Abuse Vs. Dependance

[pankreeas]

This has been a topic on my mind lately. I think this is the root of all misunderstanding behind druge use; whether recreational, or out of necessesity.

I feel that if you are abusing drugs you are in control (for the most part, yes there are exceptions). Now abuse is in a sense taking and having your way with but not giving back. If you can maintain this with your pattern of drug use then you still have the upper hand. That being you are still tipping the scale in the more positive direction than negative when gauging your outcome from using. It's once you start to feel no more positives, or rather the drug has become your only positive do you fall into dependance. Once that happens the drug has the upper hand and you will revert to those same exact drug seeking patterns, but now you are handing it all over like you would to a bully demanding lunch money.

Maybe if enough education was put towards realizing the line existed and how to steer clear of crossing it. An example to sort of sum up my point... Yes it's true that you can get hooked off your first hit of heroine. That in no way means you are dependant on it yet. You are still abusing it. You are havin a blast, oh the euphoria, yes i'm king of the fu$&in world!. But no doctor in their right mind would tell you how often you should do it before getting physically hooked... In todays society well you're already a feind at that stage so why help you manage a lifestyle on it right? ..... . ... ..

People will do drugs. They make us feel good. All thats left is to teach is well by golly! the basics? harm prevention, tolerance management, etc... The first step is just admitting to ourselves that if you can't beat em.... you indeed must join them. Everywhere should be a "safe" injection site.


Any thoughts...feedback.. comments.. etc?

Just some more jabber to maybe start something with this thread...

It's a no-brainer succumbing to the concept that drugs do in fact make the world go 'round. We're talkin everything from your baby aspirin to your, ativan, to your .5 speedballs slung on the corner. Supply will always be catching up with demand for nearly everything and we will forever be chasing the next new miracle cure... what'll it be next, glammutrex, or varlabinol, or some other name everyone thinks is so above them they would not understand it's mechanism of action. So everyone turns a blind eye and voila, another round of high 5's (among many other things...) in the offices of the rx companies as they keep us in fear.. which keeps our wallets wide open. What worries me is the fact that there's still a nearly infinite number of possibile combinations for drug names here... that it could go on until the end of time.

I know it's foolish of me to think the train will switch tracks from profiteering to maybe something a little more directed at keeping our population healthier in a to the point manner. But in a society where alcohol is the leading cause of impaired deaths, yet is one of the only legal drugs... you really have to wonder how long it'll be before the training wheels come off...

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Great Topic for discussion
	Very intelligent analysis

[Bio-Cellular Enigma]

Isn't the term "abuse" sort of an arbitrary word most often used judgmentally? SWIM has never much cared for it, but he's a strong left-brain thinker. The word "use" has a logical meaning, while "abuse" carries a heavy social/historical 'load' and typically means "use of a type that I do not agree with."

I feel that if you are abusing drugs you are in control (for the most part, yes there are exceptions).

If by 'abuse' here SWIY means "heavy use," in SWIM's opinion it very much depends on both the drug in question and specific usage patterns.

[chAos]

I also think the terms, abuse, dependance and addiction cannot be discussed without talking about a specific drug.

Maybe abuse can be defined as use when the user thinks he is doing it more as he thinks is good for him.

Also, depencence, as in using drugs in some sitiuations all the time isn't neccesairly because the user NEEDS the drug to do these things. At least not for swim when he used cannabis. He definately had a dependance to it, but he felt like some actions are just more fun when stoned. So he smoked all the time with for example a movie.

After quitting cannabis, he doesn't have problems to watch a movie, so it certainly wasn't necessairy for him to smoke while watching a movie.

I think the main problems with drugs are that people are totally ignorant about the dangers of nicotine and alcohol compaired to other drugs. A professor here, wrote that nicotine is an example of a 'soft drug', while xtc and lsd are examples of hard drugs. This comes from a professor who teaches about toxicity etc.

Another problem is that drug addicts are seen as victims. Imho this is total bullshit, addicts started using a drug, hopefully knowing it is dangerous. They probably knew they were abusing it and creating a dependance to it, but they didn't care enough to stop. After a while they just can't stop anymore. They aren't victims, they chose to be an addict.

I really don't think drug-laws will change any time soon. (except for cannabis laws)


Edit: I do agree that if everyone had a much better knowledge on drugs, less people would become addicted. However, i think there will always be people who choose to abuse drugs and get addicted to it.

[stoneinfocus]

Originally Posted by Bio-Cellular Enigma

Isn't the term "abuse" sort of an arbitrary word most often used judgmentally? SWIM has never much cared for it, but he's a strong left-brain thinker. The word "use" has a logical meaning, while "abuse" carries a heavy social/historical 'load' and typically means "use of a type that I do not agree with."If by 'abuse' here SWIY means "heavy use," in SWIM's opinion it very much depends on both the drug in question and specific usage patterns.

youßre rigth, itßs all conventins, but abuse has a definition, because it´s to be confirmative within a 3- party objection, like the insurance needs the bells and whistle to confrim the "abuse" -treatment of a clincal intervention.

So abuse means, using it without medical indication, in larger quantities than needed for the prescribed indication or when not needed for the medical indication, without prescription or
in other ways as prescribed by the professional.

To me, if amphetamine is proven to accelerate learning by a higher learning curve, has the ability to improve the driving ability of a vehicle and reaction times, as well as having lots of other "side-effects" making it rather new indications, than abuse, to me, it´s using a drug according to its specific actions on me ... -and who am I to judge others wether they´re now using, or ab-using a drug, without any signs of major damage done?

[grandbaby]

"He who would have discourse with me must first define his terms."

ab·use: –verb (used with object) 1.to use wrongly or improperly; misuse:
–noun 6.wrong or improper use; misuse: "use up," also "misuse," from 1413, from M.Fr. abuser, from V.L. *abusare, from L. abusus, pp. of abutiab- "away" + uti "use" (see use). Specifically of drugs, from 1968. The noun is first recorded 1439.

de·pend·ence
5.the state of being psychologically or physiologically dependent on a drug after a prolonged period of use.

From the above we see that the word "abuse" can not be used in a positive context, and while "dependence" certainly carries with it the seeds of societal opprobrium (heaven forbid you should be dependent on a drug, rather than on, say, gasoline or the Internet), it's pretty much a morally neutral term.

It is a misconception that the only evil of drug abuse (as opposed to drug use, which is a more neutral term) is addiction. Drugs can easily be abused without dependence entering the equation — as when one drinks to excess and spends the night "riding the porcelain bus", or drops a ten-strip of acid because one is bored, or — even — uses a drug as an escape from reality rather than a supplement to it.

As well, dependence — addiction — need not necessarily fall under the rubric of "abuse"; consider the thousands of normal, functioning people dependent on antidepressants to maintain stable lives (I'm not here talking about the many thousands more who are wrongly prescribed same by an overzealous and corrupt medical system), or those with migraine dependent on amytriptilyne, or chronic pain sufferers dependent on marijuana... even when no medical condition necessitates the use of a drug, dependence may not be a big deal; there are many functioning, normal heroin addicts walking around — talk about an invisible minority — as well as many, many people who get through the day with marijuana use, (arguably) many cigarette smokers who may have an "occasional" or low-grade habit that doesn't cause them significant physical harm, and of course one must not forget the millions who cannot "maintain" without their morning dose of caffeine, but who are never called "caffeine abusers".

To my mind, the terms "abuse" and "dependence" are separate conditions; they are not points along the same continuum. They may be exclusive of each other, they may coexist, or most often, perhaps, they may overlap like a Venn diagram. Might as well talk about "reckless driving Vs. incarceration."

My apologies for the long, didactic, and probably beating-a-dead-horse nature of this post, but I think that if we are to end the war on drugs we need to be careful about what words we use when we approach the subject; the blanket term "abuse" to describe all drug use is exactly the kind of thing that the enemies of TPOH (the pursuit of happiness) would love.

Reputation Comments on this post:

Excellent coverage of the topic at hand

[pankreeas]

Originally Posted by grandbaby

To my mind, the terms "abuse" and "dependence" are separate conditions; they are not points along the same continuum. They may be exclusive of each other, they may coexist, or most often, perhaps, they may overlap like a Venn diagram. Might as well talk about "reckless driving Vs. incarceration."

Exactly. The fact that they can co-exist , and constantly over-lap wherever you look, makes it a very easy thing to overlook. It may actually come down to redifining the 2 terms alltogether to fit them into the context of todays society. A society where "fast" food is more ideal than "healthy" food, one has to stop and think... what are we in such a rush for?

[pankreeas]

Originally Posted by Bio-Cellular Enigma

"If by 'abuse' here SWIY means "heavy use," in SWIM's opinion it very much depends on both the drug in question and specific usage patterns.

I don't think the term abuse has to be heavy usage at all. Take for example other instances of "abuse" in society. Sexual abuse doesn't even need to involve touching let alone assaulting, simply taunting with sexual remarks can land you in hot water. Sort of the same way as when a drug repeatedly makes you feel bad without being inside you because it's common pleasantries you got used to are now making life mundane without it's presence.

I guess typically when you abuse you come out on top for the time being. Whether it may be abusing your power, abusing your family, or abusing substances you have the upper hand and you are not addicted or dependent.

But the moment you wake up feeling in the dumps, then fix it with abuse, you are indeed dependent. And now you're in that troubling cycle of what goes up, must come down, but must immediately go back up. Worse than askin the mob for a favor... they will surely put you out of your misery long before your addiction does.

I mean how many people cannot wake up without their morning java? thats dependence is it not? you do not need it to live like you need food and water and at 1 point did not need it at all...

[beentheredonethatagain]

My doctor prescribes morphine for my chronic pain, I told him that I don't like being physically addicted to it, he said your not addicted to it he said that I am dependant on it.
So as stated above addiction and dependency are not necessarily connected.
And abuse is abuse that would entail taking something that isn't prescribed to you or not taking it as prescribed.
My first wife had a condition where as she had to take meds to prevent her from going off the deep end, when she didnt take them she would abuse me,
so the not taking of a prescribe drug ( medicine ) can be considered drug abuse. Right?

[momoftwinboys]

I think that when someone is "addicted" to a drug, they often believe that they need it or are "dependent" on it. I also think that when you "abuse" a drug, it is mearly using it in excess of in a different way then intended.

Swim started to abuse oxycontin a few years back. I say abuse b/c she would remove the time release which is coated on the outside of the pill and crush the pill and snort it.

In a short time, abuse turned into addiction which turned into dependence. Addiction, being thinking about it all the time, craving it, wanting it and getting it all the time. Dependence being, she had to have it to get out of bed in the morning. Without it, she felt like she was dying from flu-like symptoms, back pain, leg aches, ect...

I think use to abuse to addiction to dependence can happen way too easy with some drugs... just my 2 cents