Addiction is a Disease / Youre an opiophile for LIFE

[LongKissGoodNite]

I got back from my sub doctor first visit about 4 - 5 hours ago. Having a bit of trouble adjusting but with enough time and common sense I think I can get it all to balance out. Good thing I have the weekend.

So, while at the office, he starts going on and on about how addiction is a disease and I will have to be on subs a long long time and blah blah blah. Im not entirely convinced I have any kind of 'chronic' condition whatsoever, because ive always been one of those independent headstrong types. But lately I have actually been entertaining this notion. What if I really do have some fucked problem? Before I found opiates my DOC, I was doing drugs off and on for about 9 - 10 years. Do I have a disease?

Do others feel like they have a 'lifelong condition'? Does that bother you specifically? Or is this something to just get over, like the idea that you weren't a tall buff superstar basketball player, or whatever the fuck is the case. :)

[Morphus]

I've got mixed views about this view; I really don't like to be judged anything "for life" lots of junkies worse off than I have got off the shit so I know it's possible. But opiate addiction does kind of fit the disease model, repeated exposure to opiates breeds a compulsion to continue using, regardless of the consequences (for some) others are able to manage their addictions before they become all-consuming. One thing for sure is that chronic opiate use causes your brain chemistry to change, and it takes a long time to get back to normal, this is what does most people in and makes it so hard to quit. Sub is no different, they just wont get you high. Did he pitch you some line about being on sub and allowing your "brain to heal'? Cause the brain is not going to be healing while saturated with opioids, I think sub is just easier to manage than other drugs, thats all.

[doctor diesel]

One thing for sure is that chronic opiate use causes your brain chemistry to change, and it takes a long time to get back to normal, this is what does most people in and makes it so hard to quit.

My understanding, Morph, is that it never does actually get back to normal, that there is a permanent 're-wiring' that occurs. Also that you end up with a number of opiate receptors that is far, far greater than the norm.
Is this correct?

Doc

[Duckfeet]

I've been loving opiates, and hating opiates, and quitting opiates, and chasing opiates, and calling my love/hatred of opiates all kinds of names, depending on what the latest theory is, for several decades.

And in spite of all this, I've had a pretty good, interesting, life: full of love, friendship, adventure, success...and failure...I've had seven years and five years as an adult, totally off of opiates of any kind...and have found myself in between these times, wishing I had dope, or laying on some bunk miserable because I can't get off it. I've broken into drugstores to get dope, and flushed excellent pharmaceuticals down the toilet in despair at being so strungout.

I've never met *anyone* other than someone who has the exact same "problem", who really knew what the fuck they were talking about...whether they call it a disease, a "choice", a sin, or just "your own fucking business"...it doesn't really matter.

Opiates have been around a lot longer than whatever the latest "medical theories" have...and I suspect, long after all these docs and treatment center "experts," are dead that opiates will still be here.

I have a "lifelong condition" all right: it's called being human...what part opiates play in that condition, for good or evil, I don't know anymore...I haven't done any lately, and I'm going swimming...

I always like people who are a little unsure of themselves: makes for a happier life, IMHO, so don't be hard on yourself about all this...I'm the same way...

[LongKissGoodNite]

I've got mixed views about this view; I really don't like to be judged anything "for life" lots of junkies worse off than I have got off the shit so I know it's possible. But opiate addiction does kind of fit the disease model, repeated exposure to opiates breeds a compulsion to continue using, regardless of the consequences (for some) others are able to manage their addictions before they become all-consuming. One thing for sure is that chronic opiate use causes your brain chemistry to change, and it takes a long time to get back to normal, this is what does most people in and makes it so hard to quit. Sub is no different, they just wont get you high. Did he pitch you some line about being on sub and allowing your "brain to heal'? Cause the brain is not going to be healing while saturated with opioids, I think sub is just easier to manage than other drugs, thats all.

Ha, I love the 'brain healing' comment. Maybe they're refering to the cycle of abuse/dependance. I always felt a little freaked out at the notion that my brain chemistry has been altered. I figure thats why it takes so long to recover, the brain has to compensate for the substance it had been receiving from external sources for so long. But does that make me a junky for life? Maybe I should just accept that idea so i can get on with things.

[LongKissGoodNite]

I've been loving opiates, and hating opiates, and quitting opiates, and chasing opiates, and calling my love/hatred of opiates all kinds of names, depending on what the latest theory is, for several decades.

And in spite of all this, I've had a pretty good, interesting, life: full of love, friendship, adventure, success...and failure...I've had seven years and five years as an adult, totally off of opiates of any kind...and have found myself in between these times, wishing I had dope, or laying on some bunk miserable because I can't get off it. I've broken into drugstores to get dope, and flushed excellent pharmaceuticals down the toilet in despair at being so strungout.

I've never met *anyone* other than someone who has the exact same "problem", who really knew what the fuck they were talking about...whether they call it a disease, a "choice", a sin, or just "your own fucking business"...it doesn't really matter.

Opiates have been around a lot longer than whatever the latest "medical theories" have...and I suspect, long after all these docs and treatment center "experts," are dead that opiates will still be here.

I have a "lifelong condition" all right: it's called being human...what part opiates play in that condition, for good or evil, I don't know anymore...I haven't done any lately, and I'm going swimming...

I always like people who are a little unsure of themselves: makes for a happier life, IMHO, so don't be hard on yourself about all this...I'm the same way...

bravo, this makes a lot of sense to me.

[nick]

Yeah,personally,I'm not totally sure either.However I'd much rather label addiction a disease than a moral failing and be treated by a doctor rather than a cop.

I have this feeling that eventually they'll discover a little group of synapses that are messed up and cause addiction,but by then it will be too late for us.

[Morphus]

Ha, I love the 'brain healing' comment. Maybe they're refering to the cycle of abuse/dependance. I always felt a little freaked out at the notion that my brain chemistry has been altered. I figure thats why it takes so long to recover, the brain has to compensate for the substance it had been receiving from external sources for so long. But does that make me a junky for life? Maybe I should just accept that idea so i can get on with things.


It seems these doctors really dont know what they're doing, sub is not some magical "healing" substance, its strong shit with a crazy halflife that fills the same opiate receptors that were formerly occupied by whatever you were using. It may make for a more stable, managable existence but you're just as strung out, why cant they see that?

[Morfiend]

I have a "lifelong condition" all right: it's called being human...what part opiates play in that condition, for good or evil, I don't know anymore...I haven't done any lately, and I'm going swimming...

:) I like that.

Perhaps after doing opiates, you can never 'return' to what you were before... but this is true for many other things in life and some of the things you might wish to get back of your former non-opiated personality can be returned through other experiences.

So I think the view of your doctor is a bit 1-dimensional. Duckfeet makes a great point here that I've noticed him making over and over again... part of being happy is accepting that you are not consistent (is that accurate Duckfeet?). I have a hard time dealing with this... but often times I look back at who I was a year ago and I have learned so much that I can't imagine being that person again nor would I want to. Just based on this, I have to accept that I will not be the same person a year from now and can't possibly get everything right.

To answer the original post directly: it doesn't seem to be practical to think this way regardless of how 'true' it may be. It is a pessimistic view and can only serve to limit what you believe is possible... and it is certainly possible to quit opiates for many years.

[betmylife]

the fact that we are drawn to any substance that is mind altering, whether or not you are physically dependent, makes a strong case that there is a chemical imbalance in us. I believe these chemical imbalances are different in everyone, being some people are drawn to different drugs....addiction fits the criteria of a chronic disease, as is often gets worse the longer it goes on......now everyone is different, we are sitting here, using computers, so its hard to compare us to the junkie who lives in the street and steals for his drugs......some people are know to accommodate this disease, some cannot and they end up dead......each person is different, someone may decide to quit one day and quit, most of us are not so lucky.......I guess the point is, some people go beyond having a choice and I would call them diseased.....


on the topic of subs, I don't think most sub doctors know their ass from a hole in the wall, you also have to remember that the longer you are on the subs, the more money they make........also subs cost a lot in the pharmacy, its just another way the healthcare system is fucking people.......its all about $$$$.......if a doc really cared, he would tell you to check into detox, and take the subs in decreasing amounts for one week.....no more major physical w/d symptoms, give something for sleep for a month, and then you are good...physically.....mentally you have to decide why you take drugs in the first place, and attack that.....


me? personally? I say fuck it, I like being high......I LIKE the struggle to keep myself in check......when it gets old, and I can't take it anymore.....then I'll worry about my disease.....

peace

bml

[JonnyMohawk]

he starts going on and on about how addiction is a disease and I will have to be on subs a long long time and blah blah blah.


I really despise the idea that addiction is a disease.

Its a choice. We choose to ingest whatever psychoactive substances.


No one ever CHOSE cancer.

</rant>

[betmylife]

I really despise the idea that addiction is a disease.

Its a choice. We choose to ingest whatever psychoactive substances.


No one ever CHOSE cancer.

</rant>



lots of people choose cancer, they are called smokers, people overeat and choose diabetes, people have unprotected sex and choose AIDS and STDs, plenty of people choose diease........and some people go beyond choice with their addiction.....it fits the medical def of a disease.....

[JonnyMohawk]

lots of people choose cancer, they are called smokers, people overeat and choose diabetes, people have unprotected sex and choose AIDS and STDs, plenty of people choose diease........and some people go beyond choice with their addiction.....it fits the medical def of a disease.....


Addico, ergo sum
by Dr. Jeffrey A. Schaler What does the word "addiction" mean? "Addiction" means to devote oneself toward something, toward someone, toward some activity, or toward some experience. It means "to say yes to", "to consent to". The word "addiction" shares the same Latin root, dicere, as the words abdication, dictator, and dictation.
Addiction is a choice. It refers to something a person does, not to something a person has. It refers to behavior, mode of conduct, or deportment. Addiction is, by definition, voluntary, arising from one's own free will. Addiction is a socially constructed concept - like "the economy." There is no such thing as the economy. There is no such thing as addiction. The word "addiction" describes nothing. It is often used to prescribe something - a behavior, a way of life. This means that while many people use the word "addiction" as if they are describing some behavior, they are really prescribing how a person should or shouldn't live. In this sense, they are being moralistic.
Addiction is not a disease. It is not something someone has. It is not a lesion, or a seizure. Addiction is not involuntary. This distinction is important because since addiction is not a disease, it can be neither diagnosed or treated.
Despite the fact that behavior and disease are different, many people who believe addiction is "treatable" equate the two. Smoking is a behavior. Cancer is a disease. Drinking is a behavior. Cirrhosis of the liver is a disease. Smoking is not cancer. Drinking is not cirrhosis.
Scientists abide by certain rules to identify and treat diseases. If we are to take seriously the assertion that addiction is a treatable disease, it is necessary to inquire as to whether the rules for diagnosis and disease classification are applied and abided by in responsible and meaningful ways.
Diseases are physical. They are diagnosed by symptoms (complaints) and signs (lesions), or by signs alone (asymptomatic diseases). They are rarely diagnosed on the basis of symptoms alone (there are a few exceptions, such as migraine headache). "Addiction" is not listed in standard textbooks of pathology because it does not meet the nosological criteria for disease classification. This is because addiction is "diagnosed" solely on the basis of symptoms. There are no signs of addiction. All pathologists agree: Addiction is not a disease.


-sorry I'd say it myself, but I found someone who can say it much better.

[Morphus]

I used to have the same opinions and rationales as you Jonny M, but over the years my views have changed. Perhaps the question of choice is legit but if you look at heroin as a virus, and exposure to the virus induces the disease of addiction then it kind of works. That kind of how I see it and thats not even my idea, Bill B came up with that one, the ole "junk virus".

[betmylife]

Addico, ergo sum
by Dr. Jeffrey A. Schaler What does the word "addiction" mean? "Addiction" means to devote oneself toward something, toward someone, toward some activity, or toward some experience. It means "to say yes to", "to consent to". The word "addiction" shares the same Latin root, dicere, as the words abdication, dictator, and dictation.
Addiction is a choice. It refers to something a person does, not to something a person has. It refers to behavior, mode of conduct, or deportment. Addiction is, by definition, voluntary, arising from one's own free will. Addiction is a socially constructed concept - like "the economy." There is no such thing as the economy. There is no such thing as addiction. The word "addiction" describes nothing. It is often used to prescribe something - a behavior, a way of life. This means that while many people use the word "addiction" as if they are describing some behavior, they are really prescribing how a person should or shouldn't live. In this sense, they are being moralistic.
Addiction is not a disease. It is not something someone has. It is not a lesion, or a seizure. Addiction is not involuntary. This distinction is important because since addiction is not a disease, it can be neither diagnosed or treated.
Despite the fact that behavior and disease are different, many people who believe addiction is "treatable" equate the two. Smoking is a behavior. Cancer is a disease. Drinking is a behavior. Cirrhosis of the liver is a disease. Smoking is not cancer. Drinking is not cirrhosis.
Scientists abide by certain rules to identify and treat diseases. If we are to take seriously the assertion that addiction is a treatable disease, it is necessary to inquire as to whether the rules for diagnosis and disease classification are applied and abided by in responsible and meaningful ways.
Diseases are physical. They are diagnosed by symptoms (complaints) and signs (lesions), or by signs alone (asymptomatic diseases). They are rarely diagnosed on the basis of symptoms alone (there are a few exceptions, such as migraine headache). "Addiction" is not listed in standard textbooks of pathology because it does not meet the nosological criteria for disease classification. This is because addiction is "diagnosed" solely on the basis of symptoms. There are no signs of addiction. All pathologists agree: Addiction is not a disease.


-sorry I'd say it myself, but I found someone who can say it much better.



called an opinion.......not saying addiction is a disease, Im just saying it fits the criteria........and I can see how people think it is.........but since one pathologist says otherwise, I give up......nice use of google though, way to think for yourself........4 out of 5 dentists agree, flying saucers are real............and if addiciton isn't real, I guess we can tell the thousands of crackheads and junkies to, hey just stop ok!!!! your problem isn't real.........think of all the wasted real estate in the rehab buisness, and all those poor folks wasting their time sucking down coffee at AA/NA meetings, all over a fake problem........crazy.

[JonnyMohawk]

called an opinion.......not saying addiction is a disease, Im just saying it fits the criteria........and I can see how people think it is.........but since one pathologist says otherwise, I give up......nice use of google though, way to think for yourself........4 out of 5 dentists agree, flying saucers are real............and if addiciton isn't real, I guess we can tell the thousands of crackheads and junkies to, hey just stop ok!!!! your problem isn't real.........think of all the wasted real estate in the rehab buisness, and all those poor folks wasting their time sucking down coffee at AA/NA meetings, all over a fake problem........crazy.


Im not saying people arent addicts, and I'm not saying that some don't need help.

I just don't think 'disease' is the right term for it.

I'm not sure why you are so defensive bml.

Yeah I used google, I am not a doctor, however I didn't just look for data supporting my point, I cant find anything that says addiction meets the criteria of a disease.


No need to take it personal man, it's ok to disagree.

[LongKissGoodNite]

Addict / Disease or what have you, I really like Duckfeet's interpretation of the whole issue. The fact is we are human and humans make mistakes. I have a 'frien-emy' if you are familiar with the term and he and I are always competing always at each other's throats. I always used to look at myself as inferior to him because of my issues but when I look at it as a human problem that whole perspective goes out the window. He smokes like a chimney and has major health problems because of his youthful indescresions .. so its all even i guess.

Making the decision to quit or go on subs i guess doesnt matter at this point. If I can take steps to stop the chase and get my life back together i suppose it irrelevant how long I need to take this shit. I can look at it as a chronic injury of sorts ;0)

[Duckfeet]

Yes, but I also recognize that much of this is just simply because I'm almost sixty years old...when you get older, you either accept a lot of things about your life, and get a bit of shrug in your shoulders, or end up miserable and angry most of the time...I seem pretty cheerful, generally, and I think I got better, finally, about ten years ago, when i understood my own inconsistencies...

*But* the thing that always gives me pause, when I start pontificating or acting like this is some sort of guidleline to living, is that you *shouldn't* give in when you are young: many people do great things, many people escape opiate addiction, and it can be a beautiful exciting world, and being spunky, (and not just laying down and saying "fuck it, I'm a dopefiend...") is the way to live...I've not on opiates now, but I guess my life has taught me not to get too sure of myself, and to enjoy life when I can...

So from my vantage point, to be happy, I might see life this way, but you don't have to, and it's good you want more from your life...

:) I like that.

Perhaps after doing opiates, you can never 'return' to what you were before... but this is true for many other things in life and some of the things you might wish to get back of your former non-opiated personality can be returned through other experiences.

So I think the view of your doctor is a bit 1-dimensional. Duckfeet makes a great point here that I've noticed him making over and over again... part of being happy is accepting that you are not consistent (is that accurate Duckfeet?). I have a hard time dealing with this... but often times I look back at who I was a year ago and I have learned so much that I can't imagine being that person again nor would I want to. Just based on this, I have to accept that I will not be the same person a year from now and can't possibly get everything right.

To answer the original post directly: it doesn't seem to be practical to think this way regardless of how 'true' it may be. It is a pessimistic view and can only serve to limit what you believe is possible... and it is certainly possible to quit opiates for many years.

[The_Highwayman]

My doctor told me, this part that I agree with, is that my brain is now or has always been hard-wired that when I don't like what is going on with it to seek out a way to alter it, and when I found opiates I found that opiates were that preferred way, I can't say I have a lifelong condion/disease/disorder but I do know that when things seem like thye are too much to bear, my mind will go right to using H to sort things out....

[lotus]

i'm not comfortable with calling it a *disease* - but that may be more from a decade and a half of 12 step bullshit and my Absolute Hate of it.

and choice - yes it's a choice, to a degree. every time you fix (or get high) you decide to do so - you don't actually have to, you can decide not to.....which is where we end up when we finally stop (even if it's only a little while).

HOWEVER - something happens, something changes, and once it does it cannot be taken back, and it never goes away. addiction takes away your ability to choose, to decide...maybe addiction is a third thing.....and by arguing over disease vs choice we're not finding it.

as far as the vast array of drugs goes - i'm 32....and tho for many that's still young, i've been doing this long enough to know one thing for sure - no other drug fucks you the way opiates do. people never seem to get, and stay, off of them. the odd month or two oxy kid not included. infact, of all the people i know and have heard of (in real life) i've got one of the longest standing not-using records......5ish (possibly a little more) years. there's one other girl at my clinic, she has like 7 or 8 years, and one other guy.....think a little more.

i know all kinds of people who've gotten off all kinds of shit - but not with this class of drugs.

i've spent the last 5 years waiting for it to go away, or at least lessen......it hasn't. it doesn't. it's taken a long time to accept it may be like this till i die - and i'm slowly learning to live with that. if i'm going to spend every moment of life measuring it up to a shot i'm never going to get anywhere, i might as well use. so i'm getting used to this - taking things for what they are, the way they are.

[Morphus]

i'm not comfortable with calling it a *disease* - but that may be more from a decade and a half of 12 step bullshit and my Absolute Hate of it.

and choice - yes it's a choice, to a degree. every time you fix (or get high) you decide to do so - you don't actually have to, you can decide not to.....which is where we end up when we finally stop (even if it's only a little while).

HOWEVER - something happens, something changes, and once it does it cannot be taken back, and it never goes away. addiction takes away your ability to choose, to decide...maybe addiction is a third thing.....and by arguing over disease vs choice we're not finding it.

as far as the vast array of drugs goes - i'm 32....and tho for many that's still young, i've been doing this long enough to know one thing for sure - no other drug fucks you the way opiates do. people never seem to get, and stay, off of them. the odd month or two oxy kid not included. infact, of all the people i know and have heard of (in real life) i've got one of the longest standing not-using records......5ish (possibly a little more) years. there's one other girl at my clinic, she has like 7 or 8 years, and one other guy.....think a little more.

i know all kinds of people who've gotten off all kinds of shit - but not with this class of drugs.

i've spent the last 5 years waiting for it to go away, or at least lessen......it hasn't. it doesn't. it's taken a long time to accept it may be like this till i die - and i'm slowly learning to live with that. if i'm going to spend every moment of life measuring it up to a shot i'm never going to get anywhere, i might as well use. so i'm getting used to this - taking things for what they are, the way they are.

Wow. Sobering stuff

[Chipper]

Honestly, I see all addictions as a self-reinforcing, progressive form of behaviour.

Addiction is as much a disease as fire is a life form. Almost, might as well be but not quite.

Whatever it is, it's impact is so profound, it is with you for life. Even if it's just a memory.

It's also possible to be suspended indefinitely starting with only thoughts, alone.

[Duckfeet]

I'm always torn, lotus, you know, between seriously trying to encourage people when they are struggling to get off the shit, and at the same time, trying to give a little hope comfort to those who fall by the wayside, time and time again...

I'm not sure of *anything* anymore...I do go to AA, but I kind of like people who detest AA, so I'm not sure what that makes me...probably just old and beat, haha...and though many people on here I respect and like, do see it as a disease--and you *know* most of the 12steppers do--I've never really bought into that...I can defend why I don't, and often have, on here, but I see what Nick and others say, too: that seeing it as a "disease," is better than seeing it as a crime, or a sin, etc...but I think calling it *anything* that lets other people tell me what to do about it is fucked up totally...but like most, I make do the best I can with this shit...

And finally, I *have* known people to get off it, but they've always bought into some kind of spiritual transformation, which I'm afraid I don't want or believe in, really...there's a pretty well known AA with fifty years off of dope and alcohol who always begins his story with talking about crawling around naked on his hands and knees in a San Quentin prison cell, kicking heroin...but he also was the first guy I heard, way back in my Louisiana days, who said: "If me speaking about God will drive you out of AA, then whiskey will drive you back in..." And everybody thought that was funny, but I never did: I thought it was kind of sad, as I didn't want to drink no more, and couldn't possibly believe in God...oh well, I'm still here, and many of the more religous people I know have gone to wherever it is they go when they die drunk or doped up....

It's a tough deal: I've obviously got *some* kind of acceptance of this opiate addiction being with me to the grave...but I still fight it...was down today plotting on getting another little sailboat and sailing away...I never change :)

i'm not comfortable with calling it a *disease* - but that may be more from a decade and a half of 12 step bullshit and my Absolute Hate of it.

and choice - yes it's a choice, to a degree. every time you fix (or get high) you decide to do so - you don't actually have to, you can decide not to.....which is where we end up when we finally stop (even if it's only a little while).

HOWEVER - something happens, something changes, and once it does it cannot be taken back, and it never goes away. addiction takes away your ability to choose, to decide...maybe addiction is a third thing.....and by arguing over disease vs choice we're not finding it.

as far as the vast array of drugs goes - i'm 32....and tho for many that's still young, i've been doing this long enough to know one thing for sure - no other drug fucks you the way opiates do. people never seem to get, and stay, off of them. the odd month or two oxy kid not included. infact, of all the people i know and have heard of (in real life) i've got one of the longest standing not-using records......5ish (possibly a little more) years. there's one other girl at my clinic, she has like 7 or 8 years, and one other guy.....think a little more.

i know all kinds of people who've gotten off all kinds of shit - but not with this class of drugs.

i've spent the last 5 years waiting for it to go away, or at least lessen......it hasn't. it doesn't. it's taken a long time to accept it may be like this till i die - and i'm slowly learning to live with that. if i'm going to spend every moment of life measuring it up to a shot i'm never going to get anywhere, i might as well use. so i'm getting used to this - taking things for what they are, the way they are.

[digby]

I've always felt that addiction was doing something that felt good that was one reason short of doing something else that felt good.

[OrangeLude]

happy sunday people.. Duck, you and I have been around the same block ... although I'm not yet sixty, I'm well passed 50 ;)

Disease concept...I think in the years of clean time that I have had...I believed in the disease concept & I rationalized it with the line 'continued use despite negative consequences'...

the 12 step community believes in the disease concept. doesn't matter much to me...like df said I have a bit of shoulder shrug too....does that make it true?

medical community believes in disease concept...does that make it true?

the insurance companies treat it as a medical condition - it it a disease?

Does doing substances come from being at dis - ease? I am at dis ease a lot and take benzo's to calm down...

Moyers - The Hi Jacked Brain - calls it a disease - does that make it true?

If one person says you have a tail - you can tell em to f*ck off, if two people tell you there's a tail back there, you may take a peek?...but if three tell you you have a tail - you better check your ass out.

I personally agree that addicts are spiritually, emotionally & physically ill. That their dependance on substances has taken on the look, feel, touch & smell of a disease. That it is in fact a chronic illness that although there are periods of remission, periods of extended clean time that even result in death from 'natural' causes .... dependance/addiction...qualitfy as a disease in my thought cycles.

time for toast & mmt!

[dharma bum]

Somebody once said, "If addiction is a disease, it's the only disease that has "spirituality" as the cure." Or something to that effect..i'm paraphrasing.

It would be comforting to believe it's a disease---therefore out of your hands---no, i would rather believe it is my choice, that it's not a moral failure. There might be some truth to Endorphin Defiency Syndrome. If it is true the person without endorphins still has a choice whether or not to mask the problem with opiates. I would..But many great things, great works of art came from tortured people. Great for us to enjoy...not so great for the them....

[PdoubleE]

Addiction is a "self-inflicted" disease. I think that sums it up pretty well.

[ryan]

Yeah,personally,I'm not totally sure either.However I'd much rather label addiction a disease than a moral failing and be treated by a doctor rather than a cop.

I have this feeling that eventually they'll discover a little group of synapses that are messed up and cause addiction,but by then it will be too late for us.

Good point. Addiction cannot be technically considered a disease. There are a handful of of people like thomas szasz who see things this way who speak out against "false" diseases...that are really medically NOT diseases because there is no proof that there is some kind of ailment. Maybe someday there will be a way to determine this though...

Myself, I think the problem goes much deeper than using drugs.
I've always felt like I have something seriously wrong with me...drugs just helped to keep me stable and aleviate the symptoms...I am like crazy though seriously.
I hate being in social situations...come to think of it I really do not like most human beings on this planet.
I dunno what it is but I just do NOT like being around most people.
They annoy me.
I also have like manic outbursts where I will say begin working on a project (writing a new song, coding some software, hacking, etc.) and go balls out -- just ignore everything else in my life and concentrate on the task at hand, and then stop halfway through and get really irritated and annoyed easily, then depressed and not want to do anything. It sucks...

But yeah, as far as craving opiates, that is a lifelong thing for me.
I just did 120mg of opana on friday night after not using anything for 2 months almost...i didn't plan on it, I just did it...it sucks and it just made things worse i think overall cause now I feel really shitty.

Oh yeah ive been on suboxone for 3 years now and I dont think ill ever get off...if I am forced off I will have to turn to methadone.
Maybe meth will help with depression \ manic ness..who knows.

[LongKissGoodNite]

Here is an interesting take on addiction / recovery that some of you may or may not have heard before. The gist is that the AA community precludes the idea of quitting on your own. Anyway .. its a long one, but you may like it. Check it out:

http://rational.org/index.php?id=97

[HandMeSomeOpiates]

I always like people who are a little unsure of themselves: makes for a happier life, IMHO, so don't be hard on yourself about all this...I'm the same way...
No doubt man, no doubt!!

[HandMeSomeOpiates]

Honestly, I see all addictions as a self-reinforcing, progressive form of behaviour.

Addiction is as much a disease as fire is a life form. Almost, might as well be but not quite.

Whatever it is, it's impact is so profound, it is with you for life. Even if it's just a memory.



Chipper I agree with you on that. It will stick with you for life just like any type of tragedy or a chaotic/dramatic event. You will never forget it, that's for sure.

[lotus]

I'm not sure of *anything* anymore..



these days that's the only thing i'm sure of.

[chinaski]

Reminds me of a great Mitch Hedberg quote:

"Alcoholism is a disease, but it's the only one you can get yelled at for having."

Even if disease is the wrong word for addiction, I think it's just simple minded to call it a moral failing. All of us know personally that drug use changes the way your brain works, at least temporarily. Science has validated this. So once your brain has an imbalance, it's fairly likely that it will need to be treated medically. The same as chronic depression, schizophrenia, and a million other mental health 'diseases'. Unfortunately if we don't call it a 'disease' then suddenly it won't be covered by insurance, the ADA, ect. So what we call it isn't just an academic, scientific discussion -- it has real implications to health policy, legal status, ect.

So I say call it a disease and fuck the semantic debate. Once addiction kicks in, there is a mental state that need to be treated medically (whether via detox, management, abstinence, whatever). I have to agree with the idea that smokers choose to smoke, then they get cancer (well sometimes, just like addiction). I do think that addiction as a disease is a treatable condition and not something you have to live with forever. That's where the real choice is. But I also understand why someone would choose to stay addicted. At least you can still get high ONCE in a while!

[Duckfeet]

The main problem I have with "disease", is that calling my desire for opiates, a disease, hasn't really *changed* anything, that I can see. They've had treatment centers, and judges and p.o.'s sending us to AA/NA for around 30 years or more now...and has the actual life of a heroin addict gotten any better: we still go to jail, we have even more trouble getting decent drugs, and now we have to pay for our methadone...

Sure, if they had said: "Boy, you have a disease, and since this is the case, we are going to put you on diamorphine, until you are satisfied that you can function without stealing or hustling doctors...how does that sound?"...*then* I'd say, "that's right, I damn sure have a disease!"

It just seems more of the old con, to me. I don't see any real improvement in the lives of addicts...unless they want to go off the shit for good, but that's not the way this disease "usually" works...

Diabetics can still eat candy and ice cream if they so choose, smokers can still smoke, even *drunks* can still drink...but us *and* our disease still get thrown in jail...I'm not buying it. If they treated us humanely...but they don't...watch the look on your doc's face when you tell him: "Oh doctor, I have this other disease, too--I'm addicted to opiates...what can you give me for that?" Ha ha....

[lotus]

this is my problem with the 12 step version of disease, and why i have such a hard time accepting the term disease......said by someone else

historically, alcoholism referred simply to the excessive drinking of alcohol. with the advent of AA in the '30s, alcoholism became a specific physical disease - AA not only created this disease called alcoholism but also devised a treatment. none of this occurred in a laboratory, clinical, or academic setting. it happened in church basements.

AA has become a victim of it's own success - thrust into roles in our society that it is neither designed for, nor able to fulfill. it has been protected from traditional logical assault by the shield it has borrowed from traditional religions. in it's simplest, communal form, AA is, as it's members say, "wonderful". but when AA comes to us in it's institutional form, enforced by the military, the courts, and social welfare agencies, and set the agenda for practically every treatment program in north america, it is intolerable.

as far as the 12 step cure goes - maybe some people are bad and empty and need god to make them whole and worthwhile? i am not one of them. i am not one of them and to be told, for 15 years, that i was...while being told (sum'd up version) i'm a piece of conceited shit for insisting i wasn't - the cherry on top being a juvenile for the first half of that time - tell me how that help'd me, in any way, what so ever. and this shit being inflicted upon minors - i won't even go there, i get so angry....

any other cure......there's no such thing. you either keep on keepin' on, or you do whatever it takes to stop. period.

[JonnyMohawk]

maybe some people are bad and empty and need god to make them whole and worthwhile? i am not one of them. i am not one of them and to be told, for 15 years, that i was...while being told (sum'd up version) i'm a piece of conceited shit for insisting i wasn't - the cherry on top being a juvenile for the first half of that time - tell me how that help'd me, in any way, what so ever. and this shit being inflicted upon minors


Lotus didn't you get the memo?

You're a junky piece of shit, who can't take control of your own life, and you must surender to a higher power if you want to be functional again.


duh.

[nhop]

Hey Lotus:
"Meeting makers make it!!!@!" ;):D
Just kiddin, my man. Actually u said it very well. The only thing I would add about Institutional, (ie- "forced down yer throat!!!" AA/NA) is they violate their own traditions: "attraction rather than promotion" (or coercion, as is the unfortunate case...)
Cheers.

[nick]

The main problem I have with "disease", is that calling my desire for opiates, a disease, hasn't really *changed* anything, that I can see. They've had treatment centers, and judges and p.o.'s sending us to AA/NA for around 30 years or more now...and has the actual life of a heroin addict gotten any better: we still go to jail, we have even more trouble getting decent drugs, and now we have to pay for our methadone...

Sure, if they had said: "Boy, you have a disease, and since this is the case, we are going to put you on diamorphine, until you are satisfied that you can function without stealing or hustling doctors...how does that sound?"...*then* I'd say, "that's right, I damn sure have a disease!"

It just seems more of the old con, to me. I don't see any real improvement in the lives of addicts...unless they want to go off the shit for good, but that's not the way this disease "usually" works...

Diabetics can still eat candy and ice cream if they so choose, smokers can still smoke, even *drunks* can still drink...but us *and* our disease still get thrown in jail...I'm not buying it. If they treated us humanely...but they don't...watch the look on your doc's face when you tell him: "Oh doctor, I have this other disease, too--I'm addicted to opiates...what can you give me for that?" Ha ha....

Well bro,that's what happened to me.My nice doc said " Here Nick,take this diamorphine and go and lie in a dark room.Oh and try not to infect anyone on the way out."

Well,maybe not quite those words,but you get the idea and you know what? It worked.

The problem is not the disease model(however flawed it maybe),but the American medical profession's totally cowardly treatment policy.

[Duckfeet]

In this sense I do agree with you, Nick, and I always think of you, and England, when I say this...I think America had some negative influence on England's humane policy towards addicts (not to mention gov't intervention in doctor's buisiness), but as our influence is waning in so many other areas of the world, perhaps here, too, our gov't may finally realize they blew it, and leave other country's drug policicies alone, from mexico to canada to afghanistan...and I still don't think the disease model itself, helped much anywhere: if I recall, England had the most benign treatment of addicts in any western country...long before they called it a disease...and unfortunately, along w/the "disease concept" seemed to come "more or less" forced methadone clinics, as now, the gov't was no longer just treating "addicts" ...but "sick" people...and of course, they knew best....but it's a tricky area...I'm looking at results, and here in U.S.A., I can't really see much improvement, not for hardcore addicts...which I consider myself, even if I'm off dope...I'm a heroin addict, nobody's business in the government to fuck up my whole life, whether it's unending treatment/detox/interventions followed by jail...or just plain old jail...


Well bro,that's what happened to me.My nice doc said " Here Nick,take this diamorphine and go and lie in a dark room.Oh and try not to infect anyone on the way out."

Well,maybe not quite those words,but you get the idea and you know what? It worked.

The problem is not the disease model(however flawed it maybe),but the American medical profession's totally cowardly treatment policy.

[Duckfeet]

Well, I kind of agree with the main thrust, here, too...but I will say that AA's that have been around a while, feel the same way about us not wanting, or needing, to have such public success...more than one oldtimer has said they miss the days when people were embarassed to go to AA...we don't push this shit...but judges, probation officers, treatment center counselors do...I don't think it's AA so much breaking their traditions, as not knowing quite what to do...we tend to go where we are asked to go--I go to the jail a couple times a month, detox, places like that, and just tell my crazy story, and I say pretty much what has been said here: don't believe in God, not really, but I needed the direction and hope that AA gave me...I rarely talk about it on here--as long as I've been here--because I do believe in the traditions, and you are absolutely right...

The other thing, is that since nobody really has any idea *how* to quit this shit, AA took on this huge role, since they did have *some* success with end-stage alcoholics, and we really are so *limited* in scope: I told a guy that last night, who going on and on about methamphetamine: man, we're just about alchoholism, nothing else...

Most people wouldn't even give a shit about AA, if they *hadn't* been forced to go there...and I'm absolutely against everybody making people go to AA: it doesn't help them, and it fucks AA *all* up...and I'm one of *many* in AA who think that signing court slips, and having people there who don't want to be there, is what is destroying us....

"God?"...not me: I just needed a little honesty and direction...I know the history of AA: and how other "diseases" have copyed our shit, and how they've been battling from the beginning about who/what god was/is...the rest I see the same as any rituals, same as qigong or yoga or chanting to Krishna: don't much give a shit...I saw two dophins jumping yesterday: that's as spiritual as I want or need...

Anyway, didn't mean to go on an AA rant...I like'em, I hate'em, I go there. Need somewhere to go I guess, as my plants and you guys would get sick of listening to me non-stop :)


Hey Lotus:
"Meeting makers make it!!!@!" ;):D
Just kiddin, my man. Actually u said it very well. The only thing I would add about Institutional, (ie- "forced down yer throat!!!" AA/NA) is they violate their own traditions: "attraction rather than promotion" (or coercion, as is the unfortunate case...)
Cheers.

this is my problem with the 12 step version of disease, and why i have such a hard time accepting the term disease......said by someone else

historically, alcoholism referred simply to the excessive drinking of alcohol. with the advent of AA in the '30s, alcoholism became a specific physical disease - AA not only created this disease called alcoholism but also devised a treatment. none of this occurred in a laboratory, clinical, or academic setting. it happened in church basements.

AA has become a victim of it's own success - thrust into roles in our society that it is neither designed for, nor able to fulfill. it has been protected from traditional logical assault by the shield it has borrowed from traditional religions. in it's simplest, communal form, AA is, as it's members say, "wonderful". but when AA comes to us in it's institutional form, enforced by the military, the courts, and social welfare agencies, and set the agenda for practically every treatment program in north america, it is intolerable.

as far as the 12 step cure goes - maybe some people are bad and empty and need god to make them whole and worthwhile? i am not one of them. i am not one of them and to be told, for 15 years, that i was...while being told (sum'd up version) i'm a piece of conceited shit for insisting i wasn't - the cherry on top being a juvenile for the first half of that time - tell me how that help'd me, in any way, what so ever. and this shit being inflicted upon minors - i won't even go there, i get so angry....

any other cure......there's no such thing. you either keep on keepin' on, or you do whatever it takes to stop. period.

[lotus]

i think i have to post a temporary pic............honestly, i'm not male.

what's the time frame? one hour? then you can't delete it? i just can't put a permanent one up...

[lotus]

Well, I kind of agree with the main thrust, here, too...but I will say that AA's that have been around a while, feel the same way about us not wanting, or needing, to have such public success...more than one oldtimer has said they miss the days when people were embarassed to go to AA...we don't push this shit...but judges, probation officers, treatment center counselors do...I don't think it's AA so much breaking their traditions, as not knowing quite what to do...we tend to go where we are asked to go--I go to the jail a couple times a month, detox, places like that, and just tell my crazy story, and I say pretty much what has been said here: don't believe in God, not really, but I needed the direction and hope that AA gave me...I rarely talk about it on here--as long as I've been here--because I do believe in the traditions, and you are absolutely right...

The other thing, is that since nobody really has any idea *how* to quit this shit, AA took on this huge role, since they did have *some* success with end-stage alcoholics, and we really are so *limited* in scope: I told a guy that last night, who going on and on about methamphetamine: man, we're just about alchoholism, nothing else...

Most people wouldn't even give a shit about AA, if they *hadn't* been forced to go there...and I'm absolutely against everybody making people go to AA: it doesn't help them, and it fucks AA *all* up...and I'm one of *many* in AA who think that signing court slips, and having people there who don't want to be there, is what is destroying us....

"God?"...not me: I just needed a little honesty and direction...I know the history of AA: and how other "diseases" have copyed our shit, and how they've been battling from the beginning about who/what god was/is...the rest I see the same as any rituals, same as qigong or yoga or chanting to Krishna: don't much give a shit...I saw two dophins jumping yesterday: that's as spiritual as I want or need...

Anyway, didn't mean to go on an AA rant...I like'em, I hate'em, I go there. Need somewhere to go I guess, as my plants and you guys would get sick of listening to me non-stop :)

what you just talk'd about - is what i think is fantastic about AA. it took me many years to see what good the group actually does do......and i do believe there is a huge distinction between the communal and institutional versions of it (tho the line has been severely blur'd, there are meetings/people/places where it's still there).

i dunno. i don't scream bullshit about it like i used to. for some people it is the way out - who am i to rob them of their one fleeting thought about going to a meeting? everyone here knows the bitch-slapping crushing reality of realizing you're fucked, having no friggen clue as to how to get out, and (maybe) finally building up the nerve to say i need help. even if the success rate isn't any more than quitting alone, it's success for someone, somewhere. even tho it was a horrible nightmare for me, shitting on it makes me as awful as the people who wasted 15 years of my time.

[Paregoric Kid]

if you really want off and have the right medicines and technologies you can get off of opiates and return to a normal life. people that take opiates long term may not want to be off of them, and who can blame them? is it a disease if the "addict" doesn't view it as a disease? I don't think so. if you want to be on opiates then opiate dependence is not an abnormal condition, its a condition that you willingly want to maintain for whatever benefits you derive from the use of opiates. it could be viewed as a way of enhancing your life. if you became dependent accidentally through using it for pain or any other use and want off of it, then I guess it could be viewed as a disease. detox is for the diseased, maintenance is for those that need it for the benefits of opiates.
people should be free to choose. if you want on opiates for the rest of your life for pain relief or for the pleasure you should be free to pursue maintaining that state of being. if you want off of it you should be free to pursue ending your dependence. you have to weigh the positive and the negative and do what is right for you.

[duck]

The large disowning of the "disease" nomenclature in relation to opioid dependence in this thread reaffirms my belief that opiate users/abusers really aren't as retarded as most people think.

[KiloByte]

It seems these doctors really dont know what they're doing, sub is not some magical "healing" substance, its strong shit with a crazy halflife that fills the same opiate receptors that were formerly occupied by whatever you were using. It may make for a more stable, managable existence but you're just as strung out, why cant they see that?

Because it fills their pockets with money.

[SHELLEY]

lots of people choose cancer, they are called smokers, people overeat and choose diabetes, people have unprotected sex and choose AIDS and STDs, plenty of people choose diease........and some people go beyond choice with their addiction.....it fits the medical def of a disease.....

you can get cancer without smoking
you can get diabetes without overeating
you can get aids without having unprotected sex or sharing needles
but if you never, ever, EVER pick up a drug, you will never be a drug addict

it's a fucking choice

[PdoubleE]

Thats why its a "Self Inflicted Disease" and you cant just contract HIV or AIDS without a source.. Your body dose not produce a retro-virus for the hell of it.

[JonnyMohawk]

Thats why its a "Self Inflicted Disease" and you cant just contract HIV or AIDS without a source.. Your body dose not produce a retro-virus for the hell of it.


Then its the ONLY self inflicted disease.

and that model could apply to anything:
Chronic Masturbation is a self inflicted disease
Eating unhealthy food is a self inflicted disease

I think a lot of people like to use the 'disease' nomenclature as a scape goat.

"I can't help that I'm an addict, I have a four fold disease I can't control"

I'm not looking down on addicts, hell I am one, I just think people need to own up and say "yes I choose to do this substance", sure you may have a hard time coming off, I know I do, but that doesn't make it a disease self inflicted or otherwise.

Everyone has agency over their own life, and they can make whatever changes they choose.