Freethought & Rationalism Archive

kat10 · 03-25-2002, 01:10 AM

True. However, about your story on your brother. I'm sure we can agree that all situations are different. I happen to have an older brother myself. He's my idol. He also happens to be a pothead. A very productive one at that, but never the less, he lights up fairly often. He's offered, he's told me all these great things about it. He tells me how much easier pot makes it for him to think. I still am not interested, it's just not my thing. I agree with some of the other posts here though, that there is a danger in being predisposed to having an "addictive" personality b/c of genetics or what have you. It would be nice to have a test of sorts to check potential drug users for this. I however like to stick with reality. Drugs do ruin some people's lives, but there are also plenty of people that can handle it just fine.

cricket · 03-25-2002, 04:00 AM

Three4jump, isn't it possible your brother would have developed the schizophrenia with or without the drugs? I've always been curious as to how it's known, in the absence of family history, whether drugs are the reason or not. After all, schizophrenia does sometimes happen without a family history, and it often begins at about the same ages that young people experiment with drugs. Yet most people who experiment with drugs at these ages do not develop schizophrenia. How does anyone make the definitive correlation? You said yourself that your brother was quite successful for quite some time before schizophrenia developed. Maybe it would have developed such symptoms regardless of drug use?

Is there a way to know?

If it's impossible to know about each individual's causation, then I assume we can look at statistics and see a difference? I assume drug users are more likely to develop schizophrenia than those who have never used drugs? (I'm talking about those with true schizophrenia, not those with acute psychosis from relatively recent drug use.)

I'm not arguing here; just asking the question. Does anyone know the statistics?

three4jump · 03-25-2002, 09:54 AM

Cricket, I'm not even positive my brother has schizophrenia; it's just the most likely explanation for his paranoid and delusional behavior (such as twice trying to run over his mother with a station wagon.) I do know that 1 in 100 people will get schizophrenia, there is a genetic component to it, and much of the research has suggested that drug abuse could trigger a latent tendency for this disease. This doesn't mean that schizophrenia couldn't be triggered by some other stress or trauma.

My main point in bringing it up was to show that someone out there who is not currently taking drugs is definitely going to be negatively impacted by them, whether it is latent schozophrenia or an addictive personality type or whatever. I will try to find some statistics when I have more time, but I would guess that one in six people who start out taking drugs with the intent of being casual recreational users end up with their lives controlled by drugs. This would make taking drugs about as safe as playing russian roulette.

Would any of you who have had more experience with drugs be able to support or refute my assertion that one in six users ends up being an addicted abuser regardless of their initial intention or education level?

Viti · 03-25-2002, 12:47 PM

three4jump...I don't know the answer. I also see your points as we simply do not know who will have a problem and who won't. You are right that never trying drugs means never becoming addicted.

Crazy theory ahead...what do you all think?

I have always had a theory, that "if it's not one thing it will be another" in that people who have a disposition to addiction, will become addicted to something (food, cigarettes, alcohol, work, sex, religion etc), and even if they manage to kick one addiction it is usually replaced with another. Just a thought

kat10 · 03-25-2002, 01:27 PM

LadyShea: I totally agree with you on this one. Addictive personalities are called that because they have tendencies towards addictions. I personally know plenty of people addicted to soda for example. My father used to work for a non-emergency transport company. Mostly he'd take patients in for dialysis (sp?) treatments. Several of them were young adults who'd so poisened their bodies by the extremely high sugar content of sodas, that their kidneys totally began to fail. Most people however, wouldn't bat an eye at their children consuming like 5 sodas a day. Is this lack of education, or is it the standard thought, oh, this wouldn't happen to me/my child? There can be healthy addictions though. I think the problem is really people who go totally overboard. I can honestly say, my friend is a total gym addict. She goes constantly, like 4/5 times a week. But she doesn't take it overboard, getting into body building where she'd look freakish. There a degrees of addiction, in all forms. Some are worse for your body than others. It's whether you choose something productive or not. *Personally, I'm a book addict. I read excessively, but I see it as a good thing.

[ March 25, 2002: Message edited by: kat10 ]</p>

three4jump · 03-25-2002, 02:22 PM

As a running addict, I agree with LadyShea and kat10. I am also a chocolate junkie, and I'm having a hard time cutting down on that.

cricket · 03-25-2002, 04:07 PM

Quote:

I have always had a theory, that "if it's not one thing it will be another" in that people who have a disposition to addiction, will become addicted to something (food, cigarettes, alcohol, work, sex, religion etc), and even if they manage to kick one addiction it is usually replaced with another.

I agree. And I think often it's AA that becomes the replacement addiction/passion/obsession.

cricket · 03-25-2002, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Personally, I'm a book addict. I read excessively, but I see it as a good thing.

Kat, in general I agree it's a good thing, but sometimes I wonder if there's something twisted about my own reading habits. It's easy to let other things slide; I'm not known for achieving "balance" in my life. And I find myself in situations where I question my own subconscious motives... am I sabotaging myself? Countless times I've found myself late for work but sooo enthralled with a chapter I'm reading that I don't want to stop. Coincidence? I don't know that it is. I never seem to feel quite as entranced by a book during a lazy weekend, when it would be more appropriate. hmmmm!

kat10 · 03-25-2002, 04:24 PM

Cricket,
I am the same way, as another of my "addictions" is being late to everything

However, I don't think I do it intentionally. I've been told by lots of psychobabble that it is subconsciously intentional b/c I want to prove my importance. Whatever. Balance is of major importance, and I do have other hobbies so as not to overtax my mind with nothing but books. As long as there are other interests in your life as well, I don't think your avid reading is really a problem. Good luck with that tardiness thing, I sure need it.

cricket · 03-25-2002, 05:15 PM

I'm sure in my case it's not about proving my importance. I think that's true for some, but not me... I don't care much about my importance. I do think there may be more here than misjudging the time, though. Maybe it's the challenge it creates; it's stimulation to be in crisis mode... or maybe I'm trying to handicap myself... or maybe I'm just hedonistic; won't give up my novel to go work because I just don't wanna. Maybe it's something else. Maybe it's a compulsive form of procrastination. Is there such a thing? Maybe somebody should get us back on topic. Not later, but now now NOW!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-25-2002, 01:10 AM	#121
kat10 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere but there Posts: 48	True. However, about your story on your brother. I'm sure we can agree that all situations are different. I happen to have an older brother myself. He's my idol. He also happens to be a pothead. A very productive one at that, but never the less, he lights up fairly often. He's offered, he's told me all these great things about it. He tells me how much easier pot makes it for him to think. I still am not interested, it's just not my thing. I agree with some of the other posts here though, that there is a danger in being predisposed to having an "addictive" personality b/c of genetics or what have you. It would be nice to have a test of sorts to check potential drug users for this. I however like to stick with reality. Drugs do ruin some people's lives, but there are also plenty of people that can handle it just fine.

03-25-2002, 04:00 AM	#122
cricket Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: St Louis MO USA Posts: 1,188	Three4jump, isn't it possible your brother would have developed the schizophrenia with or without the drugs? I've always been curious as to how it's known, in the absence of family history, whether drugs are the reason or not. After all, schizophrenia does sometimes happen without a family history, and it often begins at about the same ages that young people experiment with drugs. Yet most people who experiment with drugs at these ages do not develop schizophrenia. How does anyone make the definitive correlation? You said yourself that your brother was quite successful for quite some time before schizophrenia developed. Maybe it would have developed such symptoms regardless of drug use? Is there a way to know? If it's impossible to know about each individual's causation, then I assume we can look at statistics and see a difference? I assume drug users are more likely to develop schizophrenia than those who have never used drugs? (I'm talking about those with true schizophrenia, not those with acute psychosis from relatively recent drug use.) I'm not arguing here; just asking the question. Does anyone know the statistics?

03-25-2002, 09:54 AM	#123
three4jump Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Useless Bay Posts: 1,434	Cricket, I'm not even positive my brother has schizophrenia; it's just the most likely explanation for his paranoid and delusional behavior (such as twice trying to run over his mother with a station wagon.) I do know that 1 in 100 people will get schizophrenia, there is a genetic component to it, and much of the research has suggested that drug abuse could trigger a latent tendency for this disease. This doesn't mean that schizophrenia couldn't be triggered by some other stress or trauma. My main point in bringing it up was to show that someone out there who is not currently taking drugs is definitely going to be negatively impacted by them, whether it is latent schozophrenia or an addictive personality type or whatever. I will try to find some statistics when I have more time, but I would guess that one in six people who start out taking drugs with the intent of being casual recreational users end up with their lives controlled by drugs. This would make taking drugs about as safe as playing russian roulette. Would any of you who have had more experience with drugs be able to support or refute my assertion that one in six users ends up being an addicted abuser regardless of their initial intention or education level?

03-25-2002, 12:47 PM	#124
Viti Contributor Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Down South Posts: 12,879	three4jump...I don't know the answer. I also see your points as we simply do not know who will have a problem and who won't. You are right that never trying drugs means never becoming addicted. Crazy theory ahead...what do you all think? I have always had a theory, that "if it's not one thing it will be another" in that people who have a disposition to addiction, will become addicted to something (food, cigarettes, alcohol, work, sex, religion etc), and even if they manage to kick one addiction it is usually replaced with another. Just a thought

03-25-2002, 01:27 PM	#125
kat10 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere but there Posts: 48	LadyShea: I totally agree with you on this one. Addictive personalities are called that because they have tendencies towards addictions. I personally know plenty of people addicted to soda for example. My father used to work for a non-emergency transport company. Mostly he'd take patients in for dialysis (sp?) treatments. Several of them were young adults who'd so poisened their bodies by the extremely high sugar content of sodas, that their kidneys totally began to fail. Most people however, wouldn't bat an eye at their children consuming like 5 sodas a day. Is this lack of education, or is it the standard thought, oh, this wouldn't happen to me/my child? There can be healthy addictions though. I think the problem is really people who go totally overboard. I can honestly say, my friend is a total gym addict. She goes constantly, like 4/5 times a week. But she doesn't take it overboard, getting into body building where she'd look freakish. There a degrees of addiction, in all forms. Some are worse for your body than others. It's whether you choose something productive or not. *Personally, I'm a book addict. I read excessively, but I see it as a good thing. [ March 25, 2002: Message edited by: kat10 ]</p>

03-25-2002, 02:22 PM	#126
three4jump Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Useless Bay Posts: 1,434	As a running addict, I agree with LadyShea and kat10. I am also a chocolate junkie, and I'm having a hard time cutting down on that.

03-25-2002, 04:24 PM	#129
kat10 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere but there Posts: 48	Cricket, I am the same way, as another of my "addictions" is being late to everything However, I don't think I do it intentionally. I've been told by lots of psychobabble that it is subconsciously intentional b/c I want to prove my importance. Whatever. Balance is of major importance, and I do have other hobbies so as not to overtax my mind with nothing but books. As long as there are other interests in your life as well, I don't think your avid reading is really a problem. Good luck with that tardiness thing, I sure need it.

03-25-2002, 05:15 PM	#130
cricket Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: St Louis MO USA Posts: 1,188	I'm sure in my case it's not about proving my importance. I think that's true for some, but not me... I don't care much about my importance. I do think there may be more here than misjudging the time, though. Maybe it's the challenge it creates; it's stimulation to be in crisis mode... or maybe I'm trying to handicap myself... or maybe I'm just hedonistic; won't give up my novel to go work because I just don't wanna. Maybe it's something else. Maybe it's a compulsive form of procrastination. Is there such a thing? Maybe somebody should get us back on topic. Not later, but now now NOW!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.