Answer this question

[TampaJim]

The above bolded quote is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. There are studies calling it a disease and there are just as many disabusing that notion. As of today there is no definitive peer reviewed medical publication that has categorically concluded that addiction is an organic disease. It is theoretical conjecture at it's best. There are many who wish to classify it as such and their research tends to start with that conclusion and work it's way backward in an effort to prove it.

Most debilitating and often fatal diseases come upon you with no choice. Drug addiction starts with a poor one.

Are you going to overlook the fact that many addicts started under a doctor's supervision??

I did note that decision are made, but that it doesn't undo the results or undo our responsibilities.
DNA tests have found that addictive traits are stronger in some than others. That's a genetic issue.
And for anyone lacking that genetic predisposition, it's not possible to truly 'understand' it.

If we ignore people making bad decisions, do we start with obese people, that's a big group.
Maybe those who use tobacco or drink alcohol shouldn't be able to receive medical treatment.
After all, those truly are choices ... right?? And for dang sure if you text and drive, no EMS.

When do we accept that the affected people are human, our own kind? Mistaken or not.

[PsuHntr]

Like gambling...it's a habit, which is a state of mind. I always said that folks who gamble didn't work hard enough for their earnings. Similarly, folks who do illegal drugs don't have anything they really enjoy doing (fishing, hobby, etc.) so just go for mind-numbing BS. It's a personal choice and no change of law or culture is a good thing. The needle houses in Europe and Canada are not good and we don't want to go down that road here.

Lol....I don't even really have a response to your line of thinking...so because I play poker or bet 20 dollars on a football game I don't work hard enough for my money..... judging from your signature you like to drink beer? I guess its ok to drop a few bucks on a 12 pack but not a few bucks betting lol....judge much?

[Basscatfrank]

Are you going to overlook the fact that many addicts started under a doctor's supervision??

I did note that decision are made, but that it doesn't undo the results or undo our responsibilities.
DNA tests have found that addictive traits are stronger in some than others. That's a genetic issue.
And for anyone lacking that genetic predisposition, it's not possible to truly 'understand' it.

If we ignore people making bad decisions, do we start with obese people, that's a big group.
Maybe those who use tobacco or drink alcohol shouldn't be able to receive medical treatment.
After all, those truly are choices ... right?? And for dang sure if you text and drive, no EMS.

When do we accept that the affected people are human, our own kind? Mistaken or not.

You have failed to refute any of my assertions. Are you now backtracking and calling it a bad decision as you state above? You then bring up results and responsibilities. The results and the responsibilities of the aforementioned bad decisions lay solely on those making them.

Your conflation of other poor decisions is nothing more than a strawman.

[ChrisS22]

I firmly believe that some individuals are more biologically predisposed to chemical addictions.

[Dan21XRS]

Are you going to overlook the fact that many addicts started under a doctor's supervision??

Does anyone have the numbers on the percentage of people that became addicted while under doctor's supervision??? I've never seen one, why??? In the county I live in there were on average 335 reported emergency room visits per month in 2018 for drug overdose, that's over 9 a day. How many were doctor assisted and how many are just flat out addicts??? I'd say the vast majority are flat out drug addicts. Why??? Because if the vast majority were doctor assisted advocacy groups would be screaming from the hospital roof-tops...

I know I'll get flamed on this but how many addicts started with marijuana???... Probably 99.999998% It's a gateway...

Maybe those who use tobacco or drink alcohol shouldn't be able to receive medical treatment.
After all, those truly are choices ... right??

Many if not all insurance companies charge more for smokers policies... I know my company does... So they're pulling their own weight now...

And watch the derogatory alcohol comments... Dan

[Jeff La]

Are you going to overlook the fact that many addicts started under a doctor's supervision??

I did note that decision are made, but that it doesn't undo the results or undo our responsibilities.
DNA tests have found that addictive traits are stronger in some than others. That's a genetic issue.
And for anyone lacking that genetic predisposition, it's not possible to truly 'understand' it.

If we ignore people making bad decisions, do we start with obese people, that's a big group.
Maybe those who use tobacco or drink alcohol shouldn't be able to receive medical treatment.
After all, those truly are choices ... right?? And for dang sure if you text and drive, no EMS.

When do we accept that the affected people are human, our own kind? Mistaken or not.

We had both random drug and alcohol testing at work. Last policy when I was employed was termination upon failure, no exceptions. I don't know of any medical policy I or my wife have had that paid for alcohol addiction treatment, for a short time one company paid for drug treatment on a limited basis.

[Ben Danbleume]

Wrong forum to expect any type of support or understanding.

Support and understanding enable a lot of addiction. Addiction is an untreated mental deficiency, from my experience.

[Tfall]

I know I'll get flamed on this but how many addicts started with marijuana???... Probably 99.999998% It's a gateway...

“Oh no you didn’t”...

[wildturkey]

Depends on how the person is identifying themselves at the time.

[519DVX]

My answer....it's NOT a disease. It's a habit.

Agree! But by calling it a disease takes the accountability away from the person. Just more manufacturing of victims.

[Triton TR 20]

Wrong forum to expect any type of support or understanding.

correct answer

[BP in ME]

I'd have to start with the question: how well is our current approach working for us? Then I'd approach it from a cost/benefit angle. It's not too hard to find articles on alternative, small-scale attempts to attack the opioid abuse crisis that have had pretty good results treating addicts more as patients even if the "patient" has to be compelled by law to get clean. But how much would it cost to implement one of those methods on a large scale? Now compare that to what it costs now to have addicts treated solely as criminals. Is it better to hire more guards or more counselors? What does it cost society to fill prisons with druggies and leave no space for violent criminals so they get ridiculous plea deals?

It's a complex equation for sure. Let's say it does cost more to treat the addict as a patient instead of a criminal. Now look at the recidivism rate on these people. If 7 out of 10 addicts get out of prison and return to their old ways, what does that cost us as a society. They probably can't hold a job so they either go on welfare or turn to crime (theft) to support themselves and their habit (more likely welfare and crime both). Eventually they end up back in prison, dead, or in the hospital costing us more money. Now pretend an alternative treatment plan succeeds 6 out of 10 times. Best-cast scenario, there's 3 more people who become productive citizens again--paying taxes in instead of costing us more and more. How do you think it all works out on paper?

[Bestnews]

Drug laws shouldn't factor any aspect of why one uses drugs illicitly. Laws and the penalties for their violation target the drug industry. A user contributes to the disruption of society by participating in the illicit use of drugs.

[TampaJim]

If you believe that everything is always a choice, you'll also follow that same logic for sexual preferences.
Which means things are pretty sad in your house. Too bad you aren't physically attracted to your partner.
Maybe you should go home, explain things, clear the air. Tell her you choose to enjoy her, it's not natural.

[Basscatfrank]

If you believe that everything is always a choice, you'll also follow that same logic for sexual preferences.
Which means things are pretty sad in your house. Too bad you aren't physically attracted to your partner.
Maybe you should go home, explain things, clear the air. Tell her you choose to enjoy her, it's not natural.

Sorry, the Google gibberish to English translator is down.

[mysticslobra]

I know I'll get flamed on this but how many addicts started with marijuana???... Probably 99.999998% It's a gateway...

Just curious, do you consider alcohol a gateway drug? I only ask because my cousin is an addict. He started drinking as many of us do while he was in high school at parties. In college he tried marijuana while drinking at a party. He has since moved into very hard drugs.

I personally do not smoke anything but I will drink some beer now and then. I don't have a problem with marijuana or alcohol. I'm just curious your thoughts on alcohol also being a gateway drug as you seem to have a very strong opinion about marijuana. I am curious what it is based on.

[Casslaw]

Calling addiction a disease doesn’t take accountability away from the user. Maybe in Your head it does, but not to me. While my Lyme Disease went undiagnosed for 4.5 years I was put in 17 different prescriptions; 4 of which were heavy pain narcotics. My father was an alocholic who died of cirrhosis of the liver when I was 15. His entire family were alcoholics and died much younger than the national average. I know that I have that gene in me, doesn’t take any accountability away.

I also know that since the lyme broke the blood/brain barrier I had a parasite in my brain and I was not capable of making proper decisions. Between the pain, the seizures, the lack of motor functions, I could not make normal everyday decisions. I was finally diagnosed correctly, by my now family physician. He is the head physician at my local hospital. He happened to be walking through the ER after a Judge called 911 when I had a seizure while representing a client in court. This Dr recognized my name and decided to look in on me. He diagnosed me quickly and I was on the road to recovery.

It took a couole years but he got me off of all of the seizure meds, heart meds, cholesterol meds, arthritis meds and yes, pain meds! My body was definitely addicted to all of those medications! They never took the pain away because the root cause was never taken care of.

I live every day in pain, as many do. I choose not to take opiates, never will again unless I have some type of surgery that requires it. Having been in a position where I could feel what it’s like when your body craves those medications, I can see how people get addicted. Before I lived it, I couldn’t understand, and was very judgmental as a defense attorney!

Bottom line, there is no bright line answer.

[Jeff La]

If you believe that everything is always a choice, you'll also follow that same logic for sexual preferences.
Which means things are pretty sad in your house. Too bad you aren't physically attracted to your partner.
Maybe you should go home, explain things, clear the air. Tell her you choose to enjoy her, it's not natural.

That's some real science right there

I would assume he made a choice when he chose his spouse, which would mean he use multiple avenues to make an educated decision. But hey you go on believing it's not a choice and it's predetermined who you will marry whether your physically attracted to them or not. Oh by the way, isn't it wrong in todays society to use physical attraction for a spouse, shouldn't it be more of brain matter and such, hey it's your world your supporting not mine

[mysticslobra]

I'd have to start with the question: how well is our current approach working for us? Then I'd approach it from a cost/benefit angle. It's not too hard to find articles on alternative, small-scale attempts to attack the opioid abuse crisis that have had pretty good results treating addicts more as patients even if the "patient" has to be compelled by law to get clean. But how much would it cost to implement one of those methods on a large scale? Now compare that to what it costs now to have addicts treated solely as criminals. Is it better to hire more guards or more counselors? What does it cost society to fill prisons with druggies and leave no space for violent criminals so they get ridiculous plea deals?

It's a complex equation for sure. Let's say it does cost more to treat the addict as a patient instead of a criminal. Now look at the recidivism rate on these people. If 7 out of 10 addicts get out of prison and return to their old ways, what does that cost us as a society. They probably can't hold a job so they either go on welfare or turn to crime (theft) to support themselves and their habit (more likely welfare and crime both). Eventually they end up back in prison, dead, or in the hospital costing us more money. Now pretend an alternative treatment plan succeeds 6 out of 10 times. Best-cast scenario, there's 3 more people who become productive citizens again--paying taxes in instead of costing us more and more. How do you think it all works out on paper?

I like most of what you said, however I think the number 6 out of 10 is not based on fact. From what I have seen the number that are helped and stay clean is much much lower. Can you provide support for this?

[mike petro]

Dosen't sound any different than the being born gay crap they want you to believe. Give them a blanket, puppy, and safe space then maybe they will not be addicts anymore.

Were you born straight or did you decide?