Pages: 1 2  Next -- Posted by ElephantStone at 9:17 am on Oct. 18, 2008 This is particularly interesting, DR THEODORE DALRYMPLE, 18 August 2007, Heroin addiction isn't an illness...and we should stop spending millions 'treating' it: I discovered that most addicted prisoners stopped taking heroin in jail, even when it was available. They came into the prison starving and miserable, and went out relatively healthy. But within a few months, many were back in their former condition, and when brought once more before the courts, some would beg to be imprisoned..... ....When, soon after their return, I asked them whether they intended to give up taking heroin, some would reply: "I'll have to, I've got no choice." Asked why, they would offer replies such as: "Because my girlfriend's just had a baby and she won't let me see it unless I do." This answer was a strange one if these addicts truly thought of themselves as ill and in need of treatment. # Instead, they clearly believed a purpose in life was enough to enable them to abstain. This is not how pneumonia, for instance, is cured..... ....There is a strenuous, almost outraged, rejection of the idea that addiction is, at bottom, a moral problem, or even that it raises any moral questions at all...... ....To conceive of heroin addiction as such seems to me to miss the fundamental point: it is a moral or spiritual condition that will never yield to medical treatment..... And incredibly this: As long ago as the Thirties, experiments showed that salt solution could be substituted for morphine without the addicts' knowledge, and they could be deceived out of their withdrawal symptoms. Concluding with: Yet consider what happened in China after Mao took power in 1949. At the time, China had more opiate addicts than the rest of the world put together ? about 20million. But Mao gave them a strong motive to give up: he shot the dealers and any addicts who did not give up their habit. Within three years, Mao produced more cures than all the drug clinics in the world before or since, or indeed to come. He was, indeed, the greatest drug worker in history. The point of this story is not to advocate a repetition of Mao's methods. It is to demonstrate that, when a motive is sufficiently strong, many millions of addicted people can abandon their addiction without the paraphernalia of help considered necessary today. It demonstrates that people take heroin out of choice, ultimately, and so can stop out of choice. Addicts are not blameless victims of some terrible illness they have no control over. http://tinyurl.com/59lxrn" target="_top">http://http://tinyurl.com/59lxrn Food for thought, eh? -- Posted by Disposition at 9:22 am on Oct. 18, 2008 That is interesting, but from my understanding, there are two types of addictions: psychological and physical. Hm, that idea something to consider, though. -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 9:48 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence. Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop. I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable. -- Posted by ElephantStone at 10:14 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence. Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop. I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable. I think youve missed the point. What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 10:21 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 6:14 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.    Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.    I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable. I think youve missed the point. What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. What I got from it is they lack the motivation to do otherwise. -- Posted by medjai at 2:14 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 This article is hardly a legitimate case study and it's opinionated and therefore would fail under peer review. A physical dependency on a drug is not treatable in the same way that pneumonia is because they are different forms of illness. This is like saying that a bi-polar person chooses to be bipolar, because I've personally seen someone break out of their down through force of will because they were going to lose everything they had if they didn't, and therefore why are we spending money on research for treating bi-polars. This article's direction of point is retarded. -- Posted by sadnessness at 8:47 am on Oct. 19, 2008 they often beg to be taken back to prison because they become institutionalised, meaning that they cant cope with outside life anymore -- Posted by ElephantStone at 8:50 am on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from sadnessness at 4:47 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 they often beg to be taken back to prison because they become institutionalised, meaning that they cant cope with outside life anymore I highly doubt a 6 month imprisonment for burgalry would do that to you. -- Posted by Bearsy at 2:27 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Bitch STFU, why would people choose to live eating out of a garbage can and dancing for cash so they can afford to get a needle in their back? -- Posted by ElephantStone at 2:33 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 10:27 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Bitch STFU, why would people choose to live eating out of a garbage can and dancing for cash so they can afford to get a needle in their back? did you read the article? Now I have a background in heroin. But this guy is a person who has dealt with heroin addicts for the last 40 years and I dont think it should be discarded so quickly. I think its interesting some of the points he makes, and its difficult to argue against the one with salt solution. The feeling of being a victim is a good one, becasue most heroin addicts have grown up with the feeling of being a victim- no money, council flat, etc. they go on drugs and theyre a victim to that. Its an interesting point he's made. -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 3:18 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 10:27 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Bitch STFU, why would people choose to live eating out of a garbage can and dancing for cash so they can afford to get a needle in their back? heroin feels really good. The fact is unless there is something in your life that means more to you than feeling really really good (however shortlived the high may be) then yeah, anyone would. -- Posted by Bearsy at 3:22 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 They don't feel good anymore to an addict, but it's hell when they stop... -- Posted by ElephantStone at 3:32 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 ^Have either of you actually read the article, or even the points I noted? -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 4:26 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Um yes. Do I have to blindly regurgitate your opinion to before you'll believe that? -- Posted by Wilder at 6:48 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 11:21 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 6:14 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.   Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.   I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable.    I think youve missed the point.    What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. What I got from it is they lack the motivation to do otherwise. Perfectly worded. I'd agree on Osmo with this one; I tend to look at the article as supporting the idea that supporting motivation to quit (ie: killing addicts) increases the chances of addicts quitting rather than supporting the idea that individuals choose to be addicted. -- Posted by wallopwoop at 8:32 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:14 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.    Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.    I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable. I think youve missed the point. What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. Very true. I personally have indeed chosen to partake in the use of various "addictive" substances, and have under no circumstance felt that I needed the aforementioned substances or that I was in any way addicted to them. It's a matter of will, plain and simple. -- Posted by Hoop Jargon at 9:37 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from wallopwoop at 4:32 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:14 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.   Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.   I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable.    I think youve missed the point.    What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. Very true. I personally have indeed chosen to partake in the use of various "addictive" substances, and have under no circumstance felt that I needed the aforementioned substances or that I was in any way addicted to them. It's a matter of will, plain and simple. Sustained use or just once?   -- Posted by ElephantStone at 2:30 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 12:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Um yes. Do I have to blindly regurgitate your opinion to before you'll believe that? No but youre not arguing your point. A number of points have been made above and youve just come in with your statement and left. You havent explained at all how that man can be wrong, or made any valid points against his. And for the record that is not my opinion. I never stated it anywhere that it was. -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 5:40 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:30 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 12:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Um yes. Do I have to blindly regurgitate your opinion to before you'll believe that? No but youre not arguing your point. A number of points have been made above and youve just come in with your statement and left. You havent explained at all how that man can be wrong, or made any valid points against his. And for the record that is not my opinion. I never stated it anywhere that it was. I don't think what I am saying contradicts what he said so what's to argue? -- Posted by ElephantStone at 6:20 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 1:40 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:30 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 12:26 am on Oct. 20, 2008 Um yes. Do I have to blindly regurgitate your opinion to before you'll believe that?    No but youre not arguing your point.    A number of points have been made above and youve just come in with your statement and left.    You havent explained at all how that man can be wrong, or made any valid points against his.    And for the record that is not my opinion. I never stated it anywhere that it was. I don't think what I am saying contradicts what he said so what's to argue? Sorry, I read your point on motivation, and viewed it as motivation to quit a hard addiction, rather than in the context of how this man is viewing. It took me a moment to see it that way. Sorry. -- Posted by Bearsy at 5:18 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from wallopwoop at 8:32 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:14 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.   Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.   I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable.    I think youve missed the point.    What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted. Very true. I personally have indeed chosen to partake in the use of various "addictive" substances, and have under no circumstance felt that I needed the aforementioned substances or that I was in any way addicted to them. It's a matter of will, plain and simple. I hate people like you I've smoked cigarettes before and never became addicted but I'm not going to go telling people that cigarettes aren't addictive -- Posted by the real anti christ at 5:57 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Um is it even safe to inject salt? If that study is real I would be interested to know the number of people involved and the results and what not. -- Posted by osmoticdespair at 6:06 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from the real anti christ at 1:57 am on Oct. 21, 2008 Um is it even safe to inject salt? If that study is real I would be interested to know the number of people involved and the results and what not. Saline is much safer to inject than pure water. You use saline solution to prevent it causing dangerous osmotic gradients. And it is a long known fact that the placebo effect can have profound effects on the withdrawal syndrome of heroin, (and probably in reverse too - the placebo effect can intensify withdrawals when the patient expects them). -- Posted by wallopwoop at 6:17 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Hoop Jargon at 9:37 pm on Oct. 19, 2008 Quote: from wallopwoop at 4:32 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 10:14 am on Oct. 18, 2008 Quote: from osmoticdespair at 5:48 pm on Oct. 18, 2008 Physical dependence is not addiction, you can be physically dependent on non addictive drugs, and addicted to drugs which cannot cause physical dependence.       Physical dependence just means you suffer withdrawals if you stop.       I think its probably true that psychological addiction is a moral or spiritual issue, but the fact is so are a lot of so called "mental illnesses" (not the really severe ones like psychosis or anything, but some of the milder ones) and society as it stands won't admit that either because it would mean the acceptable solutions it can offer are unworkable.   I think youve missed the point.   What Ive drawn from the article is that people are choosing to be addicted.    Very true. I personally have indeed chosen to partake in the use of various "addictive" substances, and have under no circumstance felt that I needed the aforementioned substances or that I was in any way addicted to them. It's a matter of will, plain and simple. Sustained use or just once? Sustained use of amphetamines, cocaine, and various opiates and opioids. Nicotine and alcohol too of course... and my original post stands true for all of the aforementioned substances. Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 5:18 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 I hate people like you I've smoked cigarettes before and never became addicted but I'm not going to go telling people that cigarettes aren't addictive I'd be very suprised if you've had more extended experience with addictive substances than myself, and if that's correct then you have no place to talk. Hell, I'd be suprised if you had much experience with anything other than cigarettes judging by your response. If you can provide one legitimate reason why someone would be physically incapable of quitting any substance cold turkey then I'll shut the fuck up. -- Posted by Bearsy at 6:40 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 I've had extended experience with caffeine, alcohol, cannabis and amphetamine   so you shut the fuck up -- Posted by wallopwoop at 9:19 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 Quote: from Its Bearsy Bitch at 6:40 pm on Oct. 20, 2008 I've had extended experience with caffeine, alcohol, cannabis and amphetamine so you shut the fuck up Sorry son, but the more you talk the less qualified you seem to be discussing on this topic. Cannabis isn't even considered an addictive substance at all, and I think there's hardly an individual in North America who hasn't consumed caffeine. It seems as though you don't have a leg to stand on. Bye now. -- Posted by Wilder at 10:15 am on Oct. 21, 2008 I'd be very suprised if you've had more extended experience with addictive substances than myself, and if that's correct then you have no place to talk. You're making the same mistake that BB originally slammed you for. The fact that in your personal opinion you were not addicted in the instances when you did some substances in no way constitutes grounds to make a universal statement about the nature of addiction--to do so is to commit a logical fallacy. In short, when someone goes into seizures and dies because of alcohol addiction you can't brush it off as a state of mind because it was easy for you to come off speed. -- Posted by sadnessness at 2:38 pm on Oct. 21, 2008 Surely this article only takes into account the physical addiction to heroin? What about psychological addictions, where, for example, a cup of coffee can trigger the urge to smoke? I'll link in a psychology page on it: http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/200806/no-thanks-i-need-smoke Oh and wallopwoop, isnt cannabis widely regarded as the doorway into other drugs? Meaning it is probably addicive, just as caffeine is (YES, caffeine is addictive too) -- Posted by ElephantStone at 2:48 pm on Oct. 21, 2008 Quote: from sadnessness at 10:38 pm on Oct. 21, 2008 Surely this article only takes into account the physical addiction to heroin? What about psychological addictions, where, for example, a cup of coffee can trigger the urge to smoke? I'll link in a psychology page on it: http://blogs.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/200806/no-thanks-i-need-smoke   Oh and wallopwoop, isnt cannabis widely regarded as the doorway into other drugs? Meaning it is probably addicive, just as caffeine is (YES, caffeine is addictive too) I think the article was about choosing to be addicted, and the way the mind deals with it. You physically take heroin, so you physically show it, and have to be satisfied physically. That is why he talks so much about the physical aspect of it. But he talks about salt and fooling people out of withdrawal, and how very often addicts exaggerate their withdrawal because they feel it should be worse, ion an effort to get a hit. It was all psychological to me. -- Posted by wallopwoop at 3:37 pm on Oct. 21, 2008 Quote: from Wilder at 10:15 am on Oct. 21, 2008 I'd be very suprised if you've had more extended experience with addictive substances than myself, and if that's correct then you have no place to talk. You're making the same mistake that BB originally slammed you for. The fact that in your personal opinion you were not addicted in the instances when you did some substances in no way constitutes grounds to make a universal statement about the nature of addiction--to do so is to commit a logical fallacy. In short, when someone goes into seizures and dies because of alcohol addiction you can't brush it off as a state of mind because it was easy for you to come off speed. Like I said, if you can provide solid evidence to the contrary of my argument then you've got me. But you can't. Also, typically deaths from alcohol poisoning result from binge drinking, not a so-called "alcohol addiction".  Sadnessness, cannabis is said to be a "gateway drug" by DARE and similar programs, but if you ask actual drug users you'll almost always find that they began using recreational substances with alcohol. Pages: 1 2  Next