, jump higher etc..). While things like the opiates (and at least some papers suggest MJ reward is mediated through the mu opiate subsystem) were somehow satiating pleasures. Usefull for things like sex or eating. Sure they cause future craving but for the moment you are satisfied.
The little experimental work seemed to suggest that some depressed patients would respond to merely imaprime (I know that is spelled wrong) and these often had difficulty sleeping etc.. while other atypical cases who could sleep and function etc.. fine but just didn't find pleasure in everyday activities required that I drug (I think it was one of the first tricyclics) plus amphetamine.
Damn't why don't they prescribe desoxyn for depression.
Also at least ancedotal remarks on this board seem to connect stimulant liking to poor self image/confidence. This would make sense with the woman thing as well given the much greater concern women seem to show over appearance and similar matters in our society.

 

[stardreamer]

Quale: I dig your ideas man I hope I took your post correctly (i have a lil' trouble reading straight after a jay), but I agree that stimulants satisfy a gap in confidence and motivation. Maybe users of stimulants are going back to them in order to push their life along in a way that they are lacking to do themselves.
Ah yes, and imipramine (u were close !). My mom actually took that back in like 1985 for depression, and yeah I believe it was one of the earlier tricyclics (i believe the brand was tofranil). Horrible side effects to it though, at least compared to today's standards of antidepressants. And god if only I could tell my doc,"You know this Zoloft just doesn't cut it, how bout' some good old desoxyn!"
A dude can dream!
Fuq this java chip ice cream is good!

 

[drab4]

Well to be honest I don't prescribe to most of these theories.
In my experience it's like stardreamer said, just a matter of personal preference. I certainly wouldn't say that someone's sex or intelligence has anything to do with what drugs they like.
I personally like all drugs except for weed. My favourites are stimulants.

 

[AbraMontague]

My grand theory:
Gender isn't a direct factor in choice of drug.
Agitated, anxious depressives prefer tranquilizers, opiates, and alcohol to soothe their mental state. Stimulants and even cannabis can send these people into an anxiety/panic attack.
Manic, hyperactive, unfocused (and lethargic depressive) types prefer stimulants and cigarettes. It helps them focus on and channel their energy into something more productive. Whether any one person likes coke or meth better is toss up.
I won't name any other groups of people although many more come to mind. Since substance abuse disorder is almost always comorbid with other psychological conditions, it is easier to look at which comorbidities are associated with which types of drug use. I have seen a few studies make mention of this trend, but personal preference is always a factor (and is subjective).
And I don't mean to turn this thread into a definition of substance abuse issue. Anyone who habitually uses a drug (whether or not they are actually addicted) probably has at least one psychological disorder. It might even be subclinical but it is a fact that substance abuse occurs more frequently in people with such disorders. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[antEater]

I'm pretty sure that some of you might be right, but here is the true "GRAND THEORY" about drugs:
Everyone is wired different.
It's just that simple. It's easy to see if we separate people into 2 different groups; recreational users and abusers (and non-users, but that's moot).
Recreational users, generally, have their try with whatever they're offered (alcohol, nicotine, marijuana, etc.). And they might stick with it, or they just might not. And they might like one more than the other, but generally people like this just do it when it's in front of their face and don't think much about it. You could even call it a type of "binge-using." It's there, you use it til it's gone or whatever, then it's done and you're over it.
Now you have the abusers (*raises his hand*). This can range anywhere from the "casual" abuser to the hard-core abuser. Now, for them (us), I take whatever makes me feel better or accomplishes whatever I set out to do to myself. Now, I like MDMA/MDA. It's sweet. I do it every once in a while, don't yearn for it, and that's that. Same with other drugs. So, I guess it shows that I like stimulants. But at the same time, I feel the same way about opiates. They're cool, I enjoy them and I will use them when given the chance, but again, it's okay if they're not there. So I like fast and slow. Kinda like I like my music too, ironically enough.
Maybe I'm just not enough of an abuser to really be able to make it as cookie-cutter as that, but I think that people's brains are all wired differently and there is no TRUE way to tell how someone will like something. I mean, I'm the one that thinks he would like the "Raver Speedball" (i.e. MDA and Opiates).

 

[antEater]

Originally posted by AbraMontague:
And I don't mean to turn this thread into a definition of substance abuse issue. Anyone who habitually uses a drug (whether or not they are actually addicted) probably has at least one psychological disorder. It might even be subclinical but it is a fact that substance abuse occurs more frequently in people with such disorders. Take it for what it's worth.
Abra - I don't think that sweeping judgements like that are necessarily true. I think that it could be said that people that are addicted to something (not even necessarily drugs) are MORE likely to have some sort of disorder, but I don't think it's always the case. I habitually do some drugs (as in every day, sure it's only marijuana, but still), but I have the ability to stop. And I think that's what part of the dividing point of your issue above; being able to make a conscious, successful effort to stop. I can (literally) stop whenever I want, I just don't want to because I enjoy the way that it makes me feel. But I have and will stop for amounts of time because it doesn't appeal to me.
Also, there is the whole issue of psychological versus physical addiction. There are lots of people who want to get off of a drug, but are unable to because of the physical detriment that it takes on their bodies; just go check out The Dark Side.
I'm not saying I do or don't agree with you, but I just think that there's a lot more to this issue than is just black or white.

 

[fairnymph]

I'm an agitated, anxious depressive type who loves stimulants and detests downers.

 

[SovietContin]

I have known a ton of drug users in my day. I don't believe this theory is accurate at all.
There are so many variables into what plays into determining a persons drug of choice, I don't believe any one person could think of them all.
I can only come up with three factors that even seem to be consistent when it comes to determining a drug of choice.
-The first one would be availability. You can only use what you can get ahold of. Someone may find a drug of choice simply because they never had access to something they might try that could possibly be something they would prefer more.
-The second one would be what the people you hang out with are using. People tend to prefer what others in their social circle use.
-The third would be stigmas attached to drugs. Many people will not try certain drugs because they believe they're bad. This limits the scope of what they'd be willing to try.
Another thing is that many people go through phases with their drug use. The first drug I ever tried was Tylenol 3. However despite easy access to painkillers, I totally prefered psychedelics to any other drugs. Later I got into ecstasy. Eventually I would use anything that would fuck me up. I quit using drugs altogether for a while. Now I only use opiates. Did I come around full circle? No. Opiates are simply the only drugs I can use in any situation without people noticing I'm on drugs. I can preform daily tasks on them.
Really hardcore drug addicts tend to gravitate to three drugs: alcohol, heroin and cocaine. Sometimes they will just use one of the above. Sometimes they'll use all three.
As for generalizations, there are always exceptions. Always. I know lots of girls that hate cocaine. I know lots of girls that are daily potsmokers. In my circle of friends, people will use cocaine assuming it's good quality as often as they will meth. It just depends on what's easier to get. The guy that got me into heroin alternates between that, alcohol and cocaine. As for intelligence, I've never seen a type of drug or types of drugs intelligent people as a whole tend to go towards over others. I know extremely intelligent people that use every type of drug you could think of. And I know extremely stupid people that use every type of drug you could think of.
I'm sure someone could even try to say the type of music a person listens to influences what kind of drugs they'll use.

 

[stardreamer]

Originally posted by SovietContin:

I'm sure someone could even try to say the type of music a person listens to influences what kind of drugs they'll use.
Yeah the ever fucked up US Government.

 

[sparklr]

availability, as soviet said, is a large factor, but...
I'm an extremely laid-back person. Quiet. Obedient. blahblahblah. But...I'm extremely driven. I like being amped. I like getting things done. I like the succession of action A to action B to action C. I like the feeling of being efficient.
so...I have this proclivity to stimulants, theoretically and otherwise. Cocaine is widely available where I am. And within the circles I find myself in.
I shoot it, yes, but that's a different thing all together.
There's a certain 'lull' that goes on between what I think and feel and what I can express. A tendency to 'overanalyse'. I don't want to sit in a room and think. But i know I have a natural tendency to do so...so, being the extremist I am and searching for some kind of balance...
I like action. It's not specifically about dopomine receptors and fulfilling a certain sort of void in my reinforcement/reward system...
I think it may be about not wanting to feel so introverted. to get in the game. to have my thoughts and feelings not just be these fragmented things that 'sort of' go on in my head. to feel more solid and substantial. as a human being.
I'm not an actor (I'm a screenwriter), but in my dabbling in the craft, I took this class. Voice and movement. It's more about utilizing your body, and seeing it as a tool for things. Some people can just speak directly from their diaphragm and project their voice across a room with little effort. You know, people with these booming, rich voices. It's about vibrato, it's about the size of your diaphragm, it's about all of these things...but what I'm concerned with is it's path.
my voice gets stuck in my throat before it hits the air. it gets filtered. there's a roadblock of sorts. it's similar with what I feel.
It's the most important thing to me. Knowing what i feel. Being human and things.
Sometimes, one just wants things to be more direct...things can swirl around in one's head if one lets them. If that's what one's been doing all their life.
this has become this psychological tangent, but...it's about physicality, things one might be lacking in their brain chemistry, it's about the availability of things (with all this being said, I'm sure I could have started a large opiate habit if that was what I was around, what I could get, etc), it's about recreation, it's about stigma, it's about behavioral patterns.
I'm a stimulant junkie by nature, but I like alcohol (maybe also by nature; genetically). I'm not too much into hallucinagens or opiates. But even trying it in in my recent and late drug history, IV dilaudid *waves to a friend in NJ* is amazing.
I don't know, I'm completely straying here, but with many of these things, you obtain so much control, that you give up all control. becauseit's so direct. it's like, a stalemate or something...a paradox, I don't know...one of those things. Irony.
...too...many...words...
it's almost like this post in general. I couldn't have spoken all these words to someone in a normal conversation. I would have kind of known what I was feeling about the situation, but taking a substantial stance occurs like three steps after in the grand scheme of things. by that time, we're somewhere else entirely.

 

[Brainrape]

So far this has been an intresting discussion, but only Soviet's post smacks of any actual truth and not just flawed conjecture...
I absolutley fucking hate getting technical but in this case I'm going to have too..
All the theroies presented so far suffer from a variation of post hoc fallacy. See many things in this world follow patterns without actually being causally related. So to presume the probablility of causality from sequences or correlations is setting yourself up for failure. To establish the probability of a causal connection between two events, controls must be established to rule out other factors such as chance or some other unknown causal factor...
Having established that, all of this goes back to what I think the inital theories presented suffer from, what is called the clustering illusion...
The clustering illusion is the intuition that random events which occur in clusters are not really random events. The illusion is due to selective thinking based on a false assumption (Tack on some confirmation bias, subjective validation and just a hint of wishful thinking and you can understand how people can actually believe in such utter bullshit like ESP or Meyer-Briggs tests). Finding a statistically unusual occurance in any area fundamentally depends on the boundries of your area. However, such results do not indicate that an event is not a chance event. In fact, such results are predictable by the laws of chance. Rather than being signs of non-randomness, they are actually signs of randomness...
So, if you notice people with a prediliction for one drug who abstain from another, or think intelligence, and to a lesser extent gender, have any definite bearing at all on something with as many variables as drug use, you're deluding yourself and being stupid...
Which brings me back to Soviet's post which I feel touches on the only definite and observable influences on drug preferance.
1. Availability/Price- If it's not available at all then you cannot develop any preferance for it. I only mention cost/price because it works as a subset to availability, many times it's available but you just can't afford it. Many an addiction has been prevented because it just costs too fucking much. (Personally, I love doing both meth and coke "recreationally" for different reasons, but since I have to pay regular prices for coke and next to nothing for meth, I tend to "prefer" meth).
2. Social Stigma/Socical Circle- The reason this applies is because many people are heavily influenced on what they will and absolutley will not do according to social stigma. If you will not try a drug than you cannot prefer it. People are basically mindless sheep. This is best evidenced by the drug war in general, and the singular demonization of heroin in the public eye in contrast to the vast medical use of opiates, some much more potent than heroin, which are totally accepted. Your personal social cricle works as a subset to this in that it heavily influences you on a much minor scale, and can at times help people to breakthrough the much broader social dogma. Basically, put together enough mindless sheep and they just might start a riot...
Anyways...
Perhaps I'm too skeptical for my own good, fuck, I think the whole study of psychology is bullshit to an extent, it's as make believe as shit like Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or eskimos...

 

[skydigger]

Sorry if I'm stepping on toes or repeating someone else's opinion. I've got (inattentive) ADD and I tend to drift when I'm reading.
I think a lot of people choose their substance of choice because many of us are self-medicating.
For arguments sake, lets say on average we start in early high school getting drunk with friends. Those who are curious or adventurous may then want to see what it's like to get stoned (on pot), try shrooms, LSD, E etc. Curiousity leads us to try various substances to experience the high and see what we like.
I've been a pot smoker for 19 years, never really thinking about why I'm still smoking, and my friends basically quit after university. I believe that I still smoke because it slows that extra activity that is ever present in my head.
My drugs of choice are stimulants though. I don't take dugs to get me fucked up. I prefer drugs that make me clear-headed and alert. I don't get off on E (I rarely do it) or any other stim like most people, I just take them to make me alert enough to function normaly.