How to know if you’re addicted • Hacker News Board

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#191

Post by bodge5000 » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 1:27 PM UTC

iSnow wrote: post #129

bodge5000 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guess its just a matter of experience and perspective, because for me tobacco is the "best" due its lack of any effect on you mentally, even if it is pricey and bad for you. Though I guess Sugar is probably a bit better and has pretty much the same consequences. Regardless of your perspective though, I'd say heroin is absolutely the worst

Sugar is not a drug though and doesn't create addiction, maybe a mild dependence.

> Sugar is not a drug

Define drug. One definition I found is "Drugs are substances that change a person's mental or physical state", which would included Sugar.

> It does not create addiction

It absolutely does. Not physically (or at least no more than any other substance, if you consume a massive amount of anything your body will become accustomed to it and you'll feel withdrawal symptoms), but nor is alcohol or a load of other "addictive" drugs

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#192

Post by sneak » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 2:39 PM UTC

phs318u wrote: post #156

kolla wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same here, I'm probably considered an alcoholic because of the ammount of liquour I drink per week/month but I can work out every single day and stay in great shape but come friday and saturday I do empty quite a few units. Stopping the weekend urge is hard.

Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program. If you really want to stop doing something, and are trying your hardest to not do that thing, and yet despite that desire you feel an overwhelming compulsion to do that thing, even though you rationally know the consequences for you or others will be bad - that’s addiction. Or as I once put it to m…

> Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program.

Note also that 12 step programs are pseudoscience/ineffective and are, when measured, no more or less successful at helping people beat addiction than not using a 12 step program, so take that endorsement with a grain of salt.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#193

Post by sneak » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 2:44 PM UTC

lelanthran wrote: post #34

rhino369 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The way I knew was by trying to stop for at least a week, if I could accomplish that, then it wouldn't be a problem. Not being able to stop for a week shows you are an addict. But being able to stop for week doesn't really show you aren't one. Most addicts do quit for weeks or even months at a time.

> Not being able to stop for a week shows you are an addict. But being able to stop for week doesn't really show you aren't one. Most addicts do quit for weeks or even months at a time. Correct. "Not doing $X anymore" doesn't mean you aren't an addict. "Being able to turn on/turn off doing $X" means you aren't an addict. If you haven't had a drink in years, but having a single one means that you now cannot do without…

> If you haven't had a drink in years, but having a single one means that you now cannot do without the bottle, you're still an addict.

Note that this belief is completely at odds with that of modern psychatric medicine, and is one of the core beliefs of most 12 step programs, which are ineffective pseudoscientific systems.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#194

Post by dns_snek » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 4:32 PM UTC

mushbino wrote: post #182

clpm4j wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the fact that they're grouped logically is enough, for the most part. It seems widely acknowledged that alcohol is not good for you, but there is a psychological distinction between doing shots at your local dive bar and a glass of Pinot with dinner. I think the spectrum of alcohol use is just broader than most other drugs except for maybe cannabis and psilocybin.

There isn't a chemical distinction that separates alcohol from other drugs, only social constructs.

You're being downvoted even though you're absolutely right.

I'm assuming that arbitrary distinction makes it a lot easier to rationalize drinking alcohol while they stigmatize or demonize people who say, smoke weed or eat psychedelic mushrooms (or any other drug, really) in reasonable quantities, even if they are extremely productive members of society.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#195

Post by dns_snek » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 4:36 PM UTC

clpm4j wrote: post #183

mushbino wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There isn't a chemical distinction that separates alcohol from other drugs, only social constructs.

Right, and social constructs carry more weight in cultural/societal norms which is why I doubt anyone will ever say I'll have a glass of drugs with dinner tonight even though a lot of people know there isn't a technical, chemical distinction.

Nobody says "I'll smoke some drugs" either, closest thing you'll hear people say is that they're going to smoke some weed.

"Alcohol and drugs" is a harmful distinction when we're talking about substance use, abuse, or harm reduction because it automatically implies that alcohol is categorically different from (and less harmful than) other drugs, thus reinforcing the misinformation and antiquated beliefs.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#196

Post by wanderer_ » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 5:57 PM UTC

iSnow wrote: post #129

bodge5000 wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guess its just a matter of experience and perspective, because for me tobacco is the "best" due its lack of any effect on you mentally, even if it is pricey and bad for you. Though I guess Sugar is probably a bit better and has pretty much the same consequences. Regardless of your perspective though, I'd say heroin is absolutely the worst

Sugar is not a drug though and doesn't create addiction, maybe a mild dependence.

It may not be a 'drug' in the traditional sense, but you can still become very addicted, and it can still harm you. Sugar addiction may even be more dangerous to society because of how common it is.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#197

Post by wanderer_ » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 6:02 PM UTC

toyg wrote: post #84

pqs wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should try to not randomly browse the web for one week. I'm not sure whether I'm able. Ups. It is so easy to jus type Ctrl-T and then news.ycom TAB.

that's a lot of letters, my firefox gives it to me with just "ne"-enter.

I don't even need the e...

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#198

Post by hn_version_0023 » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 6:49 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #192

phs318u wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program. If you really want to stop doing something, and are trying your hardest to not do that thing, and yet despite that desire you feel an overwhelming compulsion to do that thing, even though you rationally know the consequences for you or others will be bad - that’s addiction. Or as I once put it to m…

> Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program. Note also that 12 step programs are pseudoscience/ineffective and are, when measured, no more or less successful at helping people beat addiction than not using a 12 step program, so take that endorsement with a grain of salt.

They seem to help a lot of people. It helped my father, and if I’d continued my ways, it might have had the opportunity to help me.

You may see pseudoscience, but I see broken people without a safety net finding empathy and a healthier group to spend their time with.

I don’t know if you’ve experienced addiction yourself, but your comment comes across as woefully dismissive of something that helps lots of people.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#199

Post by nyc111 » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 6:51 PM UTC

Nice article but who is "you" here? It's very difficult to define who is addicted. In the case of sugar addiction, it is the sugar loving microorganisms that live inside the body. It is not the conscious mind who is addicted. And these microorganisms can control the behavior of the host, that is, the body, like making you go to where sweets are sold without you knowing it. I don't know how but these organisms have direct access to the motor nerveous system and can do things and make decisions without (or before) conscious mind realizes it. So the way we become aware of the hot surface we touched accidentally only after we retract our arm, we become aware of some decisions only after executing them to satisfy the desires of the microorganisms, our symbionts. So I'm sure addiction is not a mind issue but a gut issue.

Re: How to know if you’re addicted

#200

Post by phs318u » Sat, Feb 12, 2022, 7:39 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #192

phs318u wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program. If you really want to stop doing something, and are trying your hardest to not do that thing, and yet despite that desire you feel an overwhelming compulsion to do that thing, even though you rationally know the consequences for you or others will be bad - that’s addiction. Or as I once put it to m…

> Speaking as an addict in recovery, this definition is the most practically useful. It’s step 1 of every 12-step program. Note also that 12 step programs are pseudoscience/ineffective and are, when measured, no more or less successful at helping people beat addiction than not using a 12 step program, so take that endorsement with a grain of salt.

I can only speak of my experience. I first found the fellowship 24 years ago. In that time I’ve seen hundreds of people come and go. Only 10 people I know who were around in 1998 are still in the program. Of those, 9 have been in successful recovery for many years (10 years for me after walking away for several years and relapsing). The tenth has a history of relapsing every few years. I’d call that a remarkable success rate. I have no idea what has become of all the hundreds that walked away from treatment. But I know for some it’s ended in death in full-blown addiction.

Your comment reflects a deep misunderstanding of the 12-step program, and one that many addicts also fail to grasp. That is that the belief that addiction is curable. It isn’t. It’s a lifelong condition which therefore requires lifelong treatment. Much like diabetes. Diabetes treatments can be incredibly successful - but only for as long as you continue to strictly adhere to the care regimen. The elements of that care regime are not optional, and are required no matter how healthy or fit you may feel at any given moment. That’s because you’ll always be a diabetic. Failure to accept that fundamental aspect of the disease can be fatal.

In measuring the success rate of diabetic treatment do you include the measurement of those that have stopped treatment?

The 12-steps are not teleological. There is no cure. Only remission, and in remission a clear mind and the possibility of a healthy and serene life.

I get why 12-steps can rub people the wrong way. The “god” aspect. I won’t go into all that here because it would literally be an hours long discussion. Suffice to say that the program can work for atheists too. I know because I was one (I consider myself agnostic these days).