Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

dancesafe.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 151 posts

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#31

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

arcanemachiner wrote: post #27
refurb wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oxycodone was always known to be addictive. It’s right on the label from day one. “Also at the time of OxyContin’s approval, FDA product labeling warned of the danger of abuse of the drug and that crushing a controlled-release tablet followed by intravenous injection could result in a lethal overdose. There was no evidence to suggest at the time that crushing the controlled-release capsule followed by oral ingestion…

People are often taken in by the Big New Thing. That's why I have a default policy of skepticism towards pretty much everything.

> That's why I have a default policy of skepticism towards pretty much everything.

I’m convinced anyone who doesn’t do this is either too young to know better or too dumb to have been paying attention.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#32

Post by beebeepka »

Nowado wrote: post #14
niemandhier wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are drugs that cause neural rewireing in animals after a single use e.g. cocaine. If you have a stable social group and a fulfilled life you will probably not become dependant on thc, you should still avoid crack.

Everything causes neural rewiring in animals after a single use. That's what experience is. This sentence says nothing.

I'd argue that the entire post is just preachy gibberish.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#33

Post by ethanbond »

benreesman wrote: post #21
SoftTalker wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds trite but just do it. Go out. Go to bars, go to the gym, go to the coffee shop, go to wherever people are congregating. Living cooped up in a box is no way to live. Unsurprising that the study in TFA found that creatures living in unhappy circumstances seek mood-altering substances more than those living more freely and naturally.

As I said: maybe I’m an outlier and my N=1 study is one of those dots in the corner. But historically I’m a rabid extrovert on paper in terms of coffee shops and bars and comedy clubs and music shows. Before the risk was that I’d meet some cool people and talk until I had to race to the morning’s first meeting. And when I say “empty-seeming” I don’t mean there are no people exactly, but rather that walking up to some…

Another consideration is that you’ve gotten older during the pandemic.

Especially given many people’s description of “time distortion” through lockdown, it’s easy to forget you got 2-3 years older, so did all of your friends, and 2-3 years is plenty for some formative changes depending on how old you were.

I left New York for the pandemic and came back after a few years just to realize that I’m too old for this shit now, or at least for what I loved about NYC previously.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#34

Post by ethanbond »

nerdponx wrote: post #6
denimnerd42 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

don't think meth or fentanyl changes his hypothesis. if you see the interviews of those in bandos in Baltimore or on the street in Kensington, they have endured trauma their entire lives. Whether it's societal induced trauma like racism, poverty, family trauma, violence, or whatever else. These people are choosing to escape their "cages" with these drugs.

And yet plenty of people without major life trauma have succumbed to addiction as well. I have no doubt that traumatic life experiences can exacerbate addiction, make it harder to quit, and/or increase propensity to becoming addicted (maybe even increasing propensity to try hard drugs in the first place). But the notion that the addictiveness of heroin, cocaine, alcohol, nicotine, etc. is purely a psychosocial phenom…

Trauma + extremely high availability.

My understanding is that highly addictive substances will be consumed ≈ to their availability. Makes sense, given the social dynamics of addicts. It’s useful to find people who you can drag into your despair with you, so there’s an inherent virality alongside the high “retention rate” powered by the chemical itself.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#35

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

I’m not sure why it can’t be both.

Also, I’m not really sure that giving rats all the cocaine or heroin water they can drink is the same as a down on his luck homeless guy or a manager of a club or a good time college student… if you want to say it’s the cage, then you should probably theorize about how the deeper you get into drugs, typically the stronger the cage gets.

I like the idea that it’s not the addict’s fault for feel good reasons, but I’ve known enough addicts to know that the cage or the drug it isn’t kept at bay without hard work and discipline and the latter was typically already lacking to become an addict in the first place.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#36

Post by stan_kirdey »

I strongly disagree with the article. I work in the space and been involved in this topic for the last 20 years.

While the article claims that jails only worsen addiction, correctional facilities in the U.S. provide medically-supervised drug rehabilitation programs that have high success rates. Folks with substance use disorder are given medication for withdrawal and co-occurring mental health issues. There are withdrawal monitoring and detox programs at every facility. Some facilities started to offer MAT, which is currently gold standard of treatment.

The article fails to consider how addictive substances themselves, especially opioids, undermine one's autonomy and ability to connect with others. Opioids activate reward centers in the brain, inducing a sense of euphoria and pleasure that is difficult to resist (Volkow et al. 2014). Even a small dose of fentanyl, for example, can trigger an addiction with continued use (Kounang 2018); it is disingenuous to blame the "cage" alone when the substance itself chemically hijacks the brain. Genetics also predispose certain individuals to higher addiction risk, as addiction correlates highly with hereditary factors (Ducci et al. 2012).

The rise of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs has made "escaping the cage" of addiction nearly impossible for some. In some cities int he U.S. in 2023, a pill of fentanyl would cost as little as 50c. Counterfeit opioid pills containing fentanyl are extremely cheap, potent, and deadly, yet addictive to a point when a single pill can completely change direction of one's life.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#37

Post by SV_BubbleTime »

zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #30
xrd wrote: post #13

I've got a friend who recently was hospitalized for fentanyl addiction. Twenty years ago he was my first investor in my first startup. He was the guy that taught me about mediation. He was the first vegetarian I knew. He owned four cab licenses in Portland. Then Uber came in and shredded his retirement plan. The cab company forced him out so he wouldn't even capitalize on the partial ownership of the land they owned.…

That sucks about your friend. But how did anyone think there was no abuse potential? I was in highschool in the early to mid 2000s and even I knew there was massive abuse potential. There's a reason it was called hillbilly heroin

I was at a party in 2001 and they were getting Oxy delivered and figuring out how much and who wanted it. I knew then it wasn’t harmless recreational.

Two party from that party are now dead of overdoses.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#38

Post by antonvs »

zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #30
xrd wrote: post #13

I've got a friend who recently was hospitalized for fentanyl addiction. Twenty years ago he was my first investor in my first startup. He was the guy that taught me about mediation. He was the first vegetarian I knew. He owned four cab licenses in Portland. Then Uber came in and shredded his retirement plan. The cab company forced him out so he wouldn't even capitalize on the partial ownership of the land they owned.…

That sucks about your friend. But how did anyone think there was no abuse potential? I was in highschool in the early to mid 2000s and even I knew there was massive abuse potential. There's a reason it was called hillbilly heroin

Yeah. Oxycodone was always known to be addictive, like any other opiate.

The claim from the company was that Oxycontin, which was a slow release form of oxycodone, was less addictive because of the slow release.

That turned out to be largely BS, but it wasn’t helped by the fact that addicts would crush the tablets, eliminating the slow release aspect.

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#39

Post by johnea »

stan_kirdey wrote: post #36

I strongly disagree with the article. I work in the space and been involved in this topic for the last 20 years. While the article claims that jails only worsen addiction, correctional facilities in the U.S. provide medically-supervised drug rehabilitation programs that have high success rates. Folks with substance use disorder are given medication for withdrawal and co-occurring mental health issues. There are withd…

And if every addict had good opportunity for a prosperous life, do you think the number of overdoses would increase or descrease?

The brain highjakcking still occurrs in a context.

While some people simply use for kicks, many others are trying to escape some intractable situtaion.

Improving life opportunities would only help reduce extreme addiction and overdose...

Re: It’s not the chemicals that cause addiction (2017)

#40

Post by fires10 »

xrd wrote: post #26
refurb wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oxycodone was always known to be addictive. It’s right on the label from day one. “Also at the time of OxyContin’s approval, FDA product labeling warned of the danger of abuse of the drug and that crushing a controlled-release tablet followed by intravenous injection could result in a lethal overdose. There was no evidence to suggest at the time that crushing the controlled-release capsule followed by oral ingestion…

I remember with distinct anger that my friend told me information to the contrary. He probably got that phrasing from that doctor who got a free trip to Barbados to push it. I wasn't there but i remember him telling me that and it makes my blood boil. I do share other people's skepticism of the medical industry as you might be able to tell. He should have done more research, agreed.

We license doctors to do the research for us. We can not be expected to experts in all fields. It's why we license professionals.
Post reply on HN