Drug addiction: The complex truth • Hacker News Board

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#111

Post by codyb » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 9:54 PM UTC

delluminatus wrote: post #108

codyb wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you recommend not assigning meaning to your spouse? I think the Yogi is eventually one with it. He doesn't try any of the methods you offered. Controlling it, embracing it, or rejecting it. He just let's it be. And in that way he becomes free from it.

In my (admittedly limited) experience, people are taking a big risk by making their spouse a critical source of meaning in their life. I think the problem is that it's reliant on reciprocation, whereas the others aren't (except children to some extent). With respect to your comment on the yogi: note that most yogi follow some number of vows [0] and abstentions [1] that seem to me to be very much an attempt at "contro…

I totally agree. I think in real life most people decide following these path's will allow them to reach enlightenment or at least come closer. Despite that I don't think one who has reached enlightenment feels they're controlling anything at all, nor does that bother them in any way.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#112

Post by marincounty » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 10:01 PM UTC

I hope there's more studies done like this. I have always felt there's a lot of false information about drug addiction out there--even among Psychiatrists. I know that there's many addicts out there who are literally afraid of quitting a drug; especially opiates and alcohol. 'I'm not going to get dope sick', 'my doctor wants me to spend my last 30 grand on rehab', 'I was told I will have the DT's.' I have found with most drugs-- tapering off works. This is especially true with alcohol, and opiates. No, it's not simple, but many of you don't need to wipe out your savings on hysteria. Most MD's won't talk about tapering because of liability, but if you don't have the money for a fancy rehab, many of you can taper off alcohol, and opiates, and even benzodiazepines.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#113

Post by bdamm » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 10:43 PM UTC

jesushorse wrote: post #98

NotAnEngineer wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the rule, not the exception, among addicts. Every recovery program (12-step or not) emphasizes that drugs are not a drug addict's only problem. Obviously they are a very destructive part of the problem, but every addict who stops using long enough learns that -- surprise! -- they're still a self-centered, fear-driven, manipulative, obsessive person. That stuff doesn't just go away when you stop using; if anyt…

Yes, and almost every program I've seen people go through has tried to force them to "accept jesus as their savior". That's where they fail.

The religious basis of AA (Alcoholics Anonymous), after which nearly all 12-step programs are modeled, does not require "accepting Jesus as your savior". It does require, however, accepting that a "higher power" might restore you to sanity.

This is a very important distinction, because AA goes to great lengths to clarify that the "higher power" is one of your own understanding. It is not Jesus, it is not a Christian-Jewish-Muslim God. It is simply something "bigger than yourself" which exists and which you can feel comfortable addressing.

It could be the Pacific Ocean for all you care. It just must be bigger than you.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#114

Post by snom380 » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 11:20 PM UTC

MichaelGG wrote: post #89

snom380 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I think that a big part of those "functional" users are like functional alcoholics. They continue for many years to hold a job, but their daily usage causes problems for everyone around them. At least that's the story you'll often hear at family group meetings. Not the usual homeless drug addict story, but people keeping up appearances while hiding some pretty big problems. My brother was a functional meth user…

Well, I'm just gonna say arguing anecdotally is pointless. However, functional opiate and amphetamine users are not "hiding a big problem". In many cases, this is enabling them to deal with high-stress situations, or think more clearly. One example is Paul Erdős, a brilliant mathematician that used amphetamines quite a bit and found no reason to not use them. No hiding, no problem, no "keeping up appearances". Don't…

While I've had a very liberal view regarding drugs and certainly not bought into any campaign stories, I've also become much more respectful about their potential consequences in the past years from firsthand experience. It would be interesting to see more about how prevalent drug use is. I do think you underestimate the negative consequences they can have. Drugs like meth and cocaine don't just cause the users to think more clearly, it can also cause some big behavioral changes. For instance, it's not far-fetched that the economic crisis has been at least partly been caused by overconfidence from drug use: http://www.theguardian.com/business/shortcuts/2013/apr/15/co...

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#115

Post by zafka » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 11:41 PM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #109

dusklight wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's very interesting. Do you think addicts already have those personality traits from before they became addicted, or the traits developed as a result of the addiction?

Most addicts are abused (or experience comparable longterm stress) as children, which causes brain damage, which leads to addiction. There is a certain genetic component also, but it mostly has to do with your childhood.

This sounds rather much like speculation to me. Do you have any sources to back up your "Most" statement. Since the disease is generational, quite often children of addicts will have a stressful upbringing, but your theory of brain damage from stress causing the addiction is quite a stretch.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#116

Post by Alex3917 » Sat, Sep 14, 2013, 12:00 AM UTC

zafka wrote: post #115

Alex3917 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most addicts are abused (or experience comparable longterm stress) as children, which causes brain damage, which leads to addiction. There is a certain genetic component also, but it mostly has to do with your childhood.

This sounds rather much like speculation to me. Do you have any sources to back up your "Most" statement. Since the disease is generational, quite often children of addicts will have a stressful upbringing, but your theory of brain damage from stress causing the addiction is quite a stretch.

Gabor Mate discusses this in his Angry Ghosts book. If you search through my comments for his name, there is a link to an interview where he discusses this also.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#117

Post by gtr32x » Sat, Sep 14, 2013, 1:48 AM UTC

We acknowledge that the drug addiction is a complex issue and with our current understanding of human psychology it's hard to generalize the rationals behind the addition.

With regard to the law system, it basically boiled down to this: if such a behavior or activity does have the potential to threaten recipients in their well-being and the others around them, then it's probably better to ban it to allow a more harmonic society. Such as jay-walking, it is also illegal.

However, do people still jay-walk? Of course they do, because it provides convenience, a sense of accomplishment -> dopamine. So is it similar to drug use? Of course. The difference is that jaywalking laws are enforced way less than hard core drug uses.

Now laws aren't always black and white, judgment is often involved. Outside of law, mentally should we be more accepting and acknowledge drug use instead simply putting it down? Sure why not. As long as you can safely understand that it won't cause harm to you or your surrounding. But can anyone be absolutely certain of that? Afraid not.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#118

Post by jmcgough » Sat, Sep 14, 2013, 1:49 AM UTC

I worked in a neuroscience lab for years - our rats were housed in pairs, in extremely small cages. They were required to have "environmental enrichment" by LAR (Lab Animal Resources), which for us meant a small stick for it to chew on. So yes, a lot of research is done on animals that are not exactly what I'd consider healthy or normal.

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#119

Post by lotyrin » Sat, Sep 14, 2013, 2:01 AM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #78

1337biz wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, she found a puzzle game on her phone that she would play obsessively Actually an interesting observation on how difficult it is to draw the line between obsession and passion. It seems that she (can devlop) an extremely high level of focus, something that what would probably regarded by many as a trait for becoming successful in a specific discipline.

To me, this and the parent post are the most interesting thing here. I find myself to be quite like the parent's family member in that all that I do is obsessive, often to the point of self-destructive results. It's always been this way with work and hacking (to the extreme) and certainly for other less productive things like alcohol, food, news (ctrl-R) and especially television/films. What I'm wondering is if we co…

https://www.superbetter.com/

Re: Drug addiction: The complex truth

#120

Post by bane » Sat, Sep 14, 2013, 2:07 AM UTC

jere wrote: post #54

bane wrote: post #38

Like lots of folks I drink a bit, and I smoke the occasional celebratory cigar. I'm fortunate to not have found myself addicted to anything though (that I'm aware of at least). However, I have family members who have deep addiction problems. Life affecting. One thing that I've noticed is that even when they get off of the substance, the addictive personality traits are still there -- years later. One of my relatives,…

You seem to be suggesting an initial addiction caused an addictive personality, but are you sure your relative wasn't prone to addictive behavior to begin with?

It's anecdotal of course, and correlation doesn't equal causation and all that, but the people I'm close to who seem to really have addiction issues seem to be people who had addiction issues a priori.

e.g. I can't even conceive of a scenario where I could find myself thinking about willingly even trying heroin or cocaine. But I have a few family members and (former) friends with addiction problems so severe that pounding a case of beer before snorting lines is what they call a normal Thursday afternoon and heroin is considered a weekend recreational sport. Something predisposed them to the notion that this was a valid idea whereas I can't even conceive of it.