4 ms·

People Say Addiction Is a Disease. Mine Wasn't

3 points by Jimmc414 2y ago

Jimmc414 2y ago
https://archive.is/W6iH6 https://archive.is/W6iH6
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
PaulHoule 2y ago
Alcoholics Anonymous and many other programs treat addiction as if it was a spiritual problem. Their solution is social, "keep going to meetings". This book https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/2129/persuasion-and-healing https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/2129/persuasion-and-he... points out that faith healing was the first line treatment for most conditions so I'm going to reject that the "disease" and "spiritual" explanations are exclusive. (Pushing my fox out entirely and putting on my arch-reductionist hat I'd say anything you experience from drug addiction to listening to classical vs rap music makes some kind of change in your brain and the ability of us to quantify and detect that is a measure of our progress.)
- Jimmc414 2y ago
  > I'm going to reject that the "disease" and "spiritual" explanations are exclusive Agreed. His main evidence against the disease model seems to be that addiction "consumes and penetrates your entire being in ways that diseases, which normally have a physical location in the body, do not." Many established diseases like diabetes, autoimmune conditions, and depression affect multiple body systems and impact a person's entire life experience. His preference for calling addiction a "disorder" rather than a disease seems more semantic than substantive.
  - onecommentman 2y ago
    Lots of money in calling something an “illness” or a “disease”…10% of US GNP is dedicated to medicine. That semantic difference can be quite profitable, if the illness model is correct. But you can’t just “will” your way out of an illness. You can will your way out of an addiction. In fact the addicts I know who are no longer troubled with their addiction say it’s the only way to conquer it. It must be a deep transformative personal choice, an act of will. Supporting that new life often requires support, say AA, but not the sort of support normally associated with treating physical disease. Even “mental illness” isn’t a match, because again the will can’t be applied if the mind is broken. (Here assuming that the addiction alone is the issue, and physical pain or organic brain dysfunction isn’t the actual culprit.) But there’s not a lot of money in strengthening/reorienting the will. Only actual deep, permanent healing. But if you can grift it into an “disease”, well…say hi to Matthew Perry for me.

3 points by Jimmc414 2y ago

Jimmc414 2y ago

https://archive.is/W6iH6 https://archive.is/W6iH6

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

PaulHoule 2y ago

Alcoholics Anonymous and many other programs treat addiction as if it was a spiritual problem. Their solution is social, "keep going to meetings". This book https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/2129/persuasion-and-healing https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/2129/persuasion-and-he... points out that faith healing was the first line treatment for most conditions so I'm going to reject that the "disease" and "spiritual" explanations are exclusive. (Pushing my fox out entirely and putting on my arch-reductionist hat I'd say anything you experience from drug addiction to listening to classical vs rap music makes some kind of change in your brain and the ability of us to quantify and detect that is a measure of our progress.)

Jimmc414 2y ago
> I'm going to reject that the "disease" and "spiritual" explanations are exclusive Agreed. His main evidence against the disease model seems to be that addiction "consumes and penetrates your entire being in ways that diseases, which normally have a physical location in the body, do not." Many established diseases like diabetes, autoimmune conditions, and depression affect multiple body systems and impact a person's entire life experience. His preference for calling addiction a "disorder" rather than a disease seems more semantic than substantive.
- onecommentman 2y ago
  Lots of money in calling something an “illness” or a “disease”…10% of US GNP is dedicated to medicine. That semantic difference can be quite profitable, if the illness model is correct. But you can’t just “will” your way out of an illness. You can will your way out of an addiction. In fact the addicts I know who are no longer troubled with their addiction say it’s the only way to conquer it. It must be a deep transformative personal choice, an act of will. Supporting that new life often requires support, say AA, but not the sort of support normally associated with treating physical disease. Even “mental illness” isn’t a match, because again the will can’t be applied if the mind is broken. (Here assuming that the addiction alone is the issue, and physical pain or organic brain dysfunction isn’t the actual culprit.) But there’s not a lot of money in strengthening/reorienting the will. Only actual deep, permanent healing. But if you can grift it into an “disease”, well…say hi to Matthew Perry for me.