Possible to get addicted unknowingly? (hypothetical)

[Chaote]

Now let me start by saying tis is 100% hypothetical. But what would happen if a person was given lets say coke or meth, but unknowingly, like a theirt drink or food, Would they become addicted and since they didn't know they were taking it what would they be craving, the food? or what.

[bcStoner420]

They would most likely be addicted, but unconsciously. After they were stopped giving it I would imagine things like problems sleeping, and mood swings would be apparent. Also they might notice they are eating alot more and possibly gaining weight. Of course they would have to be given this drug everyday for a decent amount of time.

[sands of time]

Yes they would become addicted, and there are studies to back this up. If you recall the cocaine experiments where rats were essentially given the choice between cocaine or food.... They choose the coke. This experiment was also done with monkeys I think. The animals did not know they were consuming a psychoactive substance because they have no comprehension of that. They just know that they feel good after choosing one specific item.

As far as cravings, they might be different than when someone knowingly consumes a drug. The person would have the withdrawals, but they would not be sure why. The withdrawals might be mistaken for depression.

[pharmapsyche]

Originally Posted by Chaote

Now let me start by saying tis is 100% hypothetical. But what would happen if a person was given lets say coke or meth, but unknowingly, like a theirt drink or food, Would they become addicted and since they didn't know they were taking it what would they be craving, the food? or what.

I think something a little different than the people who posted above it. I don't think someone would get addicted. SWIM has tried cocaine a few times in her life and isn't addicted now. SWIM has even split a whole 8ball with her bestfriend and they did it all in one night, and SWIM is still not addicted. Addiction is basically only a concept and only a word, it means something different to everyone. It would be hard to slip someone cocaine or Meth-Amphetamine in there food, but i'm sure it's possible. It's sorta a funny thought to wonder if they would just crave that food really bad again instead of cocaine or meth since they didn't know any better, but i highly doubt it.

[bcStoner420]

^^ My bet is that psychologically they would crave that food/drink. After a while there brains would connect feeling good, to that food/drink. And I do see what your saying, but was SWIY taking cocaine everyday for say a month?? If that was the case I could almost guarantee the person would experience psychological withdrawals, even if they didn't know exactly what from. Hell, eating that food or drink again without the drug in it could be enough to fade the "withdrawals" to an extent.

[pharmapsyche]

Yes, the person would eventually become 'addicted' to the substance, if the substance was indeed physically or psychologically addictive. Addiction can exist without specific drug craving. The subject isn't addicted to the drug itsself but rather the neurochemical change caused by the drug. For example: If an electric probe was inserted into the nucleus accumbens of an amphetamine addict in withdrawl, what would happen when the probe emitted an electric current? The symptoms of amphetamine withdrawl would subside even though amphetamine was never administered. This is because the effect of the probe is similar to the effect of amphetamine. My whole point is, addiction can exist without consent of the 'addict'. Addiction is more than just a word, it's a science.

[sands of time]

Originally Posted by benzenerings

Yes, the person would eventually become 'addicted' to the substance, if the substance was indeed physically or psychologically addictive. Addiction can exist without specific drug craving. The subject isn't addicted to the drug itsself but rather the neurochemical change caused by the drug. For example: If an electric probe was inserted into the nucleus accumbens of an amphetamine addict in withdrawl, what would happen when the probe emitted an electric current? The symptoms of amphetamine withdrawl would subside even though amphetamine was never administered. This is because the effect of the probe is similar to the effect of amphetamine. My whole point is, addiction can exist without consent of the 'addict'. Addiction is more than just a word, it's a science.

No, its a crime that must be delt with by the law, and lots of jail time... DUH!

[DrugPhreak]

I have thought about this for some time and the last couple of days I was wondering about this a lot so I was surprised to see this post discussing it. It would be rather hard to give someone a drug without their knowledge if it wasn't orally active or active enough to be consumed that way. Cocaine is not an appropriate candidate, but methamphetamine would work and lots of other substances.

Since the purpose is getting them addicted most people would probably start with the active dose of a drug that has been proven to be very physically addicting, but possibly the inexperienced drug user would freak out thinking that have been poisoned etc and go to the emergency room where their stomach gets pumped out or they are given a test to check their blood etc.

I’ve heard stories of restaurants and manufactures of some food products that where adding small amounts of drugs to make them even more popular, but such things normally backfire after a while… a customer drops dead or the item gets analyzed by an outside lab for other reasons without the manufactures knowledge and they accidentally find what they weren’t even looking for. I’ve definitely felt something more than the satisfaction of having a good meal a few times.

[sands of time]

Drugphreak, cocaine is orally active, you just need higher amounts to get the same buzz as snorting. We all know the famous ingredient in the classic coca-cola formula.

As for the restraunts, that is true. In very recent times, a few restraunts in China have been busted after authorities found out small amounts of opium were being added to the food.

[pharmapsyche]

Originally Posted by sands of time

No, its a crime that must be delt with by the law, and lots of jail time... DUH!

I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say here. What's a crime? Do you mean spiking a person's food or drink with addictive drugs without their consent is a crime? No shit it's a crime. DUH! You didn't understand my post correctly, obviously. Maybe I didn't put what I was trying to get across into words very well.

I'm confused by this comment, and I think it might be a joke instead of a stab at me. If that's the case, I'm sorry for getting shitty.

[sands of time]

Originally Posted by benzenerings

Addiction is more than just a word, it's a science.

I was refering to the last statement, I should have removed the stuff I wasn't refering to, sorry. It was sarcasm, although that is what my country really believes about addiction.

Reputation Comments on this post:

He was very witty

[pharmapsyche]

AHHHH I understand now, completely. It was a clever statement.

[DrugPhreak]

Yep, it's orally active, but a portion of it will be hydrolyzed to ecgonine requiring the doses to be somewhat higher than insufflation so I thought it wouldn't be the best substance for something of this nature.

[sands of time]

Originally Posted by DrugPhreak

Yep, it's orally active, but a portion of it will be hydrolyzed to ecgonine requiring the doses to be somewhat higher than insufflation so I thought it wouldn't be the best substance for something of this nature.

Yes, but this whole experiment is hypothetical. Cocaine would be an entirely plausible agent. Cocaine was used in similar experiments in the past, although I believe those involved rats which require a much smaller amount.