Drugs mean a lot of different things for different people
Addiction starts like ordinary behaviour in social context, its rewards are powerful and immediate.
Later on, the social context is not so important and people continue for variety of reasons...
depending who they are, who old they are, what is their personality and what is their cultural background...
they use drugs for different purposes, businessmen use tobacco to calm their nerves, physicians use opiates to help them deal with stress...
Why lots of people don't become addicts?
The answer is in the balance between incentives and restraints.
People start with balance but picture changes, they make stronger attachment to addiction.
People at risk have lots of pulling factors towards incentives but less towards constraints.
Dependency develop over time, it is flowing continuum.
Reward is powerful and immediate they ignore all harmful signs.
There is no balance any more, one is pulling them in one direction and another is restraining them...
When attachment has risen and conflict has risen,
positives go up, harm goes up...
The addicts are in tremendous pressure, they are closely attached to something and now they are told to give it up....
There is conflict.
What happens to people under conflict?
They minimize the amount and how often they use drugs.
They change their social group to spend time with people who share their habbit.
'Pleasure now, pain later', they say.
They get hooked, they can not function properly.
Their behaviour become dysfunctional and they become obsessive.
Their dependency stopped being normal and it became a problem.
It is time to make the right decisions to change their behaviour. Addiction is learned behaviour and the change is possible.
It depends on each individual and what they need, the change takes time but they are all capable to bring control back into their lives.
The history of drug wars
the science of addiction
for a species
wired for survival
we have an odd habit
of getting hooked
on things
that can kill us
and we kill each other
for them too...
Can we stop drug wars?
Can we stop addiction?
Can we stop making and distributing drugs?
Can we stop hunger for drugs?
Can we stop poverty?
Can we stop corruption?
You know and I know
the answer is NO.
Addiction is such
a harmful behaviour
that evolution
should have long ago
weeded it out of the population
and yet
humans will always
experiment
with things
to make them feel good.
What else I can say,
drug wars
will only end
with the last man....
Attitudes to drug use
have changed
over time.
The history of drugs
is history of humankind.
Neolithic man
made his first
alcoholic drink
through the fermentation
of cereals
and Stone Age beer jugs
have been found,
the first wine industry
flourished
along the banks
of Nile.
Chinese doctors
used marijuana
before 4000 BC
while in Iraq
in 6000 BC
opium was used
to treat many illnesses
and we can only guess
how long people have been using drugs
to change their states of consciousness.
In 1492 Columbus
smoked tobacco
with Native Americans.
In 1600 Marijuana cultivation
began in the U.S.
with the Jamestown settlers.
in 1919 the National Prohibition Act
and in 1971 President Nixon
declared a WAR ON DRUGS,
and yet nothing changed.
The drug industries are the first
to fight back,
in 1994 Tobacco industry
denied nicotine
is addictive
just as other drugs.
Instead of declaring the war,
we should ask
whether addiction
can ever be cured.
Drugs are everywhere around you,
part of our nature,
part of us,
yearning to use it,
reuse it,
misuse it
is there
4,000 plants
all around the world
are known
for their intoxicating effects
but we use only 40 of them,
so far....
In Biblical times,
St Paul
condemned drunkenness
and yet
recomended
the consumption of wine
in moderate amounts
to commune with God.
Noah listened to him
planting his own vineyard
he drank of the wine
to his shame
label 'drunkard'
stuck to his name.
In colonial 17-18th Century,
drunkenness was a choice,
albeit a sinful one,
which some individuals made.
Suddenly,
in the 19-20th centuries,
addiction became a disease
people taking drugs
are no more weak,
just unfortunate
or are they?
In the middle of the 19th century
in prosperous England
when gin and rum trading
were rife
there were many problems
we still recognise
in our times:
poverty,
homelessness,
child neglect
among the social disadvantaged.
The middle class
developed the new theory,
arguing
that because of their moral weakness
'the lower classes'
are unable to control their drinking.
If you listen carefully
to some of us,
who feel superior,
you will hear 'this moral view'
being presented even today.
In the Pharmacological view
the addiction resides
in the substance itself,
alcohol was vested with a power
that humans had no control over
and therefore society had an obligation
to protect its members.
Once prohibition ended
the disease view of addiction
emerged
as a way
of humanely responding
to the many people
who had developed
problems with their drug use
with only one goal of treatment
abstinence.
The Social Learning view
emerged in 1960s
and focuses
on the interaction
between the environment,
individual
and drug
as a way to understand
the complexity of the drug experience.
"Addictions are repetitive behaviours
in the face of negative consequences,"
Joseph Frascella from the Institute on Drug Abuse said,
"The desire to continue something you know is bad for you."
The drug use is learned
and is functional,
which means,
change is possible
and control is possible,
and yet,
the sad part is that
if you look at where
addiction treatment
was 10 years ago,
it hasn't gotten much better.
During those same 10 years
researchers have made progress
in understanding
the physical basis of addiction,
a more detailed understanding
of how deeply addiction
can affect the brain,
by hijacking memory-making processes
by exploiting emotions,
using that knowledge,
they have begun
to design new drugs
to cut off the craving
that drives an addict
irresistibly toward relapse,
the greatest risk
facing
even the most dedicated abstainer.
We know drugs are here to stay,
we know, when exposed to them,
our memory systems,
reward circuits,
decision making skills
and conditioning kick in
to create an all consuming pattern
of uncontrollable craving
that goes for nonchemical addictions
as well
for gambling,
shopping,
food
internet
and sex
may start out as habits
but slide quickly into something else.
Not everyone becomes an addict
we have other,
more analytical areas of the brain
while performing decision-making tasks
to evaluate sequences
and override mere pleasure seeking...
Is that all
what separates
a heavy user
from a problem user
from an addict?
Studies have long shown
that stress can increase the desire for drugs,
among higher creatures like us,
stress can also alter
the way the brain thinks,
the way it contemplates
the consequences of actions.
Recall how many times
in a day
you found yourself
in a stressful situation,
the familiar 'fight or flight mode'
you are more impulsive
giving in to your craving
again and again....
The history of drug wars
hasn't finished yet,
the science of addiction
hasn't found a cure,
we have to face ourselves
our own addiction
is in our own hands,
"It's never too late,"
the previous user said as a message
for drug users,
"There is more to life than destroying yourself."
