Addiction - Thoughts, opinions and questions

[Lucid Phoenix]

So I'm an addict. I'm addicted to weed and computer games (specifically strategy games like Total War, Civilization, etc.). For the past year I've been in recovery, and as such haven't 'used' (smoked weed or played any games) the entire time. There's a much longer story there, and if you're interested I can share that with you, but that's not what this topic is about. I'm curious about what your views, possible prejudices, and thoughts are about addicts, and addiction in general. This includes substance addictions like weed, cocaine, alcohol, speed, heroine, etc. As well as process addictions like gaming, gambling, sex, etc. And the possible differences

I'm not easily offended, so even if you have a strong negative prejudice about addicts and addiction, I would like to know. This is not a poll, nor is it something I'm doing to seek confirmation one way or the other; I'd like to open up a discussion about how non-addicts (like most of you, I'm assuming) view a disease with a perceived stigma (or not, as the case may be). If there are any other recovering addicts on these forums, I would especially like to hear your stories about how you've come to experience this, and maybe, just maybe, we can help one another when times get tough.

[veti]

Difficult subject.

Quite often and in many contexts, I think "addiction" is really little more than an emotive conjugation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotive_conjugation): "I have routines, you have habits, she is addicted". And in this context, the word seems to have no very significant or consistent meaning. (Yes, I know, "becomes compulsive and interferes with other life responsibilities" - but that's at best subjective.)

Very often, people will self-deprecatingly describe themselves as "addicted" (generally, to something entirely legal and socially acceptable, like puzzles, or social media, or video games, or exercise). In that case, what I hear them as saying is something like "I think I would like to spend less time on this hobby, but it's too much work to think of something else to replace it with, so I can't be bothered". In particular, I get scornful when I see people use it to excuse socially (or even legally) unacceptable behaviour, such as marital infidelity, or misrepresentation, or public drunkenness.

Don't get me wrong - I don't want to dispute for a moment that there is such a thing as "real" or "hard" addiction. I remember my mother's many attempts to give up smoking, for instance - there was more going on there than mere "habit". But it's a word that has acquired a colloquial meaning that's far more widely used than its more precise, medical meaning.

I believe, of myself, that I have what's been called an "addictive personality". That is to say, I feel I am quite vulnerable to developing habits that I will find it hard to break when I want to. For that reason, I've always avoided illegal drugs and gambling (because those are habits I'd most hate to develop). I have worried, in the past, about my drinking habits. Sometimes I'll avoid drinking anything for some time - in the ballpark of "two to six weeks" - just to see how it makes me feel. But as far as my completely-untrained-and-unqualified testing can tell, I don't have any addiction to alcohol.

[tantric]

my take, presented to the engagedbuddhist line on reddit:


he neurochemical vehicle
about the title: in buddhology, a vehicle, sanskrit 'yana', refers to a body of dharma, more or less self-contained, that offers a path to enlightenment. thus 'mahayana', the greater vehicle, and 'vajrayana', etc. in no way does this little diatribe pretend to be such a thing. no even. 'the neurochemical vehicle' is merely a catchy phrase designed to interest a particular audience. at best, it is skillful means. still, there does need to be a western vehicle, and y'all need to get working on that.

once talking with another along the path, our conversation turned to addiction. we observed that buddhism treats the fundamental cause of suffering as an addiction. beings are addicted to sensual reality. that's a dense and complex thing to say, so allow me to add some context from that conversation. we were saying that seeking after pleasure is the fools' game, as when the thing so sought is obtained, it is always found to be lacking, leaving one with an emptiness and craving for even greater stimulation. it never ends and you never win that game, right? but we has also said that for those who follow the path, leading simple lives concerned with basic needs, combined with compassion and a rational outlook, there is also wellbeing which is not pleasure. we decided to call this 'joy'. so, in this system, pleasure is what is felt when you get something you want, but it then fades and leaves you wanting more pleasure. sharing pleasure makes it less. it's greedy and needy. joy is what is felt by being a good person. it's not something you get - when you do good things, you don't 'get' joy, actually, in the real world, you might get a slap in the face. but joy comes from knowing that you did the right thing. it can't be taken from you. you can share it - when you share joy, you get more joy. it has to do with loving people, and being loved. joy and pleasure, so defined, are VERY different things.

all buddhists understand this on some level. we know the difference between what we want and what we need. not that it's easy, no, not that, but we grok it. anyone who does get this, and lives by it, well, said person is a buddhist, regardless of what they like to be labeled, in my opinion. ahimsa paramo dharma. but none of this is really controversial, or even new. the next part is.

all humans, and so far as i know, all mammals, have the potential for addiction. by addiction, in this context, i mean not only a drug/behavior that results is a feeling of pleasure, but also the conditioning process whereby each further stimulation requires more and, when the source of the pleasure is removed, there is pain/withdrawal. this is a specific, technical use of the word 'addiction'. drugs make this phenomenon obvious. give a being a dose of morphine, said being feels good. when it ends, that being wants more, and it takes fractionally more morphine to achieve the same feeling. overtime, high levels of tolerance develop. at this point, if the morphine is discontinued, the subject goes into withdrawal, which involves pain, vomiting, all kinds of nastiness, plus an insidious desire for more morphine. this ends after a time, a couple of weeks, usually.

in the study of addiction as it is, it is taken as a given that the subject will always crave morphine and that if given a single dose, will again become profoundly addicted. this has been observed many times - it's the core of the alcoholics/narcotics anonymous experience. though we don't say it, buddhistically, we can see that these people are not on the path. for one thing, they have a huge attachment to the abstraction of their addiction. also, their theology tells them that their suffering is unavoidable and that it comes from a god who is testing them, and will reward them in the afterlife for how dutifully they endure that suffering. buddhistically, that's hog wash and we know it. but it's not polite to say. but drug addiction is a very real problem, and in the real world, this path looks like the only solution.
thus, the neurochemical vehicle. let's start from the beginning - why the potential for addiction exists. yeah, sociobiology. this mechanism in our brains evolved and that means it was/is useful and prosurvival, at least in some situations. it's the same kind of thing that causes mothers to bond with their children. we have this big old brains, and instead of hardwiring instincts, the better path is to make some behaviors fun. it works. but why addiction?

all addictive drugs, those that can induce withdrawal, stimulate dopamine in some way. dopamine is the pleasure neurochemical. consider: amphetamine is almost identical to dopamine, changed only so it can cross the blood-brain barrier. opiates, which triggering various opiate receptors in our brains, also release dopamine. all addictive drugs do. so do all addictive behaviors. this is how it works - the neurochemical carrot. but why? hmmm.

most people will agree that cheese tastes good. despite humans not having tastebuds that sense 'good'. your tongue can't recognize 'good'. but your brain can. you get a rush of dopamine just looking at 'good' food. what is good food? high fat high protein food. especially fat - junk food (because, fundamentally, we already know that junk=heroin is the same 'junk' in junk food). it makes evolutionary sense - animals that choose to eat high fat/protein foods over other foods pack on fat and survive hard times. junk food is very hard to come by in nature, and, frankly, globs of animal fat are nasty, but our ancestors found a way to enjoy eating it and re-enforce it. i give you the sociobiology of addiction.
it's actually a bit worse than that. the ultimate junk food, the first food we get, is mothers' milk, chock full of fat and protein. and babies can't stop eating when they have enough - if there's more left, and siblings get it and grow bigger and stronger....so babies suck milk because it's 'good' and if it's taken away, it hurts. to coerce them into consuming as much as they can. yes, milk, it does a body good, is the first drug, the primal addiction. this is an awful thing to know, but we have to understand it if we are going to beat it.

so are we damned to this? remember the noble truths. no - you can live life without addiction. avoid those drugs and behaviors your know are bad for you, and eat a simple low fat/protein diet. and be a good person. it's that easy. this is the alternative to the AA/NA nonsense - curing your addiction. it's being 'high on life'. neurochemically, that means once you're off the dopamine train, serotonin experiences become much more vivid. smiling, thinking of your loved ones, etc - that's joy. joy and pleasure and incompatible, sorry. now, i would never advise letting go of right view, mindset, understanding, etc. but functionally, this works. without the dharma, you can't maintain it, hold it together, make sense of it, but it is like a gear in that machine. the neurochemical vehicle.

okay, now, reality. if everyone in the world read this and lived by it, the global economy would crash and burn and billions of people would die from starvation and disease. we read about the decay of the dharma, etc, how what we have now is so much less that what was before and wonder - what? now we have zen and theravada and varjayana, and we can move information like never before, what decay? now you know. this is the age of lord mara, and we're in the thick of it. be strong, my people, and strive unceasingly - all compounded things must fall apart. peace.

[Lucid Phoenix]

It is indeed a difficult subject, one I'm involved in on a personal level. So while I try to be objective and aim to better understand, if I come off as defensive/hostile, this is not personal.

@veti:
In the form of emotive conjugation, I agree and think that's an excellent way to put something I've been suspecting a while now; the term is used too loosely, almost losing value as a result. Indeed, the 'value' of the term is further tarnished by people 'jokingly' or as a selfdepreciation calling themselves addicted. I've even seen it happen that people, addicts or no, use the term as an excuse to keep doing the things they claim to be addicted to. Altogether the result of this incorrect use of the word almost helps in that it makes it less of a taboo, though I don't know if the positives weigh up against the negatives in ths particular case.

Smoking (cigarettes), indeed is an addiction, one I haven't quit (yet), and indeed an addictive personality is something to be careful with, prevention is generally better than curing, especially when there is no known cure. You do have the right of it in regards to your drinking; it's not your ability to stop, for any length of time, that tells you whether you're addicted or not, it's what quitting does to you mentally (and especially emotionally) that tells you.

@tantric:
I can identify with the distinction between joy and pleasure, and thank you for that insight, I will keep that in mind. Without going into detail reacting, or disputing, or agreeing with everything that was mentioned, I will give my rough interpretation of it.
The text really only goes into the physical dependancy of addictive substances and behaviors, and while indeed dopamine is the key to such, it is only on the physical level that it has any influence. Though you seem to mention NA/AA, and there's many more, and go on to react to how you percieve it, I would like to hear what you know of it/how you view it before I form a conclusion. For now, I'll say that there's no bound theology regarding the enduring of suffering or tests, and especially not afterlife.

The word 'God' in the texts simply puts a name to the 'power greater than ourselves', something that by comparison makes you, and your problems, small and insignificant. Personally, my higher power is 'The Powers That Be'; anything and everything that was, is, and will be (including you). Above all I simply believe that coincidence doesn't exist, and while the reason is foreign to me, it helps me accept all things I have no control over.


As a rule, addiction is an illness of the body; the dependancy, withrawal, and immediate return of dependancy upon first exposure, this is widely understood, at least on some level. What gets people (and addicts most of all), is that addiction is a two-part disease; illness of the body and mind.
The illness of the mind is that even if you're physically no longer using/doing the addictive drug/behavior, you're still obsessing about it, your mind can't quite let it go, ever. Now, more than ever, with a year of cleantime fast approaching (11 days from now), my mind is occupied with the 'allure' of using, the illusion of satisfaction I get by using, 'the good old days.'
Long story short, physical dependancy is what keeps you using, and the mental obsession that keeps you relapsing. If I interpret you correctly, tantric, you seem to only adress the physical dependancy.

[Final Hyena]

An addict is an addict.

It is possible that a person develops a stronger desire than their addiction and can work to live a different life, but if it falls apart (and lets face it addicts aren't the best at keeping things together) chances are they'll fall back to the original addiction.

[Kapow]

As I consider myself an addict (addicted to weed and nicotine), I feel I can contribute.
(Please excuse me, if my english isn't 100% correct, it is not my native language and posting from phone)

First, I think the most important thing is to admit to one self, that you are addicted, thst there IS a problem. Admitting this to other people can help a lot and is imho very commendable! So hats off to you ;-)

It took me nearly twenty years, two therapies and the near-end of my marriage to get to this point. (weed..., cigarettes are addictive I knew that nearly from the start)
Today, sadly I'm still not clean, but I can handle it much better. Relapses are much less common and I quit beating myself up about them. Because I realized, that this was the “thing“, that threw me back into relapses more than anything else. I told myself I'm worthless for always using again, lying to my wife and so I didn't even earned to be clean. Yes, that's pretty f....d up.
It is a long way and not easy (for me at least), so I now simply cut me some slack.

To the topic of addictive behavior:
I got to know some people, who had even more problems than me with getting off of gaming, so I tend to take those addictions seriously.
Not to say, that there aren't people, that use addiction without knowing what it means or out of lazyness.

[Lucid Phoenix]

Though I do agree; an addict is an addict, they're also so much more. It's like saying someone who's depressed is depressed, or someone who has AD(H)D, Cancer, autism or any number of other things is just that. I'm purposely lumping things very unalike together here to make a point. The term addict is a description, not a prescription (much like D&D alignment, in that sense). True enough though, overcoming/recovering from addiction requires a constant vigilance, and many do relapse, myself included.

Aside from this, I'm glad I reached the audience of a fellow addict. Indeed, the first step to fixing anything is admitting there is a problem. In its essence, the twelve steps are a simple program for complicated people:
I have a problem.
I find that something can help me.
I let that something help me.
I record all the wrongdoings in my life (to me and by me).
I admit openly I was at fault where appropriate.
I take resonsibility to change the faults.
I ask help from that something to do just that.
I make a list of who I've hurt.
I try to make it right with those I've hurt.
I take responsibility when I'm wrong in future, and try to set it right immediately.
I stay grounded in reality and let go of the illusion of control.
I help others as I have been helped.
I'm not saying I'm perfect, though I try to be; I'm an incurable perfectionist. Cutting oneself some slack every now and then is a good thing though. Using because of the guilt of using is not messed up, that's addiction, I know exactly how that feels. It took me two therapies, and subsequently two rehabs for me to get this far, and I know people who needed no less than sixteen rehabs, but now have a happy life without active addiction. Though I can go on, I almost feel like I'm trying to be convincing/inspirational, and I know from experience this can work in inversely, so I won't.
If you want further contact, or need any help, please do send me a message.

Strange as it may be, however, I'm not against drugs. There are plenty of people who can use without ever developing a problem and my defense mechanism when I encounter people using drugs is to wish them have fun, distancing myself from the using.

[JeenLeen]

I've had one question about addiction and such that I feel too scared to ask some of my acquaintances in AA or NA.

I see that some folk who are now clean won't drink alcohol, even if they aren't an alcoholic. (Total Sobriety?) I know one guy in NA like that, and he'll often avoid parties where folk are drinking. Is the idea behind it that, if inhibitions are lowered through drinking, relapse is too likely? If not, what?

(It definitely seems a wise move, and I mean no criticism of that practice. Just trying to understand why.)

[sktarq]

There are lots of reasons to do that

Some know that even when booze was not their drug/behavior of choice they tended to indulge often when drunk and/or the lowered inhibitions and poor judgment brought on by alcohol would reduce their ability to say no to the idea of their own issue if it comes up

Some look at alcoholics and see something very similar to how they feel about their own addictions and very themselves as vulnerable to new addictions (often rightly) and want no part of replacing their previous problem with alcoholism.

For some the contact high and/social acceptance/norm of drinking at certain social engagements makes it very difficult to say no to drinking itself. The situation reinforces the option to the point where psychological defences are vulnerable and often the addict knows it.

For others fighting addiction came down to self control issues (at least fighting it did) and any loss of self control (such as drinking) brings up lots of personal deamons, etc. Which even if it gets no where near bad enough for them to be near relapse it makes the whole situation uncomfortable.

And that's another thing. If you feel you can't safely get drunk/drink (which for an addict is not uncommon-especially in the states) being around the behavior is often un-fun. A bunch of people getting to do something they enjoy right in front of you-often pressuring you-or being rude and you can't join in.

So there are lots of reasons-each person will face some mix of all the above and have to weigh how they want to react to other people drinking/drinking social events

And no I'm not an addict. I just got to date one for years and watch her loose. Sadly informative.

[Lucid Phoenix]

While all of the reasons sktarq stated are absolutely true, I'd still like to confirm that by quoting a part of what we read aloud each meeting at NA; stating that same thing with more certainty:

...

Thinking of alcohol as different from other drugs has caused a great many addicts to relapse. Before we came to NA, many of us viewed alcohol seperately, but we cannot afford to be confused about this. Alcohol is a drug. We are people with the disease of addiction and must abstain from all drugs in order to recover.

That being said, after my first rehab, when I wasn't yet addicted to weed, 'only' to computergames, I didn't buy it either, and said "If I can limit myself to three drinks a night, and drinking no more than twice a week I'll be ok." (Grand total max of six drinks a week) After a particularly disappointing/bad day I found myself hammered and soon after I found myself smoking weed again, and it wasn't long (call it maybe a month), before I full on relapsed and got addicted to weed as well. I fully believe that if I have even one drink, even if I seem to be ok (especially if I seem to be ok; I'll fool myself using that as proof), I'll start drinking more eventually and it all leads to a swift relapse and another cross-addiction; alcohol.

That being said, I frequently go out with people from NA after a meeting (why just tonight, in fact), where we all drink tea, or coffee, or soda, even hot cocoa. When I go out with friends I've built up a rapore (report?) that I don't drink, a classic round of drinks is however many beer and a(n) [insert soda here]. I've even come to enjoy the chance to be myself; as foolish/crazy as the drinking people, bouncing around like a madman, showing signs of ADHD, rather than ADD. Fun times.

Oh and for the record; most addicts enjoy guests at meetings, and while not everyone wants to bring someone they know as a guest, you'd still be welcome without an addict friend to go with.

[Crow]

Since you asked, I'm going to express my views, and probably horrify some people in the process.

I come from a family that was severely impacted by addiction. I grew up in environments where addiction was the norm, and have seen the result of the most hardcore addictions. I've seen the entire horrifying transition from healthy and productive to degenerated and finally dead. People that were intelligent, active people; real contributers to society; I've seen them turn into worthless walking talking pieces of human garbage. All as a result of their addictions. As such, I have been essentially straight edge my entire life. This is also partly because I realize that I have an addictive personality. I would be at risk of treading the same path.

Process addictions are one thing. I think we all struggle with those to some small degree or another. Where my sympathy ends though is chemical addiction. I know people who are addicted to pot, and I'm not talking about that; things where people can still be essentially productive. I'm talking about progressed meth addicts and the like. I understand people can get addicted to things, or not know the risks. Okay. I hope they find help. The people who have found help, and then went back to it though- No sympathy whatsoever. When you've been to the brink, stopped, and then chosen to go back- When you've reached the point where you are taking something like Krokadil to get your high- No sympathy. In fact, I would rather you just died; because there comes a point where you aren't just hurting yourself. Once you've reached the point of addiction I'm talking about, you've probably left a wide wake of pain and suffering in all those around you. You're also past the point where you are likely to ever be a positive contributor to society, so just go kill yourself, for the sake of society and those around you, just go kill yourself.

Told you it'd be horrifying, but those are my thoughts on it. No doubt influenced by my horrific formative experiences of being forced to live around this stuff. Think I'm a terrible human being? Don't bother replying; just get in line.

[sktarq]

The biggest key about addicts (and a hell of a lot of a lot of mental illness too) is that "choices" are not just ephemeral - they are reflections of the structure of people's brains. Addictions are fundamentally about a illness in the choice centres of one's brain.


And not really horrified, more amused that someone who obviously works to be logical can still have issues with mind/brain splits.

[Lucid Phoenix]

Though I'm not horrified, I don't quite know how to react to this.

It's not surprising you see it this way, given your history. Only I feel it doesn't do justice to the way the disease of addiction works, how it makes you deny that you have it in the first place. I'm a bit confused , are you saying that people who smoke pot can still be essentially productive? Other than that you were clear enough, and I can see the futility in trying to add a nuance.

Anyway, statistics for addiction and recovery are still kind of depressing; 10% of addicts come into contact with recovery, and 3 out of those ten don't relapse within a year. So roughly speaking, one would need 3 rehabs to finally get the picture, but here I go rambling on again, so I'll just quit. I appreciate the honesty.

[Velaryon]

I'm not sure how much I can contribute to this discussion, nor whether I should. I've never had any sort of substance addiction - I rarely drink and I've never gotten into weed or any other kind of drugs - but there have been times where I've gotten so deeply involved in a game or spent so much time on it that it may have been possible to call it an addiction. I've never been diagnosed with anything though, so I'm uncertain whether what I was ever truly an "addict" in the medical sense of the term.

What led me to post is that I have a question for Lucid Phoenix: you mention in the first post that you are addicted to video games. I wanted to ask how you realized that, and what the signs were. If I have an addiction to anything, it's probably either the internet or certain specific video games. But the thing is I'm not sure, and I'm wondering if perhaps your insight can help me reach a conclusion.

So let me lay out the reasons why I might or might not be addicted to video games:

I spend significant amounts of my free time playing games, either with friends or alone. Sometimes I stay up well past the time I should be in bed in order to get in one more match/level/etc., which may turn into two or three more.

Increasingly as I've gotten older, I'm the type of person who will fixate on one or two games at a time and play those for a very long time. Sometimes I continue to play well past the point where I'm not enjoying them that much anymore, simply because it's easier to keep playing them than to invest the time and energy required to learn a new game. For example, I played a Facebook game called Castle Age for several years, quit for awhile because of problems I had with the game, then got back into it for another year and a half because I didn't have time for "proper" video games while I was in grad school but wanted to scratch that gaming itch somehow.

Currently I play a mobile game called Summoners War that takes up probably an hour or two of my day at minimum (sometimes significantly more when there's an event going on). The game is a grindfest, which gets on my nerves sometimes, but the advancement of my monsters is rewarding enough that I've stuck to it for about 15 months now. When I broke my tablet one day, I immediately dropped what I was doing, ran out and bought a new one so that I could keep playing this game (and so I would have continued access to other mobile apps since my phone is extremely unreliable, but Summoners War was my first and foremost reason why I had to have it that day).
On the other hand, I don't find myself spending insane amounts of money on gaming.

I categorically refuse to play any subscription-based games such as MMO's.

I don't spend any money on freemium-type games where you can play for free but get bonuses or faster advancement if you spend money.

I visit a GameStop maybe once or twice a year at most. I rarely pre-order games and will frequently wait for a price drop instead of paying full price unless it's a game I want to play with friends while they're still interested in it.

I've never taken off work, faked an illness, or skipped class to buy or play a game.


It seems to me that there's more reason to think I'm not an addict than to think that I am, but the amount of time I devote to certain games, along with the fact that I seem to sometimes keep playing past the point where I enjoy them, is enough to make me want to consult with someone more knowledgeable on the subject.

[Grinner]

I've had one question about addiction and such that I feel too scared to ask some of my acquaintances in AA or NA.

I see that some folk who are now clean won't drink alcohol, even if they aren't an alcoholic. (Total Sobriety?) I know one guy in NA like that, and he'll often avoid parties where folk are drinking. Is the idea behind it that, if inhibitions are lowered through drinking, relapse is too likely? If not, what?

(It definitely seems a wise move, and I mean no criticism of that practice. Just trying to understand why.)

They're alcoholics. They might be X (units of time) clean, but deep down, they're still alcoholics. That's what AA teaches. A recovering alcoholic might get to a point where he thinks he's in the driver's seat again, but that's just his arrogance talking.

[sktarq]

And this is where I say the *horrible* stuff

I call totall BS

While AA style treatments dominant in the US will say that it is not the only treatment system and not all agree with the above

In places like Nordic countries offer other options counseling and even drugs to act as blockers are used (I think Naloxone or something similar sounding) and then an individual plan is created. In some centres as low as 20% of clients end up not drinking at all. And those that do drink wean themselves off the blocking drugs of course.

With far lower rates of people's lives and health being disrupted (what would be counted as relapse under their terms)

So Yeah I think that such statements that they are always an alcoholic is part of a structure that activly doesn't work for most people but blocks other approaches by shameing other research and treatment approaches.

For the minority of people well suited for such an approach, more power to you. But I think such attitudes and the *A (AA, NA, etc) faith it comes from is a deeply dangerous thing (especially the whole rock bottom thing) that kills people by blocking the type of help that they need.

[Lucid Phoenix]

Thank you, I'm glad my admittedly not so great history with games has given me the right experience to give you some answers. While I cannot definitively say whether you are addicted or not, it can be used as a test, if you will, carried out by you, on whether or not you would be better off checking with someone who's studied to make duch a diagnosis.

In its essence, the two things that stand out to me are that you've never skipped class/work to play a game, and that you had to have a new tablet the same day. The two may be conflicting, but imagine it with another hobby; if you're a fervent reader, would you have gotten a new e-reader the same day? Altogether, to me it seems that you have, as you say, a gaming itch, and like it as a hobby. And while you stay up late to get involved in it, nobody's perfect and you shouldn't beat yourself up about it. Then again, if you're holding back information (which, if you were an addict, would not surprise me), that would almost certainly be info on the "I might" side, and the act of withholding information itself could very well point towards addiction.

In the end, the key thing is that you have to be honest with yourself about it, and if it's interfering/taking over other aspects of your life; socially, professionally, or otherwise. At the peak of my addiction I slept 6 times a week, for six to eight hours at a time, to be awake for anywhere from 12 to 30 hours in between. About 80% of the times I left the house was to get more weed only, the other 20% was to get more weed in addition to cigarettes/food/social obligation.

I never really 'found out' I had an addiction, it went from playing a game now and then in elementary school, to playing it most of my free time by the end of it, early highschool I started to neglect homework, and by the end I slept in school to stay up all night gaming. University was just a big mess; I missed all classes, skipped exams, and spun a web of lies to keep everyone pacified into believing I was doing ok.

The real big sign for me was that I broke up with my girlfriend because the time I spent with her could be 'better' spent gaming. Other signs were simply put neglect. Neglet of everything from basic human needs (food key among them; I've gained 30lbs in the past year and I now have a healthy weight), to letting people know I'm not coming because I can't make up a good enough reason (and still not go), to simple laziness; peeing out over the balcony because I couldn't be bothered to put out my joint, walk 7m to and fro the bathroom, and relighting it.

[Aliquid]

I suggest reading this comic... it gives insight into how addiction works

http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/

[Delivery Food O]

They say necessity is the mother of invention, so when the founder of Fresh-N-Healthy couldn’t find anything “Fresh & Healthy” in a convenient fashion what did he do? Invent the health food market! Well not quite. Founder of Fresh-n-Healthy Meals simply took what he had learned working through college in the hospitality industry and made it convenient to get fresh healthy food delivered right to the customer’s door. He didn’t invent the wheel, he just made the wheel tastier and convenient!

[Lucid Phoenix]

The comic is a good read, and while I hadn't noticed it so blatantly, addiction is indeed only a symptom of an underlying problem; isolation, whether caused by or as a cause of addiction, they strengthen one another. Though only now do I notice I'd been ninja'd in my previous post, my reaction to that, other than specifics is mostly along the same lines of things I've mentioned before.

There's the physical dependancy, and the mental obsession, both only symptoms of underlying problem; the urge to escape from this world. Most of the time this includes an urge to escape into a more pleasant one, whether imagining it, hallucinating it, or finding one premade in games (like myself), all addicts avoid reality. That can't be solved by (more) drugs. In the rare cases where the blocking drugs do work (if I understood correctly, around the same ballpark as the frequency of '*A' working), I'd almost doubt if the recipient is even an actual addict. But I have no personal experience with it, so I can't judge, nor would I know.

[danzibr]

Quite an interesting thread!

For my two cents, I think I had one addiction. It took a long time, but I overcame it, and have been clean for 4 years. Scary thing, I can see myself relapsing under certain circumstances. When I read the above, ``Once an alcoholic, always an alcoholic'' thing I thought man, that's bull. But... the more I think about it, yeah, that rings true to me. Not a pretty truth, but a truth.

btw, big grats on not playing computer games for a long time despite clearly being on computers ;)

[Quild]

I think that different people can have different view on the same addiction, and that one person can have different views on different addictions.

If you make a list of all addictions you can think of, you won't have someone telling you they're all wrong or all good. And you'll always have someone saying that it isn't that wrong for a specific addiction.

If you try to tell people that watching that much sports on TV (or TV at any rate) is an addiction, that reading too much is an addiction, that too much sport is an addiction, that their social life is ruined by their pet, etc... They might probably frown at you and disagree. But spend the same time on video games than they do on your hobbies, and you're a freak.

Spend the same time they spend on their different hobbies on one singe hobby, and you're an addict. Because you don't diversify.

For me, as long as your addiction/hobby doesn't:
- Damage your health or put your life at risk
- Damage your social interactions(*)
- Make you miss important things in your life
I'm fine with it.

(*): I have some friends that I don't see anymore since they have a girlfriend, either because they don't care for their friends anymore or because the girlfriend doesn't like us. I usually try to to talk the formers about themselves and the latters about their girlfriends.
Yeah, girlfriends can be a dangerous addiction :smalltongue:

[danzibr]

[...]
I was getting on to say something similar to this. In another thread I posted, ``and once was all it took to get hooked again.''

Sounds bad. That phrase by itself. But actually, I was talking about jogging, which most people would consider a good thing, but usually we wouldn't say someone is ``addicted to jogging.''

[Lucid Phoenix]

Thanks, I was very afraid of originally using a computer, and fot eh first six months didn't, then slowly adapted, and now I'm almost comfortable using it, and don't nearly use it every day, which I see as a good thing.

While I don't disagree with the analyses presented, there no past tense in having an addiction, it's an incurable disease; once an addict, always an addict (just thought I'd clear that up). It can be defined in broader terms however, as "some 'habit' that you choose to do in favor of other things, the result of which makes your life unmanageable.' While girlfriends and jogging can be an actual addiction, that would fall under 'codependency' or relationship(/sex/love/attention) addiction, and a sports addiction respectively. As there are many many people who practice these things (relationships and sports) without being addicted, so too can it be, and is it, for drugs. I still have friends who smoke weed every now and then, and more than enough who still play the occasional computergame, and that's a-ok. I have a mechanism where I wish them 'have fun' to distance myself from it mentally.

Let me make this abundantly clear though; if I think back on some of the things I wrote, it may seem as if I'm saying everyone is addicted to something. By no means am I saying that, I'm trying to convey that everying can be addicting, and even then not everyone gets addicted. It's just that (I feel) the term gets used to loosely/jokingly, or on the other hand is viewed as a bit of a taboo if you're not joking about it, and I wish for/am trying to create/work to get that middle ground; addiction is a real thing, nothing to use too loosely or joke about, but not all addicts are junkies living under a bridge, or alcoholics passed out constantly.

In other news, I actually reached a year cleantime last sunday (on mol day). Oh and one last thing: please don't read all of the things I say as words from a guru, or complete truth, or even that what I say about the NA is absolutely the way it works. I'm only one year clean and still my opinions are just that; subjective. So take it with a grain of salt.

[sktarq]

While I don't disagree with the analyses presented, there no past tense in having an addiction, it's an incurable disease; once an addict, always an addict (just thought I'd clear that up).

And this is where I disagree with you.

I have known several alcoholics who were totally out of control and would get DT's if they stopped. . . . They are fine now but not "clean" they have a glass of wine with dinner, a beer or three after work etc. They cleared up the lack of a stop/enough/ etc part of their personalities, or whatever made them feel they needed to be intoxicated. They are in control of their lives. Figuring out the why they needed/used/etc was often more important than dealing with anything other than the most acute issues it brought up.

Can everybody who was addicted to something develop a health relationship with that thing. Hell no. but some can.

There is a past tense for some addicts.


Sounds bad. That phrase by itself. But actually, I was talking about jogging, which most people would consider a good thing, but usually we wouldn't say someone is ``addicted to jogging.''

Lol - having been diagnosed with Anorexia Athletica while eating 5000+ Calories a day - twice . . . yeah I know that one. See my comments in exercise and mental health. . . It's my antidepressent but when I had breakthrough depression I damn near killed myself trying to run/row/rugby it off.

[Razade]

The comic is a good read, and while I hadn't noticed it so blatantly, addiction is indeed only a symptom of an underlying problem; isolation, whether caused by or as a cause of addiction, they strengthen one another. Though only now do I notice I'd been ninja'd in my previous post, my reaction to that, other than specifics is mostly along the same lines of things I've mentioned before.

There's the physical dependancy, and the mental obsession, both only symptoms of underlying problem; the urge to escape from this world. Most of the time this includes an urge to escape into a more pleasant one, whether imagining it, hallucinating it, or finding one premade in games (like myself), all addicts avoid reality. That can't be solved by (more) drugs. In the rare cases where the blocking drugs do work (if I understood correctly, around the same ballpark as the frequency of '*A' working), I'd almost doubt if the recipient is even an actual addict. But I have no personal experience with it, so I can't judge, nor would I know.

This is....a really narrow and unscientific description of addiction. Cigarette smokers are certainly not "running away from reality", neither are your typical adrenaline junkies considering how active they generally are. Nor do they stem from "isolation". Certainly people who have anti-social problems or depression are more likely to fall into substance abuse the substance abuse isn't a "symptom" specifically of these problems. Addiction is a disease in it's own right and is an incredibly difficult science since a lot of things (like the two you say you're "addicted" to) aren't chemically or physically addicting. Actual addiction changes body chemistry and neurological functions, actual addiction and things like pot or porn or video games don't do those things and thus aren't true addictions. Not medically or scientifically speaking at any rate.

[Aliquid]

Actual addiction changes body chemistry and neurological functions, actual addiction and things like pot or porn or video games don't do those things and thus aren't true addictions. Not medically or scientifically speaking at any rate.
Not sure if I agree. You are talking about a chemical addiction, but not all addictions are chemical addictions.

Gambling addictions act just like substance abuse addictions, in that they are tied to an uncontrollable urge to activate the brain's reward mechanisms.

Looking at addictions purely from a chemical perspective often overlooks important factors. For example, when a person is in the hospital and on heavy-duty pain killers... they are using drugs. Often a purer form of the same drugs sold on the street. The hospital patient uses these drugs for a few weeks, and then stops. Without an addiction.

There are also people (usually wealthy ones... since dugs aint cheap). Anyway there are people that recreationally use heroin, and other hard drugs, and they don't become addicts. We don't hear about them because they don't make a point of advertising themselves to the public.

--------EDIT--------
I guess the point I was trying to make with that rambling comment is:
When it comes to addiction related behaviour and brain activity.... A person addicted to Heroin has more similarities to a gambling addict than they have similarities to someone using medical grade Heroin in a hospital.

[Vinyadan]

I suggest reading this comic... it gives insight into how addiction works

http://www.stuartmcmillen.com/comics_en/rat-park/

The comic is nice, but it doesn't observe that human addiction statistics are probably more similar to the ratpark than the ratknast [edit: I did not consider the fact that all rats tried cocaine when I wrote this]. It is one of many ways to look at things and it does help take one more point of view to the subject, but there remains the fact that withdrawal, if handled without medical supervision, can have terrifying effects, among which death and hallucination, and that men are conscious of the fact that they suffer this because they are giving up the drug. The fact is this, men live in a physical and in a mental world, and we don't know if rats also do (or with which degree of self-consciousness), but if a drug makes your mental world "more pleasant" it gets hard to give it up.

About different sources of addiction: I guess it's just like that, addiction can be physical or mental or both. Cigarettes are physical, gambling is mental. There was another mouse experiment that I found very worrisome, in which rats received the hormone (or transmitter?) causing satisfaction if they pushed a button. They didn't do anything else, they just kept pushing the button. They died after a while. (I am sorry I can't find the book describing this). This is how I understand video game addiction, having an assured satisfaction button, no matter what, and to keep going to it.

About different drugs having different strength when causing addiction, yes, it's like that. Crack is a version of cocaine, but it is much more addictive than normal cocaine (like, immediate physical addiction). The quantity of morphine you get in the hospital probably won't be enough to create physical addiction, but a guy injecting it for "recreational" purposes has a good chance to develop mental addiction or simply the desire to do it again, which, through repeated use, will bring to physical addiction and the really ugly stuff. Certain medicaments against attention deficit disorder easily cause addiction even if used the right way.

About wealthy people, rhinoplastic surgery is pretty frequent in these cases. I wouldn't say that they aren't cocaine addicts, just that they live in a milieu where the use is widespread and have a lot of free room and time to use it where it is considered acceptable, so it's as if they were OK (until they kill themselves getting smashed into a bus while driving like Falco did, or need emergency reanimation because of overdose).