5 ms·
If a drug is available and there is addicts of said drug, the addicts don't suddenly stop being addicts just because the drug is not available, they'll just mov
by capableweb 4y ago
If a drug is available and there is addicts of said drug, the addicts don't suddenly stop being addicts just because the drug is not available, they'll just move on to a different drug. The problem is that addicts are not being treated, not that a specific drug is available or not.
- emodendroket 4y agoThey can't become addicts if they don't start abusing the drug in the first place.
- aarpmcgee 4y agoWe all have addictions. For some it is substances, other relationships, power, sex, gambling, food, etc. What if yours suddenly became really difficult to manage within the societal-framework-du-jour? Just don't start doing it?
- emodendroket 4y agoI think it's trivializing the concept to say "we all have addictions," since by definition an addiction is meant to be a significant impediment to living a normal life. And I'm not sure how you're answering the concern here. Like yeah, a lot of people get addicted to gambling -- that's a compelling argument against legalizing gambling.
- aarpmcgee 4y agoMy point was more an attempt to point at an empathetic response as a possibility. "don't start abusing the drug in the first place", to me, felt like a way to dismiss the reality that it can be really easy to fall into addiction, because most of us are broken in our own peculiar ways and have our own vulnerabilities. What if someone else's response to one's own brokenness was "just don't do that"? It doesn't really help much, because the reasons for it are valid, and the need itself needs to be seen. My own comment was a knee-jerk reactive comment in reply to what I felt in your post, which may or may not have been a real thing. Idk. My hunch is that we are all addicted to something, and if you don't see what it is yet, then either you or society (or both) must not have much of a problem with that particular addiction, and that can always change.
- emodendroket 4y agoMy point is that seeking to prevent abuse of amphetamines is a way to avoid creating addicts in the first place.
- TomSwirly 4y ago> since by definition an addiction is meant to be a significant impediment to living a normal life. Wrong. The definition of addiction is "physically and mentally dependent on a particular substance." (Oxford Dictionary) I am addicted to coffee. I get mild physical withdrawal symptoms if I quit. In no way is it an impediment to living my normal life.
- emodendroket 4y agoHere is how Wikipedia defines it: > Addiction is a neuropsychological disorder characterized by a persistent and intense urge to engage in certain behaviors, one of which is the usage of a drug, despite substantial harm and other negative consequences. In fact, the article goes on to specifically refute the argument you are making: > The term addiction is frequently misused when referring to other compulsive behaviors or disorders, particularly dependence, in news media. An important distinction between drug addiction and dependence is that drug dependence is a disorder in which cessation of drug use results in an unpleasant state of withdrawal, which can lead to further drug use. Addiction is the compulsive use of a substance or performance of a behavior that is independent of withdrawal. Addiction can occur in the absence of dependence, and dependence can occur in the absence of addiction, although the two can occur together.
- Godel_unicode 4y agoCitation very much needed.
- mobb_solo 4y agoActually, this is EXACTLY how many addicts KICK. They make a decision.
- DontchaKnowit 4y agoNot sure what you are saying here exactly, but ive heard far more stories of someone ruining their life because they turned to black market subsitutes for drugs they were previously able to obtain legally than stories of people who just decided to quit when it was no longer available.
- yakubin 4y agoThe latter doesn't make for as exciting a story.