3 ms·

One thing I am curious about with this research is how they would get reliable numbers for high functioning opiate addicts. Addiction is really a spectrum from

by jm__87 6y ago

One thing I am curious about with this research is how they would get reliable numbers for high functioning opiate addicts. Addiction is really a spectrum from "no dependence on the drug and no negative life consequences" to "high dependence on the drug and many negative life consequences". I'm sure that many people fall in the middle where they continue to responsibly live their lives while still being dependent on a drug that they may wish to quit, but can't because the withdrawal is too much. I also would not be surprised if many of these people did not seek out help and tried to hide their problem from others due to the major stigma associated with being addicted to opiates, not to mention those who are dependent on opiates but in denial about their dependence.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
> is how they would get reliable numbers for high functioning opiate addicts. He's very clearly advising against getting addicted, something most opiate users accomplish.
- jm__87 6y ago
  So the article states that Carl Hart makes a claim that 70% of drug users don't meet the criteria for being a drug addict. I'm wondering how you could even get a reliable number for this for a drug like heroin, given the stigma attached to this drug and the fact that users themselves may be in denial that they are dependent on the drug. Someone can be meeting all their obligations in life and still be struggling with a drug addiction. If asked, I would imagine a lot of high functioning addicts would say they can stop whenever they want to, they just don't want to. Anyway, I may just have to give his book a read, it sounds interesting.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    An easy way to improve that accuracy is to survey people based on their past use as well. There's less reason to be in denial about something you've already dealt with.
  - bostonsre 6y ago
    Yea, I would be very interested in the methodology they used to come up with that 70% and I am wondering if that is a snapshot in time or is that over someone's entire life. Addiction almost always starts out in a more controlled manner until its not. So if 50% of those 70% of drug users become full blown addicts, then its a BS number. I'm also really curious how they found those high functioning drug users, because I can't imagine anyone that is successfully hiding their use from the world would divulge it to anyone they don't know or trust ("hey, are you a high functioning drug user?" sounds like something a cop might say).
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      Both the "snapshot" studies and the lifetime studies find similar rates of addiction, I went and found part of what he's referencing. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2681168 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/...

by jm__87 6y ago

boomboomsubban 6y ago

> is how they would get reliable numbers for high functioning opiate addicts. He's very clearly advising against getting addicted, something most opiate users accomplish.

jm__87 6y ago
So the article states that Carl Hart makes a claim that 70% of drug users don't meet the criteria for being a drug addict. I'm wondering how you could even get a reliable number for this for a drug like heroin, given the stigma attached to this drug and the fact that users themselves may be in denial that they are dependent on the drug. Someone can be meeting all their obligations in life and still be struggling with a drug addiction. If asked, I would imagine a lot of high functioning addicts would say they can stop whenever they want to, they just don't want to. Anyway, I may just have to give his book a read, it sounds interesting.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  An easy way to improve that accuracy is to survey people based on their past use as well. There's less reason to be in denial about something you've already dealt with.
- bostonsre 6y ago
  Yea, I would be very interested in the methodology they used to come up with that 70% and I am wondering if that is a snapshot in time or is that over someone's entire life. Addiction almost always starts out in a more controlled manner until its not. So if 50% of those 70% of drug users become full blown addicts, then its a BS number. I'm also really curious how they found those high functioning drug users, because I can't imagine anyone that is successfully hiding their use from the world would divulge it to anyone they don't know or trust ("hey, are you a high functioning drug user?" sounds like something a cop might say).
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    Both the "snapshot" studies and the lifetime studies find similar rates of addiction, I went and found part of what he's referencing. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2681168 https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/...