• BASIC DRUG
    DISCUSSION
    Welcome to Bluelight!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Benzo Chart Opioids Chart
    Drug Terms Need Help??
    Drugs 101 Brain & Addiction
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums
  • BDD Moderators: Keif’ Richards

Need advice on Dilaudid dosage.

Status
Not open for further replies.
If you are in pain you are in pain. If you are going to continue to be in pain and eat these medicines you will be addicted there is simply no way around it. Take them when you are in pain if you plan on using them for pain, otherwise don't use them at all. You can't worry about addiction like that when using meds for pain. I've tried, doesn't work. Either you take them when you need them always or you just don't do it at all is my best advice. Going on and off every other day or week will make you extremely miserable untill you get addicted anyway.
 
I guess it all depends on your particular definition of addiction. I define addiction as a craving for the "high" obtained from the meds. Even if you go through detox and get clean and no longer have pain you still seek out pain meds. I guess my problem with the term "addiction" is the bad connotations that are associated with it. It labels you as a drug addict- and that bothers me. People especially doctors will treat you differently if they think you are looking for nothing more than a high, and that irritates and insults me. Being labeled as a drug addict conjours images of someone who is down and out and will do anything(legal or not) to obtain more drugs. Their life revolves around drugs. I guess this is what is upsetting to me- i dont want that label because i know that is not my situation. But what you are saying is that everybody out there that is physically dependent on narcotics is a drug addict even cancer patients and terminally ill patients. I think that is wrong to attach a label, that is undeniably degrading to these people. I know doctors will and do treat patients differently if they think they are addicts as opposed to having a physical dependence. Its kinda like calling a homosexual a faggot. Please excuse the term but thats the closest analogy i can think of at the moment. Being called or labeled a drug addict is disrepectful and i for one dont like it or think its right. If i was to tell a doctor that i was addicted to pain meds as opposed to telling him that i was physically dependent on them he would suggest different treatments. For one thing addicts need alot of follow up help and therapy as opposed to someone that is PD. Its much easier for someone who detoxed from a PD to stay away from narcotics than it is for an addict. I know this from experience. And also how is an addictive personality explained if everyone who is PD is also an addict? I think there is bigger degree of separation between the two terms than what you have stated. I realize that it is somewhat of a fine line but there is an actual difference. And ill still say im not an addict and will take offense if im considered to be an "addict". This is my opinon based on my research and experience.
 
I think it's more the stigma you associate with the term 'addict' that bothers you; rather than that people are calling you an addict. I was[am] addicted to opiates. I work a full time job, make decent wage and spend a lot of money on drugs. I will do what I can to curb my withdrawals if I cannot obtain my DOC, but it's not life or death if I have to deal with an uncomfortable situation to (illegally) obtain my DOC.

I still understand your point. I just wanted to try to clarify what some people mean when they say addict. Many members on this site would consider themselves addicts, I don't think many of them consider themselves low-lifes.
 
But what you are saying is that everybody out there that is physically dependent on narcotics is a drug addict even cancer patients and terminally ill patients. I think that is wrong to attach a label, that is undeniably degrading to these people. I know doctors will and do treat patients differently if they think they are addicts as opposed to having a physical dependence. Its kinda like calling a homosexual a faggot. Please excuse the term but thats the closest analogy i can think of at the moment. Being called or labeled a drug addict is disrepectful and i for one dont like it or think its right.
Click to expand...

I think you misread me entirely. I never said you have to be addicted if you become dependent, I said you can, In both the case of a recreational user or a medical user. If you continue to use a drug long enough, it doesn't not matter who you are and what reasons you are taking it for, there is a chance you will become addicted, not only dependent, but addicted. Even with that said, you can argue that much like a cancer patient, addicts are self-medicating. If you dislike the term because of the stigma attached to it then that's too bad but that doesn't change the fact that it happens to pain patients all of the time, and that a good percentage of people who use illicit opioids where once pain patients and had their medication discontinued, or their insurance ran out, or their doctor decided their pain no longer warrants medication. So they start a heroin habit despite knowing well that dependence both psychologically and physically will deteriorate.

Is there a way to measure whether a cancer patient or a recreational user will become addicted, that when the cancer patients disease is cured they will continue using opioids? No. Genetics, DNA and myriad of other things are responsible for who becomes addicted and who doesn't.

I wish you good luck, I thought I would warn you of a possible path ahead, and that much like many people in this world you addiction is not something that you decide.

It's nothing at all like calling a homosexual a faggot.
 
It sure sounded like you stated that anyone who becomes dependent will next become addicted. As you stated "the end of the road is addiction". You just stated it in a misleading way I guess. And yes i do take offense at being called an addict. I do not have the characteristics of an addict. If somehow i could not get my meds and my pain becomes unbearable i would not go to the streets for medication, I'd go to the ER. I understand most of your points but believe you and many others are using the term addiction incorrectly- they are not interchangable.
 
I never said they are interchangeable and that was a theoretical road of the implications of drug use. Many people, pain patients such as yourself, can draw the line at dependence, not allowing it or its consequences to deteriorate. This requires discipline, self control, and biological factors have to be favorable. If biological factors are against you, and you do not possess discipline, then the opposite is likely to happen. These substances are dopaminergics, a hormone that controls reward and pain, its only natural that if your body becomes accustomed to it coming from a substance that you'll rely on it and only it for these feelings even after the pain is gone and you no longer need them for a legitimate medical purpose.

I think you don't understand addiction just as much as those who have attached this stigma to you.

Again, dependence is just one component of addiction. Understand it whichever way you like, but I really hope that you acknowledge that just because you don't exhibit any traits of an addict, and just because your using substances for medical purposes does not make you immune to addiction.

Also, if you have a legitimate medical condition, your medications are prescribed under the recommendation of a physician, then why is the stigma bothering you. It's generally people who want the medications, that are trying to prove their pain which at times is legitimate that have to go through this discrimination.
 
Last edited:
Your first paragragh made perfect sense. I argree with what you staed.
Im not so much personally bothered by the stigma of being an addict (i know exately whats going on with myself- belive me). I more bothered seeing the term addict thrown about indiscrimately and so often. I don't think enough people actually know that there is a difference. People typically will hear that someone has been RXed narcotics for an extended periods and automatically the "addict" word is thought of. Bottom line is that i believe the word addict is misused a whole lot.
 
Well unfortunately that's the world we live in, a drug user is a scumbag irregardless of why he/she uses. The problem I find is people associating addict with a thief, liar etc even though that's not the case. So even if the term addict doesn't apply to you, you should not perpetuate its false meaning just because you don't want to be associated with it. That in itself makes you somewhat responsible for the false characteristic accusations and misconceptions about addiction and its terminology that society has made taboo.

If you feel some people exercise prejudice that way, then cut them off, if your doctors are as well, fire them. If you have an ailment that's cornered you into use of addictive substances, you don't need to justify yourself to anyone.
 
As this has spiraled far off topic from the original question asked, it no longer meets the harm reduction standards for BDD. Closed. PM any questions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top