Can they quit on their own?

[smutt butt]

I remember the cooking was a high in it's self. Watching it melt down into and oil and you swirl just at the right time.

And think O SHIT i just put $200 worth of coke in there!!! LOL!!!

[manicmonday]

Well, I thought you would give a factual debate, not just the first hit of Google.

 

Laboratoire Physiopathologie du Comportement - Inserm U.588, Institut Francois Magendie, 146 rue Leo Saignat, 33077 Bordeaux Cedex, France.

Drug addiction is a medical condition, a chronic relapsing disease. As in other domains of experimental medicine, appropriate experimental investigations are needed in order to better understand the disease. However, to understand the diverse facets of drug effects and of the underlying pathophysiology it is necessary to keep in mind the complexity of the psychopathological processes. The main symptoms that characterize addiction correspond to expressions of dysfunctions within specific circuits and regions. Pathways to addiction are numerous and comorbidity and in the real world poly-drug use are common. Some of these aspects will be examined as well as the role of life events and stress. Theoretical considerations will be proposed [see also: Koob, G.F., & Le Moal, M.. 2005a. Neurobiology of Addiction. Elsevier. 570 pp] to account for the stages of the disease from impulse control disorder to compulsive disorders, for affective dynamics and for the relations between the symptoms and pathophysiology.

PMID: 17169534 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

 

 

And from one of the latest abstracts:

 

PMID- 11964061

OWN - NLM

STAT- MEDLINE

DA - 20020419

DCOM- 20020530

LR - 20061115

PUBM- Print

IS - 0965-2140 (Print)

VI - 97

IP - 4

DP - 2002 Apr

TI - The role of brain emotional systems in addictions: a neuro-evolutionary

perspective and new 'self-report' animal model.

PG - 459-69

AB - The evolutionary significance of neurochemical events in the brain has

received minimal attention in the field of addiction research. Likewise,

the general failure of neuroscientists to postulate how basic brain

circuits might mediate emotional urges has retarded the development of

scientific perspectives that could inform new inquiries into the

underlying dynamics and treatment of addictions. In this paper, we revisit

the argument that prototypically abused substances activate or alter

specific emotional brain systems that were evolutionarily designed to

signal potential increments or decrements in fitness. We then discuss two

distinct emotional systems (reward seeking and separation distress) which

may track different types of potential changes in fitness. Based on this

evolutionarily inspired approach, we illustrate how a mammalian model of

emotion (i.e. rodent ultrasonic vocalizations) may enable scientists to

predict drug-related phenomena such as abuse potential, anatomical

location of mediating neural substrates, and the psychological impact of

withdrawal. We conclude by discussing some therapeutic and social

implications of examining drug addiction processes with multiple emotional

brain systems in mind.

AD - Department of Psychology, J.P. Scott Center for Neuroscience, Mind and

Behavior Bowling Green State University, OH 43403, USA.

jpankse@bgnet.bgsu.edu

FAU - Panksepp, Jaak

AU - Panksepp J

FAU - Knutson, Brian

AU - Knutson B

FAU - Burgdorf, Jeff

AU - Burgdorf J

LA - eng

PT - Journal Article

PT - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

PT - Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

PT - Review

PL - England

TA - Addiction

JT - Addiction (Abingdon, England)

JID - 9304118

SB - IM

CIN - Addiction. 2002 Apr;97(4):470-1. PMID: 11964062

CIN - Addiction. 2002 Apr;97(4):472-3. PMID: 11964063

CIN - Addiction. 2002 Apr;97(4):473-4. PMID: 11964064

MH - Animals

MH - Behavior, Addictive/ physiopathology/psychology

MH - Brain Chemistry/ physiology

MH - Emotions

MH - Evolution

MH - Models, Animal

MH - Sociology

MH - Substance-Related Disorders/physiopathology/therapy

RF - 92

EDAT- 2002/04/20 10:00

MHDA- 2002/05/31 10:01

AID - 25 [pii]

PST - ppublish

SO - Addiction. 2002 Apr;97(4):459-69.

 

 

You know, from a real University, from real funding, with

real publishing. The long story short? Addtiction is a hard

thing to understand and even doctors don't always get it right. However, a jo/slmo saying, it didn't happen to me, why did it happen

to you doesn't cut it.

 

And I noticed I responded to you and you conveniently ignored that, but berated me

for ignoring yours. I see how you are.

[Jhony5]

Did you even read that garbage before you posted it?

 

What gives with all the abbreviations and goofy ass numbers? That shit makes about as much sense as that article. I didn't just post the first thing I googled. I actually put some effort into it as I wanted to find a reputable resource that stated the EXACT same information I've been trying to impress upon you.

 

Okay, lets take a look at this bullocks you just posted, shall we?

 

Laboratoire Physiopathologie du Comportement - Inserm U.588, Institut Francois Magendie,

My French isn't so good (is that French?) but I think this is a biased report from a medical institute. Exactly what I expected from you. Go with independent research and see what ya come up with. Instead of quoting from sources that I have already shown to be biased toward enforcing the "addiction disease" theory. And yes, its theory. The one thing that this article does omit.

 

As in other domains of experimental medicine, appropriate experimental investigations are needed in order to better understand the disease.

Already they are going with the assumption that this is a disease. Please note the use of the word "experimental". As in, we aren't sure what the fuck we are dealing with. However it is an omission that they are dealing with an unknown quantity.

 

The main symptoms that characterize addiction correspond to expressions of dysfunctions within specific circuits and regions.

Translation from gibberish to English: The brain of a drug addict displays anomalies. Is it just me or is that to be expected by someone whom abuses drugs?

 

Theoretical <<<<<<There we are again...))))considerations will be proposed [see also: Koob, G.F., & Le Moal, M.. 2005a. Neurobiology of Addiction. Elsevier. 570 pp] to account for the stages of the disease from impulse control disorder to compulsive disorders, for affective dynamics and for the relations between the symptoms and pathophysiology.

Theoretical???????? Thats a solid base for your argument.

 

What we have here is the injection of million dollar words and complex medical jargon into what is basically a brief article regarding theory, rhetoric and experimental science.

 

the argument that prototypically abused substances activate or alter

specific emotional brain systems that were evolutionarily designed to

signal potential increments or decrements in fitness.

Translation from gibberish to English: Drugs cause brain damage. They could have spared themselves a few syllables and just said "Brain Damage". Again, not symptoms of disease, rather the result of abuse.

 

All one needs to read to understand that this article is BUCKING FULLSHIT is this>>>>>>.....

Drug addiction is a medical condition, a chronic relapsing disease. As in other domains of experimental medicine, appropriate experimental investigations are needed in order to better understand the disease.

A paper that provides no proof of any sort whatsoever. A self-serving bunch of shat most likely contrived in order to garnish funding for their "experimental theoretical" research.

 

Google again, MM. This time actually take a minute to decipher your sources in order to make sure they are pertinent to the discussion, like I did.

 

This whole article actually goes to prove MY point. That there is no proof at all of any sort of disease relating to addiction. Only theories and conjecture that hope to build on the business of addiction treatment.

[manicmonday]

This whole article actually goes to prove MY point. That there is no proof at all of any sort of disease relating to addiction. Only theories and conjecture that hope to build on the business of addiction treatment.

 

Like a child covering his eyes and saying, I can't see you mommy.

 

Tunnel vision redneck.

[Jhony5]

Like a child covering his eyes and saying, I can't see you mommy.

 

Tunnel vision redneck.

 

 

Snappy comeback.

 

I seem to have understood your cute little article better then you yourself did.

 

Did ya even read it? In summation, all that article said was this: 'Drug abuse causes brain damage. The specific areas of the brain that are affected are being studied as to better understand the disease of addiction.'

 

Dude, lady, whatever the fuck you qualify as, this article says nothing but shit. They call it a disease, like in a way that suggests they are sure of this. Then they go on about the mysterious nature of the experimental research and the various theories they are trying to prove to be correct. In short, they assert the reality of a situation that they themselves admit isn't provable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

DISPUTE THAT!

 

Go ahead brainiac. Try and translate that shit like I did, line for line. Did I make an error? Yes? No? Do it. Prove to me that you actually understand what you quoted. I did, and you ducked it, responding with only a childish insult. OR....or you could admit I'm right and apologize for wasting my time.

 

Or maybe you thought all those big city fancy words would scare off the dumb redneck?

[phreakwars]

Like a child covering his eyes and saying, I can't see you mommy.

 

Tunnel vision redneck.

Your weakening.

.

.

[manicmonday]

Your weakening.

.

.

 

No, I just don't have the time for this mouse that I used to. Or the energy.

[phreakwars]

No, I just don't have the time for this mouse that I used to. Or the energy.

Uhm, ya, I just said that...

 

You just said it with a longer explanation.

.

.

[Phantom]

Ohhhhh c'mon Phanny. Thats a fucking cop-out. I smoked crack before. Several times in the past. We bought some powder, used a spoon, a candle, a dab of water and some baking soda. Heated it while stirring just like pudding, and smoked it while cat fishing. It was fun. No one died. No one started sucking dick or stealing radios to pawn for another fix. Its not as addictive as people might lead you to believe. If you're smoking crack everyday and making a mess of your life, than FUCKING STOP IT!!! You don't need treatment. You don't need counseling. You need to fucking stop smoking so much crack. If you abuse crack, than flat out you're a piece of shit and you choose this. Its not a contagious virus. Its a habit. STOP IT! If crack didn't exist, then I fucking guarantee that these same hobo ass losers would be tanking their lives via some other form of intoxicant.

Its not the crack that ruins lives, its the people that smoke it.

 

But you weren't neglecting your child for another fix like Atlantic's friend.

 

It wasn't a cop out- just friendly advice. The woman had already claimed to quit, lied about her past drug use, then dumped her daughter off on a friend so she could go get high. The child shouldn't have to stay in that situation while us adults try to fucking figure out the definition of addiction.

 

My comment was submitted prior to this post taking a heated turn so I won't "go there." If you want to get high I might not approve but it isn't any of my business. Do what you want to do. However, if I see a child being hurt or neglected, I have to intervene.

 

No one started sucking dick or stealing radios to pawn for another fix.

 

I LOVED that line!

[Phantom]

.

 

Bob Saget asks, "Have you ever sucked dick for weed?"

[hugo]

Addict equals dumbass. Addiction is a disease only dumbasses can catch. Dumbasses have a hard time doing anything on their own.

[atlantic]

But you weren't neglecting your child for another fix like Atlantic's friend.

 

It wasn't a cop out- just friendly advice. The woman had already claimed to quit, lied about her past drug use, then dumped her daughter off on a friend so she could go get high. The child shouldn't have to stay in that situation while us adults try to fucking figure out the definition of addiction.

 

My comment was submitted prior to this post taking a heated turn so I won't "go there." If you want to get high I might not approve but it isn't any of my business. Do what you want to do. However, if I see a child being hurt or neglected, I have to intervene.

 

 

 

I LOVED that line!

You know Phantom, I've been thinking alot lately about all the times in the past when she has actually met me and my son at the park and then left for an hour or more to supposedly talk to someone about a job. Now I think that was just bullshit too. It all adds up now. Nazznegg is right also, she is just worried about him doing her drugs; and the fact that they get welfare and are taking it away from a child who may actually need it makes me sick. She constantly complained about her husbands addictions (which are many); shows up at his work to check on him, calls him up to 20 times a day; she even was told she couldn't show up at his work for awhile, but it is behind their house so pretty hard to enforce. She really pissed me off dragging me and my son into that. After 20 years of always picking up her pieces I'm done. She only cares about herself.

[Phantom]

But what about her child? Has CPS done anything?

[atlantic]

But what about her child? Has CPS done anything?

Don't know. I'm sure she'll try to lie her way out of it of course; but with her history I am sure it will be investigated and maybe this will help her. She and I no longer speak.

[Jhony5]

A few questions NazzNegg number two.

 

People with children that use drugs should have their children taken away

What exactly do you mean by "use...drugs" in this reference? Are we talking about just hard drugs like cocaine, meth and heroin? Or are we talkin about illegal drugs in general? Is alcohol included in this? Maybe just people who use drugs while they have their children in their care?

 

You need to be more careful and descriptive when laying out such a broad statement such as this. I plan on resuming my recreational use of marijuana when my custody situation is finalized. However and of course this does not suggest that I'll be toking up in the bathroom while my daughter plays in the other room. People that do that are pieces of shit on the sidewalk of life. I'll say the same for people that drink while they have their kids under their care. However this is generally socially acceptable as it is not illegal. Somehow that makes it right.

 

Addicted individuals are scum-bags, worthless waste of human flesh that should be beaten, and used as slave labor until they die in the yoke.

 

Again you make a broad sweeping statement that has lots and lots of room for individual deciphering.

 

The words "addict" ..."addicted"...and "addiction" have transformed into buzzwords. With many different applications and levels of severity.

 

The definition of the word ADDICTION: compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal.

 

I drink coffee everyday. But does that mean I have a coffee addiction? According to this definition, yes. Because, although on a very minor scale, I will have physiological symptoms as a result of depriving my body of a substance that it craves. Cigarettes, well those physiological symptoms are somewhat more harsh and carry a far more apparent effect upon withdrawal. Some people have addictions to certain TV shows. They find themselves stuck in traffic and realize that they are going to miss their show, thus making them physically agitated and, as silly as it might sound, emotionally upset to one degree or another.

 

 

So I have to ask you to clarify what you mean, EXACTLY, by your statement that addicts are bad parents. Most of us here are addicts in one sense or another.

What you said might seem obvious as most of use are probably picturing a crackhead huddling over his pile of dope while his/her children are scuttling about trying to figure out how to cook their own mac 'n' cheese. If thats what you mean by "addicts" then I'm totally with ya.

 

Drug addictions are not a disease, They are a choice

 

Agreed.

 

People that use drugs should not be passing out advice to others that use drugs.

Sounds correct, but plenty of room for correction. People that work on cars are the last people that should be handing out advice about cars. Did that sound right? Naaaaa, it sounds a little funny. Think about that for a second will ya please.

 

Often the "experts" that study drugs and hand out advice and legislative measures about drugs are doing so while in a vacuum. This is a large part of the reason why many narcotics, and the ensuing addictions are misunderstood and shit gets lost in translation. Because there is a need for translation when dealing with and discussing something that one has no personal knowledge about.

 

You can read all the books and scientific data you want about cocaine. But in the end you'll know very little about the nature of the beast until you've stood face to face with it.

To understand this you must also understand that often police will turn to former criminals when trying to understand and profile other criminals and their respective crimes. How does a serial killer think? Ask a serial killer, then you'll know. All else is equal to guesswork.

 

 

In short your above post more of a smart arse jab than a thoughtful addition to this thread.

[atlantic]

So to summarize this topic:

Everyone agrees that:

 

Addicted individuals are scum-bags, worthless waste of human flesh that should be beaten, and used as slave labor until they die in the yoke.

 

Drug addictions are not a disease, They are a choice

 

People that use drugs should not be passing out advice to others that use drugs.

 

People with children that use drugs should have their children taken away

 

Soooo... when will most of you be dropping your children off for adoption and reporting to the labor camp to die in the yoke??.

.

.

.

I don't feel that people should lose their children, I do feel that if somebody is neglecting their child because of drug use they should be made to get counseling and monitored.

 

I feel bad for people with addictions, what kind of life is it, when all you can really connect with is a pipe, or a drink. Sad really.

 

I think people can get help but only if the people they know don't enable them, and they themselves truly want the help.

[Phantom]

I don't feel that people should lose their children, I do feel that if somebody is neglecting their child because of drug use they should be made to get counseling and monitored.

 

I absolutely disagree with that. A parent should never drink when they are alone with their children, smoke ciggarettes around their children, or do drugs at all if they have children. I couldn't care less if anyone disagrees with me. I can't stand parents who do such things. Kids are too precious. Period.

 

Weed, beer, ciggarettes: although considered "light" addictions by many, are still not something a responsible or good parent should do or do around their kids.

 

If someone has a drinking or drug problem, they should lose their rights to their children, even if temporarily while they get help. Why should children be subjected to their parents' idiocy? Unacceptable. The parents already showed society their drugs were more important to them than their children in my opinion.

[atlantic]

I absolutely disagree with that. A parent should never drink when they are alone with their children, smoke ciggarettes around their children, or do drugs at all if they have children. I couldn't care less if anyone disagrees with me. I can't stand parents who do such things. Kids are too precious. Period.

 

Weed, beer, ciggarettes: although considered "light" addictions by many, are still not something a responsible or good parent should do or do around their kids.

 

If someone has a drinking or drug problem, they should lose their rights to their children, even if temporarily while they get help. Why should children be subjected to their parents' idiocy? Unacceptable. The parents already showed society their drugs were more important to them than their children in my opinion.

Phantom, I do agree that these things should not be done around children at all. Lets say for example though you have a chance to go out with the girls one night, have a designated driver and know your son will be safe at home with dad. Then I think it would be ok for you to drink. I should have clarified that.

 

I don't let anyone smoke cigs around my son, hence, why I was so pissed my son had to be stuck in that house breathing the crack air.

 

Addictions are usually destructive period. Whether it be gambling, drinking alcohol, drugs. When someone brings a child into this world they need to put their selfish wants behind and do right by the child aways I agree.

[atlantic]

I absolutely disagree with that. A parent should never drink when they are alone with their children, smoke ciggarettes around their children, or do drugs at all if they have children. I couldn't care less if anyone disagrees with me. I can't stand parents who do such things. Kids are too precious. Period.

 

Weed, beer, ciggarettes: although considered "light" addictions by many, are still not something a responsible or good parent should do or do around their kids.

 

If someone has a drinking or drug problem, they should lose their rights to their children, even if temporarily while they get help. Why should children be subjected to their parents' idiocy? Unacceptable. The parents already showed society their drugs were more important to them than their children in my opinion.

Phantom, this brings up another good debate. I knew a nurse 20 years ago that was an acquaintance of a guy I was dating who used Cocaine occasionally with her husband at parties. I was shocked to learn this, but everyone else seemed fine with it. She was a great mother and a good nurse. You'd be surprise how many people in various professions can carry themselves well in society and still party once in awhile. I honestly wouldn't have felt right about reporting her. She was a wonderful person and mom. I should also mention that I knew her children were always safe, and well provided for and were never neglected of medical attention when they needed it or food and shelter.

[hugo]

I see no problem with drinking moderately in front of children.

[snafu]

Back to the topic.

You can quit on your own. But if they get caught and say they're gonna quit I wouldn't believe them. Also if they quit you will notice because they will go through withdrawals and then they will be proud to mention the fact they quit. They will be able to tell you how long they've been clean. It's a badge of honor. To quit on your own you have to have will power too. Without self control and will power they are domed to the drug without intervention.

[Phantom]

Phantom, this brings up another good debate. I knew a nurse 20 years ago that was an acquaintance of a guy I was dating who used Cocaine occasionally with her husband at parties. I was shocked to learn this, but everyone else seemed fine with it. She was a great mother and a good nurse. You'd be surprise how many people in various professions can carry themselves well in society and still party once in awhile.

 

I know a lot of older people that smoke weed on a regular basis but they don't have young children. I guess it comes down to doing something that alters your reaction time and senses. To me, it just seems like a bad idea.

 

I honestly wouldn't have felt right about reporting her. She was a wonderful person and mom. I should also mention that I knew her children were always safe, and well provided for and were never neglected of medical attention when they needed it or food and shelter.

 

How good of a parent could anyone be if they do drugs around their kids? I'm glad the children were "always safe" but that sounds like luck. It's just not worth the risk of possibility.

 

I see no problem with drinking moderately in front of children.

 

If you can handle a beer or two then I suppose it's ok but if you are a lightweight like me who gets a buzz after half a beer, it's best to stay away.

[atlantic]

 

 

How good of a parent could anyone be if they do drugs around their kids? I'm glad the children were "always safe" but that sounds like luck. It's just not worth the risk of possibility.

 

 

That's the thing; she would never do that around her children, and I guess I just didn't know enough about the situation to really feel like I could make a judgement about her. From what I was told they only used it once in a blue moon. I felt the same way you did though. I felt it was wrong.

 

The other person has a history, and by history I'm talking about 15 years of serious drug addiction. So bad that she has stolen all her friends vehicles to go in search of her love (Drugs) while she was staying with them. She has stolen from all her friends and family, she will stop at nothing once she gets going.

[phreakwars]

Anybody heard this story yet ??

 

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=911f03df-e75c-4887-9b7b-51860c3592f9

 

They are charged with INJURY TO A CHILD !!!

.

.

[Jhony5]

Anybody heard this story yet ??

 

http://www.woai.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=911f03df-e75c-4887-9b7b-51860c3592f9

 

They are charged with INJURY TO A CHILD !!!

.

.

 

Holy shit....thats horrible. They should be charged with something serious indeed. I had a friend who's dad did this to him when he was 7. Both of which are in and out of jail frequently.

 

That is injury, BTW Phreak. A 2 year old doesn't even have a developed body yet and hes smoking tar laden marijuana. His brain is still developing the necessary electrical connections and no fucking doubt whatsoever that this is damaging to this process. A clear case of child abuse and they should be in prison for that stunt.