Talk about your various addictions here

So, in addition to talking about alcoholism, I would be interested in hearing about others who have struggled with addictions like gambling, for example, as well as all others, like drugs, smoking, over-eating, etc, etc.

I hope the "regulars" who have contributed to this thread will continue to do so.

Thanks everybody for your interest.... Very Happy

0 Replies

Hi, my name is Calamity Jane and I am a chocoholic.

0 Replies

New subject-
Talk about your addictions.

Hmm.. I can list mine alphabetically? numerically? Chronologically? Laughing

I too started out smoking when i was young. I believe I was 8 when I first took a drag off of a cigarette. By the time I was 10 I was addicted to them. Still have not quit , but have never in my life gone above smoking 4 a day. Most people have a progressive smoking addiction.. I guess I am one of the lucky few.

I have spent time on almost all street drugs. As I have stated in other threads, I was homeless for a few years. Most of my teen years to be exact. And the mind set of " noone can tell me what to do anymore" dominated my better judgement.

Of all drugs, heroin was the most painful to kick. I spent 3 days in the back of a van I was living in , sick and in pain. My head felt like a bowling ball. My bones were on fire. My lungs were full of water and I was seeing stuff that wasnt real. I sweated 24-7 and sometimes could not make it out of the van fast enough to deficate by a tree. At that time I was 17.

Cocaine was another vice I welcomed soon after heroin. Again.. hooked beyond belief.
I was traveling around the southern part of america and northern Mexico. Mostly hitchhiking with truck drivers who were doing the same drug I was. I remember vividly one ride I was sitting on the floor between the driver and passenger chair and I heared the radio call out my name. Over and over and over again. I never picked up the reciever because I still had enough of a brain to know that it wasnt really happening.. but my ears were registering my name.
I had fights with cocaine off and on until I was 20. Then.. I just stopped.

Crank was not a heavy addiction for me , but more of a time filler between heroin and coke. I treid it a few times, enjoyed it ( or so I thought) but never became physically dependant on the substance. For some reason, staying awake and pissed off for 7 days wasnt my cup of tea. Laughing

The very last substance I was ever physically dependant on was prescription pain meds. Easy to get, all I had to do was go to an ER and pretend to have fallen. That took almost 3 years out of my already short life.

I still smoke cigarettes. I doubt i will ever quit. Simply because i dont want to. I have never been a drinker, though you would think it would be easy for me to have been. I am the defination of additive personality..
To this day I have not touched a single drug in several years. All without any direct treatment. Not will power.. because I dont have any of that.
i just dont WANT TO anymore. Maybe I was lucky enough to have hit a bottom somewhere in my addictive life that made the desire dissappear.
I dont know what it was.. I just know that staying sober is a daily task.
Not a burden, but a well deserved job.. so to speak.

0 Replies

Shewolf wrote:

Quote:

I dont know what it was.. I just know that staying sober is a daily task.
Not a burden, but a well deserved job.. so to speak.

Very well deserved indeed. And we're glad you took it on.

0 Replies

Overcoming cancer v. overcoming bad habits
You may not have had any "control" over the cancer that attacked your body, but you certainly didn't purposely bring it on, did you? I believe, as I hope you will attest, that you fought fiercely, to erase the tumor(s) from your body. From the first moment of discovery, to the step of reaching out to your physician, to agreeing to, at the very least ,some sort of treatment: (in your case surgery),chemo, radiation, medication, etc.

We all know from those who have been stricken with cancer, that they FOUGHT to survive this disease that was fighting to kill them. They counseled with their loved ones, doctors, friends, etc. to do everything possible to survive. Even those who found they had untreatable cancer still utilized treatment to survive. I therefore completely disagree with you: You had everthing to do with overcoming the cancer that invaded you. And for that, I find it a wonderful thing.

I do not find it worthy of kudos to anyone who purposely poisons their body with a drug that they know has a high probablity of addiction (alcohol included), stopping that habit with high doses of another drug (as Dr. Ameisen has done) and then reporting on it to the world as a sort of miracle.

In addition, the WHO, among other organizations, that recognize alcoholics and addicts as "diseased" are, in my opinion, highly mistaken and are even doing a disservice. Because by doing so, I believe they are giving a crutch and excuse to those who use these drugs in the first place as a crutch and excuse to continue to hide ("poor me, I am out of control. But it's not my fault. It's the DISEASE").

When I do something stupid, such as behaving badly and perhaps hurting others by my poor behavior, I don't exclaim to the world, "it wasn't my fault" while pointing to sugar in my cabinet. I recognize I hurt someone or myself right away, act like a grown-up and apologize, and then get on with it, eliminating the poor behavior.

And if I have the inclination that perhaps it was because of the cookie that I ate that caused my insulin levels to rise to the point that I acted badly, I don't go back to the pantry to eat more cookies. I tell myself that I cannot handle eating sweets and stop. Period.

overcoming cancer. That is a beautiful thing. Regarding your alcholoism, I really don't know what to say other than you are back to where you should be in the first place. No congratulations or hugs necessary.[/quote]

I'm puzzled, Jovana. Why would you congratulate me for something over which I had absoluely no control? I was not an active participant in the cure. The surgeon who removed the tumor is the only one who deserves to be congratulated -- and thanked -- here. On the other hand, you really should congratulate me for overcoming my alcoholism. That was a struggle in which I was an active participant. It took a tremendous amount of will-power. I'm pretty proud of having beaten alcoholism. I can take no pride whatsoever in having survived cancer as I had nothing to do with it.[/quote]

0 Replies

When I originally started this topic, I had no idea that it would be this popular, but now as I reflect on it, I think it was a good idea. The widening of the subject matter seemed to me to be a natural extension of the alcoholism discussion. I think it can be a good catharsis for people to talk about what's on their mind.

So, what are my addictions? I hope you don't think I'm copping out here, but I don't have any, at least none that I'm aware of. I don't drink alcohol, smoke anything, or take recreational drugs. When I was a kid, I smoked a half of a cigarette and hated it. Tried a few cigars, but wasn't that keen on it. As far as alcohol is concerned, I've drank probably a half dozen beers in my life. Tried a little wine, and despised it. Drugs. Never tried them, not even pot.

Probably the closest thing that I have to an addiction would be the internet, although, in my opinion, I think that's a non-starter. My doctor thinks so though. I used to play online chess for long periods of time, but I've almost stopped playing now. I spend most of my online time here, or something in a round-about way to do with here.

I almost feel like I should apologize to those of you who have told their life stories. Laughing

0 Replies

Thanks for your post, Jovana.

Although it wasn't addressed to me personally and no definations were questioned, I think, I just write what I've learnt about it and what is generally accepted in most parts of the world by most:

Alcoholism, also known as alcohol dependence, is a disease that includes the following four symptoms:

Craving: A strong need, or urge, to drink.
Loss of control: Not being able to stop drinking once drinking has begun.
Physical dependence: Withdrawal symptoms such as nausea, sweating, shakiness and anxiety after stopping drinking.
Tolerance: The need to drink greater amounts of alcohol to get "high."

Now, why do I (and most others) think that alcoholism is a disease?
The craving that an alcoholic feels for alcohol can be as strong as the need for food or water. An alcoholic will continue to drink despite serious family, health, or legal problems. Like many other diseases, alcoholism lasts a person's lifetime; it usually follows a predictable course; and it has symptoms. The risk for developing alcoholism is influenced both by a person's genes and by his or her lifestyle.

And alcoholism can't be cured:
Even if an alcoholic hasn't been drinking for a long time, he or she can still suffer a relapse. To guard against a relapse, an alcoholic must continue to avoid all alcoholic beverages

Obviously, you have another understanding of <disease> than I (and many others) have:

Quote:

disease: a harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism. A diseased organism commonly exhibits signs or symptoms indicative of its abnormal state. Thus, the normal condition of an organism must be understood in order to recognize the hallmarks of disease. Nevertheless, a sharp demarcation between disease and health is not always apparent.

source: "disease." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9110618>.

Quote:

source: "disease." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030628>.

Which leads to my final quotation from the Britannica:

Quote:

Alcohol problems and controls > Individual and social effects

source: "alcohol consumption." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-40559>.

0 Replies

Good post, Walter. And I would add that both the medical profession and the insurance industry recognize alcoholism as a disease. It is a rare health insurance policy that will not cover at least some costs of treatment.

It is easy to say that the alcoholism is self inflicted and in a sense that is true. If no alcohol is consumed, then no alcoholism develops. But to say that the non addicted guy who has a couple of beers at a backyard barbque or a glass of wine or two with dinner is weak or self destructive or immoral just flies in the face of reason.

I am guessing that the vast majority of alcoholics started out as social drinkers who didn't drink to excess nor did they generally drink to get high. There may be somebody out there who intended andor expected to be alcoholic when s/he first started drinking socially, but I've never met such a person.

How many of us intended to get hooked on cigarettes when we first started smoking? And who intended to get fat when they enjoyed their first piece of cheesecake?

The alcoholism itself frequently causes weakness and immorality. But it is rarely weakness or immorality that causes the alcoholism.

0 Replies

Hi Walter,

I don't know any healthy living being that is born into this world that must have a scotch or a hit of weed to survive (since you refer to an individual needing alcohol as much as air, water and food). Unless of course, the parent has created an environment of fetal alcohol syndrome or crack baby syndrome in their newborn, and I certainly give allowances to these poor baby victims.

Therefore, until Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs is re-defined to include alcohol, I do not consider alcoholism and drug addiction as anything more than a self-inflicted habit that has grown out of control.

In addition, alcoholism does not manifest all by itself like cancer. It takes a human being to create the ultimate result. They go into it knowing the results. Would you drink small amounts of auto coolant just because it is sweet and tastes good? No. Not unless you are suicidal.

So if alcoholism is given a label, if any, that is endorsed by the WHO or any other medical institution, why isn't it given the label of "suicidal behavior" given. An active participation in ones own demise, rather than a passive term such as "disease".

A "self-inflicted and deliberate act led to the person's death" is what alcoholism, drug use and smoking are when we know genetically or psychologically we cannot tolerate them. We know the risks yet we continue to consume the agents. That sounds like suicide to me.

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Thanks for your post, Jovana.
Although it wasn't addressed to me personally and no definitions were questioned, I think, I just write what I've learnt about it and what is generally accepted in most parts of the world by most:

Alcoholism, also known as alcohol dependence, is a disease that includes the following four symptoms:

Craving: A strong need, or urge, to drink.
Loss of control: Not being able to stop drinking once drinking has begun.
Physical dependence: Withdrawal symptoms such as nausea, sweating, shakiness and anxiety after stopping drinking.
Tolerance: The need to drink greater amounts of alcohol to get "high."

Now, why do I (and most others) think that alcoholism is a disease?
The craving that an alcoholic feels for alcohol can be as strong as the need for food or water. An alcoholic will continue to drink despite serious family, health, or legal problems. Like many other diseases, alcoholism lasts a person's lifetime; it usually follows a predictable course; and it has symptoms. The risk for developing alcoholism is influenced both by a person's genes and by his or her lifestyle.

And alcoholism can't be cured:
Even if an alcoholic hasn't been drinking for a long time, he or she can still suffer a relapse. To guard against a relapse, an alcoholic must continue to avoid all alcoholic beverages

Obviously, you have another understanding of <disease> than I (and many others) have:

Quote:
disease: a harmful deviation from the normal structural or functional state of an organism. A diseased organism commonly exhibits signs or symptoms indicative of its abnormal state. Thus, the normal condition of an organism must be understood in order to recognize the hallmarks of disease. Nevertheless, a sharp demarcation between disease and health is not always apparent.

source: "disease." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9110618>.

Quote:

source: "disease." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9030628>.

Which leads to my final quotation from the Britannica:

Quote:
Alcohol problems and controls > Individual and social effects

source: "alcohol consumption." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2005. Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service. 5 Sept. 2005 <http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-40559>.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I am guessing that the vast majority of alcoholics started out as social drinkers who didn't drink to excess nor did they generally drink to get high.

While doing some background work for my thesis, about 20 years ago, I met a (than) ~75 year old lady in a sanatorium.

She was one of the - if not THE - oldest (female) alcoholic therapied in Germany until then.

She didn't drink more than half a glass (= about a normal water glass) of beer every day for supper, but that for more than 60 years.

Her addiction didn't come to surface until she had to stop drinking - after some operation.
Then, however, suddenly and really heavily all the known symptoms started.

0 Replies

Hi Foxfyre,

You knew the risks when you started. And the benefits outweighed the risk. We do it with the knowledge that trouble is right around the bend.
We aren't stupid. We know. Why drink a beer or a glass of wine at a BBQ instead of water or iced tea or soda?

The plain fact that we choose to ignore what we know to be true is something to be addressed. We are not victims to the contents of that bottle or a leaf of a plant that's crushed and put in a piece of paper.
We know what we are getting into when we start. That is reasonable. So it is reasonable to consider that if we continue, the horrible outcome eventually will be addiction.

Just like overeating, overindulging of any kind produces poor results. And the fact that my insurance premiums cover the cost to treat others who purposely hurt themselves doesn't sit well with me. I am paying for others stupidity. And I do not condone it.

Foxfyre wrote:

Good post, Walter. And I would add that both the medical profession and the insurance industry recognize alcoholism as a disease. It is a rare health insurance policy that will not cover at least some costs of treatment.

It is easy to say that the alcoholism is self inflicted and in a sense that is true. If no alcohol is consumed, then no alcoholism develops. But to say that the non addicted guy who has a couple of beers at a backyard barbque or a glass of wine or two with dinner is weak or self destructive or immoral just flies in the face of reason.

I am guessing that the vast majority of alcoholics started out as social drinkers who didn't drink to excess nor did they generally drink to get high. There may be somebody out there who intended andor expected to be alcoholic when s/he first started drinking socially, but I've never met such a person.

How many of us intended to get hooked on cigarettes when we first started smoking? And who intended to get fat when they enjoyed their first piece of cheesecake?

The alcoholism itself frequently causes weakness and immorality. But it is rarely weakness or immorality that causes the alcoholism.

0 Replies

Jovana writes

Quote:

You knew the risks when you started. And the benefits outweighed the risk. We do it with the knowledge that trouble is right around the bend.
We aren't stupid. We know. Why drink a beer or a glass of wine at a BBQ instead of water or iced tea or soda?

The plain fact that we choose to ignore what we know to be true is something to be addressed. We are not victims to the contents of that bottle or a leaf of a plant that's crushed and put in a piece of paper.
We know what we are getting into when we start. That is reasonable. So it is reasonable to consider that if we continue, the horrible outcome eventually will be addiction.

Just like overeating, overindulging of any kind produces poor results. And the fact that my insurance premiums cover the cost to treat others who purposely hurt themselves doesn't sit well with me. I am paying for others stupidity. And I do not condone it.

I hear what you're saying, and believe me the first thing addicts who recover learn to do is blame nobody and nothing other than themselves for their situation. If you are a teetotaler, that is great. Kudos to you. The fact is, however, that the vast majority of people can enjoy an alcoholic beverage with no ill effects whatsoever. I even know people who can enjoy one cigarette and stop. (I could murder them for it, but they can do it.) These people are not harming themselves or others and who is to say they should not enjoy a small pleasure?

It is as easy to say that nobody should enjoy high carb or refined sugars just in case they might be susceptible to diabetes. Or if a person might possibly be subject to Celiac disease, s/he should never have a sandwich or piece of toast. Does heart disease run in your family? No hotdogs for you. And Lord knows those of us who fight the battle of the bulge would have avoided all that if we just never started eating. (Okay, I'm getting extreme here, but you get my drift.)

The point is that the alcoholic does inflict harm to himself and those around him. He has a very hard time admitting that when he is drinking, but those who recover accept responsibility for the damage they've done and make amends as much as they can. No excuses. No justification. No rationalization. They just accept it for what it is and they get better.

Nobody is expecting you to feel sorry for the alcoholic or that you should be tolerant and undestanding when he behaves badly. That isn't even good for him. But understanding the illness helps us to not make things worse and it helps us learn how to deal with our own anger and demons.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

But understanding the illness helps us to not make things worse and it helps us learn how to deal with our own anger and demons.

The understanding of an illness generally is helpful, not only for diseases of the "addicted circle".

Your examples aren't so extreme as they may sound: alcoholic beverages were 'invented' quite early in human history.

0 Replies

The person who has one or two drinks of alcohol daily is not necessarily an alcoholic. Most people can handle this, if they like to, with no problem. You come home from work, make yourself a cocktail, sip it, put the bottle away and sit down to supper. You have a glass of wine with your supper and, again, put the bottle away. The point is that you do all this without giving it a second thought. You wouldn't dream of sneaking a look at that bottle and thinking, "Damn, I could use one or two more." That is a normal person using alcohol in a normal way.

The alcoholic cannot do this. This is the part that is so hard for non-alcoholics to understand. I could force myself to drink that way, probably. But it would be nightmarish because once I've had that first drink I sure as hell don't want to put that bottle away until it's empty. Once the compulsion has set in, it is hell to control. And that's why, for a person like me, it is far safer never to touch the stuff. I don't begrudge it to normal people who can handle it, however. What Jovana seems to be saying is that either nobody should drink alcohol at all or that all should somehow force themselves to be "responsible." The alcoholic is not[.i] responsible for what happens to his/her metabolism at the ingestion of that first drink. And, of course, no alcoholic can know that he is an alcoholic until he takes that first drink. There are probably some alcoholics who have never had a drink. The disease has never kicked in because, for whatever reason, they never had occasion to drink alcohol to start with. Probably a lot of observant Muslims are like that.

0 Replies

You're probably right Andrew. I am firmly convinced that some are born with that invisible line out there in their future. I'm pretty sure I was even though I didn't quite get there. Had I continued to drink I'm very certain I would have crossed it. And it's still out there.

We are taught that the alcoholic rarely drinks to enjoy or to relax or mellow out or get drunk. The alcoholic drinks to feel normal. It's what makes him want that second and third drink. And that's what sets him apart from the non alcoholic. You said it better than I did though.

0 Replies

I read the first 12-14 pages of this thread with interest.

I have an aunt who is a drinking alcoholic. She was hospitalized with hepc for almost a year. She underwent dialisis and was told if she continued to drink, she would die. She continues. My uncle divorced her and got on with his life. Their kids are trying to do so as well. But, it's really hard for a kid to walk away from his mother.

Anyway, congrats to all who have done it (quit, that is) and who continue to do it.

I quit smoking years ago, but cigarettes still smell good to me when I catch a whiff of smoke. I know I can't ever smoke casually and haven't tried to do so since before I quit.

0 Replies

As I was reading Andrew's post above, I was mulling over the difference between an addiction as opposed to a compulsion. Here are the dictionary meanings:

addiction
-- 1 : the quality or state of being addicted <addiction to reading>
2 : 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; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful

compulsion
-- 1 a : an act of compelling : the state of being compelled b : a force that compels
2 : an irresistible impulse to perform an irrational act

For myself, I may not have any addictions, but I certainly may have some compulsions. For example, I have this habit whereby I must check that all the doors and windows are secure before going to bed. That's fine if I do it once. Just being safety-minded, but when I do it 2 or 3 times, it becomes a compulsion.

So, when does a compulsion become an addiction? Or does it?

Hobbies can be compulsive, I guess. Do you think they can also be classed as addictive?

0 Replies

I know a professor at Harvard who specializes in addiction. I could ask him when a compulsion becomes an addiction....... actually, I think compulsions become habits, not addictions. Unless the habit is one with a component that produces withdrawal symptoms upon ceasing the activity.

0 Replies

Reyn wrote:

Just being safety-minded, but when I do it 2 or 3 times, it becomes a compulsion.

True, but even if you only did it once, it could still qualify as a compulsion, if it really upset you if you were not able to do it.

0 Replies

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Reyn wrote:
Just being safety-minded, but when I do it 2 or 3 times, it becomes a compulsion.

True, but even if you only did it once, it could still qualify as a compulsion, if it really upset you if you were not able to do it.

Hmm, interesting thought. Didn't think of it that way.

0 Replies

Talk about your various addictions here

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know