3 ms·

Addiction is very much a function of the interplay between a person, their history, and their current environment, in addition to the addictive substance or act

by zasz 10y ago

Addiction is very much a function of the interplay between a person, their history, and their current environment, in addition to the addictive substance or activity. Many soldiers, while deployed to Vietnam, ended up addicted to cocaine. Yet when they returned home, the vast majority kicked the habit. Why? War is about a billion times more stressful than being home. They needed a coping mechanism, and they found one, albeit an unhealthy one. Removal of the environmental stressor removed the need for a drug addiction. http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/01/05/371894919/what-heroin-addiction-tells-us-about-changing-bad-habits http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/01/05/37189491... In addition, addiction is often the result of sheer psychological immaturity: www.substance.com/most-people-with-addiction-simply-grow-out-of-it-why-is-this-widely-denied/13017/ Certainly, there are genetic factors that play into addiction. It is a complex phenomenon. But to say that someone developed an addiction because they have addictive traits is far too reductive.

projektir 10y ago
> Many soldiers, while deployed to Vietnam, ended up addicted to cocaine. Yet when they returned home, the vast majority kicked the habit. Why? War is about a billion times more stressful than being home. They needed a coping mechanism, and they found one, albeit an unhealthy one. Removal of the environmental stressor removed the need for a drug addiction. This doesn't seem a deep seated problem with the person, but a problem with their environment, like you said. That seems very different from what concinds is talking about. War is also a bad example in general because it tends to rearrange priorities. Can we even say that they were addicted? If I was in a war, I'd probably do a lot of unhealthy things, too, because a war is far more unhealthy than most of them. This doesn't really imply I would be addicted.
- crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
  I disagree: war's a great example! War is traumatizing. I think self-medicating in the face of trauma is a natural response when other resources aren't available & it's not possible to escape the source of trauma. It's a survival mechanism that's no longer needed when the trauma's removed, or as you said, the person's no longer in the traumatic environment. While the drugs allow for survival, though, I don't think they prevent the sufferer from being traumatized. The drugs numb the pain, but not the effects, so PTSD could've still occurred, which can essentially bring the environment (and sometimes addiction) back home. I'm not certain "addicted" is accurate to describe we the soldiers who kicked the drugs because addiction has physical changes in the brain that come along with it.

by zasz 10y ago

projektir 10y ago

> Many soldiers, while deployed to Vietnam, ended up addicted to cocaine. Yet when they returned home, the vast majority kicked the habit. Why? War is about a billion times more stressful than being home. They needed a coping mechanism, and they found one, albeit an unhealthy one. Removal of the environmental stressor removed the need for a drug addiction. This doesn't seem a deep seated problem with the person, but a problem with their environment, like you said. That seems very different from what concinds is talking about. War is also a bad example in general because it tends to rearrange priorities. Can we even say that they were addicted? If I was in a war, I'd probably do a lot of unhealthy things, too, because a war is far more unhealthy than most of them. This doesn't really imply I would be addicted.

crawfordcomeaux 10y ago
I disagree: war's a great example! War is traumatizing. I think self-medicating in the face of trauma is a natural response when other resources aren't available & it's not possible to escape the source of trauma. It's a survival mechanism that's no longer needed when the trauma's removed, or as you said, the person's no longer in the traumatic environment. While the drugs allow for survival, though, I don't think they prevent the sufferer from being traumatized. The drugs numb the pain, but not the effects, so PTSD could've still occurred, which can essentially bring the environment (and sometimes addiction) back home. I'm not certain "addicted" is accurate to describe we the soldiers who kicked the drugs because addiction has physical changes in the brain that come along with it.