Yet another HN article that minimizes the perception that drugs can cause harm. Yes it is true that most people grow out of addiction. But many do not. In my circle I count four dead, many more damaged by drugs.
I don't think the point was to minimize the negative impact of drugs. The point was that our understanding and treatment of addiction is flawed, and we need to change that perception so we can really help those with addiction.
FYI: I don't entirely agree with this article. But I posted it in part because I seriously loathe the AA "disease" model. My dad drank heavily when he was in the army. He fought in the front lines of two wars. I think he did it at least in part so he could sleep because alcohol helps suppress dreams (and, thus, also nightmares). About four years after he left the army, he swore off alcohol and basically never touched…
It sounds like you and your father weren't addicted - that sounds great for you! I currently know a number of people in 12-step programs (Christian and secular), ages ranging all over the place, who struggle with it in an entirely different way. For them, waiting for some indeterminate time at which they "grow out" of their addiction is hopeless because they and those around them suffer in the meantime. 15 years is a very long time to wait as you destroy your family and your body.
As someone who struggled with cocaine, heroin and prescription opioid addictions throughout my teenage years, this resonates with me quite a bit, but I'm not sure if I agree with the conclusions the author is drawing. I got clean with no help either - and yet, many years later, I still consider myself "in recovery." I view my recovery as a never-ending process; even though I haven't touched the substances themselves in ages, I'm still dealing with the consequences. Just hearing someone mention one of the drugs in a conversation is sometimes enough to make my mood plummet if I'm taken by surprise. I don't really hang out in environments where they're easy to obtain anymore, but if I ever find myself in one, even though I know on some rational level that I'd never touch them again, part of me is in great distress because I'd have a hard time saying no if they were offered to me.
I think these types of articles tend to ignore the longer-lasting, psychologically debilitating consequences of addiction. It doesn't just end with going cold turkey. You need to be able to look at your thought process and identify where you go wrong, and I think programs like AA and NA give you the tools to do that. Obviously, they don't work for everyone, and they aren't foolproof, but I'm of the opinion that they still have some merit.
> But although I got treatment, I quit at around the age when, according to large epidemiological studies, most people who have diagnosable addiction problems do so—without treatment.
Looks like he's not claiming that no-treatment was his particular path.
I take issue with the headline, and I didn't see any support for it in the article -- that people simply grow out of addiction. Treatment or not, we can call that process of reducing one's addictive behaviors growth, but I don't think you can find any addicts -- former or otherwise -- their families, or addiction treatment specialists, who would call that process simple.
Yet another HN article that minimizes the perception that drugs can cause harm. Yes it is true that most people grow out of addiction. But many do not. In my circle I count four dead, many more damaged by drugs.
False dichotomy. Recreational drugs (such as cocaine and heroin) are dangerous. If 95% "grow out" of the addiction and 5% die (I made those numbers up) then the drugs are very dangerous, but the "growing out" premise is true. LSD might cause a bad trip (if used under sane circumstances, such as with a non-tripping sitter) less than 1% of the time, but the medical establishment has good reason even still to be nervous…
Please don't bring LSD into the mix.
Damage by cocain and heroin are well known to the our medicine, while LSD is NOT. There is still an huge grey/dark area when it comes to damage caused by entheogens such as LSD. All we have is little bits of data, some little experiment here or there.
No, I'm not saying LSD is fun nor safe, but the propaganda out there about it is pure bs.
Yet another HN article that minimizes the perception that drugs can cause harm. Yes it is true that most people grow out of addiction. But many do not. In my circle I count four dead, many more damaged by drugs.
I take issue with the headline, and I didn't see any support for it in the article -- that people simply grow out of addiction. Treatment or not, we can call that process of reducing one's addictive behaviors growth , but I don't think you can find any addicts -- former or otherwise -- their families, or addiction treatment specialists, who would call that process simple .
I don't think "simple" here means they do it easily, but rather that they do it on their own.
As a sober addict I really can't comprehend the "flavor" of addiction the author describes. Most of my addict friends and acquaintances either worked at sobriety or died from using. Actually most died.
If someone can just stop, most would simply say the person wasn't actually an addict.