| Like alcoholism, drug addiction, gambling, etc.. I was hearing about this recently, I didn't even know some people treated addiction as a disease.... What do you guys think? |
| No, it's an addiction. |
 |
| Addiction is a weakness or a character flaw. Treating it like something that you cant control is just weak people refusing to take responsibility for themself |
| No, it's a problem, but not a disease. |
| Depends, psychological addiction is a state of mind, there's nothing biological to it. Physical addiction on the other hand. e.g. Addiction to Nicotene or Heroin is very very real, and it should be treated like a medical condition. Very few substances are physically addictive though. e.g being addicted to the internet is a psychological thing. |
| I don't see addiction being a disease. It's more a condition. You have to treat the addiction by implementing the appropriate method to let the person stop. Other than that, I'm not sure. |
| You're all idiots, but I'm no different. |
cuntologics said: I don't see addiction being a disease. It's more a condition. You have to treat the addiction by implementing the appropriate method to let the person stop. Other than that, I'm not sure. You've never been addicted to a physically addictive substance. |
| Both physical and psychological addictions? I think calling mental addictions a "disease" would be stupid. Physical addictions on the other-hand make more sense, though I would still refer to them as a disorder at the most. I know "Disorder" could be synonymous with "disease", but "disease" is much more set in stone in with its definition. |
apatch3 said: cuntologics said: I don't see addiction being a disease. It's more a condition. You have to treat the addiction by implementing the appropriate method to let the person stop. Other than that, I'm not sure. You've never been addicted to a physically addictive substance. Meaning? No I haven't but is it really right to call it a disease? As someone said up top, it's probably appropriate to call it a disorder. Not a straight up disease. Okay, my logic is with this is, you can have an addiction to cigarettes and as a result, a disease such as lung cancer may develop. That's just my view I guess. |
| You're all idiots, but I'm no different. |
| No, at least not a psychological addiction. If it's caused by an addictive substance maybe, but I'm not particularly clear on what qualifies as a disease in the medical sense. |
| Yes and no. When addiction can not be controlled it becomes a disease. |
| It is not a disease but a DISORDER.. yes, disorder is the perfect term for this.. And when this disorder will not be treated with proper discipline, then disease will arise... |
| ScribeOrigins, MKD 「先生のことが」 |
cuntologics said: apatch3 said: cuntologics said: I don't see addiction being a disease. It's more a condition. You have to treat the addiction by implementing the appropriate method to let the person stop. Other than that, I'm not sure. You've never been addicted to a physically addictive substance. Meaning? No I haven't but is it really right to call it a disease? As someone said up top, it's probably appropriate to call it a disorder. Not a straight up disease. Okay, my logic is with this is, you can have an addiction to cigarettes and as a result, a disease such as lung cancer may develop. That's just my view I guess. Well it is a disease, in the sense that you experience withdrawal symptoms that are as bad, if not worse than any disease out there, the same goes for many other substances, your body starts malfunctioning because it has developed a physical dependence on the substance, it can't properly regulate itself without it. It isn't just some psychological illusion of an addiction, your body ends up developing a real dependence on it. You have to be weaned off them slowly, some of these substances will kill you if you go cold turkey. |
apatch3May 30, 2013 11:05 AM
| By the definition of disease, yes. |
| sexual incest in nisomonogatari - no one bats an eye romance incest in SAO - everyone loses their minds |
| Isn't something only a disease if it requires (or it would be preferable to have) medicine? |
LoneWolf said: @Josh makes me sad to call myself Canadian. |
| Yes it is. Then, it could be harmful or not. |
 |
| I believe the medical community now treats alcholism and addiction as a disease. It fits some disease model or some shit like that. I'm a recovered alcoholic/addict and i don't believe its a disease. It comforts some people to think so, but not me. I view myself more as being a victim of circumstance and subsequent need to escape. its a tricky topic. obviously many people do not agree, but disease is where its at these days |
| Pretty sure that addiction and alcoholism and such counts as a mental disease/disorder, so yes. |
 |
| It can be, if you count a chemical imbalance in the brain as a disease. |
| It's not really up for debate, but like people are saying, you may prefer to call it a disorder. By definition addiction to drugs/alcohol or anything harmful to ones self is a disease. They have proven that addiction is a trait that can be passed down through your families genes. It is also something that doctors prescribe medication to help treat, and you can be hospitalized for. If you want to just say all the medical data on the subject is wrong, that's ok, it's just your opinion though. I understand people who don't know much about the troubles of addiction might think it's just a matter of will power. I would disagree, but in a way that is correct. It's like saying depression is a matter of will power. There is absolutely no difference in saying "why don't they just stop using drugs", and "why don't they stop having depression". Disease isn't defined as being only things like diabetes or cancer, but I understand why people wouldn't want to compare addiction/depression with them. Disease is a very broad term though. My two cents. |
FintanMay 30, 2013 6:00 PM
LostOddity said: Addiction is a weakness or a character flaw. Treating it like something that you cant control is just weak people refusing to take responsibility for themself There are often physical symptoms that result from an addiction if the substance is suddenly removed. So it is a disease from where I stand. |
| I don't have a signature. |
| addiction also can be on PC , facebook and other stuff like that . |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
| It's a psychological medical condition for damn sure. I'm predisposed to addiction and have been fighting it all of my life. I'm addicted to marijuana and alcohol now, dependent on opiates though on legitimate pain management as far as that goes. Before that I was addicted to video games as a young kid, and junk food for that matter (thank god for a fast metabolism heh). So that part of my personality was pretty much always in me. Some people don't understand just how hard it is for people who really have it bad to control themselves. They look down on us and think we're just being weak. I think there are a lot of factors involved, sometimes even our natural brain chemistry is a bit off from birth. Sometimes we're just trying to cover up depression and other psychological issues or distract ourselves from certain things in life. This is why non-violent drug addicts shouldn't be thrown in jail like common criminals. When it comes down to it many addicts aren't actually hurting anyone but themselves. We should be focusing on treatment instead of punishment because after all it is a legitimate medical condition. Also, for anybody who's too full of it to agree with that, they might want to consider that the country is paying 30,000$ a year for every person in jail. So you can always look at it from a financial stand point as well. We're shooting ourselves in the foot by punishing non-violent law breakers. Maybe we could come to a middle ground and have the maximum penalty be probation for possession of drugs? I think that should be part of the discussion because it has a lot to do with addiction and the way our country sees it. I kind of rushed through this as I don't have much time, didn't express myself as well as I'd like to. As someone with the condition myself I really should read up more on the topic. Anyone who wants to ask me questions feel free to, though I can't guarantee you an interesting answer. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
Dipp-Fish said: Some may say that addiction shows the same/similar symptoms of disease, but i don't hold totally to that belief. I already said this, but alcohol withdrawal often has serious physical symptoms which can include death, as this normally doesn't occur after removal of alcohol from the diet, one can conclude that alcohol addiction has serious physical symptoms. |
| I don't have a signature. |
| no,in my opinion its just an addiction! |
 |
| It's an addiction, not a disease. It's an a class of itself. I'd be much more upset over someone calling a drug addiction a "disorder" than I would a disease. If you called my past experiences with drug addiction a disorder a couple years ago I might have gotten angry enough to kill. This is deep rooted with a hatred for psychiatry and the drug addictions they directly start and are 100% at blame for, but do not acknowledge existence of and scapegoat "mental illnesses" or "disorders" in place of what is actually negative effects and withdrawals of the drugs they throw at people. I agree that it should be treated as a medical condition. Just not that it should be called a disease. In my experience the medical field is extremely incompetent when it comes to treating physical addiction though. If you walked into most doctors or hospitals here claiming you had a problem from drugs you were illegally taking, they very likely might treat you like scum and not give you proper medical care whatsoever. I would say the majority of "medical professionals" have no clue what they're doing when it comes to something like, say benzo, alcohol, and/or barbiturate addiction. They would probably actually make the situation much worse than it would be without their intervention, to the point where they might very well seriously contribute to their death or cause serious damage. Most people would rather not believe this though, and of course would dismiss it as ramblings of someone who doesn't know anything, and of course believe that "medical professionals" would never be so incompetent when it comes to issues like this, or that they would ever be wrong. The medical world is filled with incompetence though, and in reality they are just people. The fact that everyone puts as much trust as they do in them is disgusting. There is no such thing as a physical test to verify whether or not someone has a "chemical imbalance". The entire label is fabricated. It is based off an unproven hypothesis that has commonly and incorrectly been passed off as fact. >They have proven that addiction is a trait that can be passed down through your families genes. No they have not. >It is also something that doctors prescribe medication to help treat, and you can be hospitalized for. Cutting your wrist with a knife can land you in the hospital and get you under medical care. But "cutting your wrist with a knife" is not a disease. You are right. There are withdrawals that can very easily kill a man. In many cases you can't stop taking drugs suddenly without chance of death or very serious complications. But the point is that aside from people who naively got addicted to prescription drugs by taking them as prescribed, or other odd cases, people voluntarily chose to get addicted to a drug. They know the consequences. I agree with him that drug addiction is a weakness, a character flaw, completely the users fault, and something that can or could have been stopped by will. Drug addicts choose to be drug addicts. I chose with my own will to get addicted to drugs. |
CazeMay 31, 2013 3:42 PM
| ^ I share your distrust of doctors, especially psychiatrists the DSM manual is a big fraud, they often try to treat 1 addiction by introducing you to another new addiction. For example they'll say - Oh you've been taking this because you're depressed - here have this lithium (another addictive drug) and take a tablet a day. Before you know it you will be addicted to lithium. I've never been to a shrink before, but my father (who is a doctor with many decades of experience) says this about shrinks. In fact I think scientologists are sometimes justifiably critical of the psychiatric profession (although scientologists are basically all crazy and need to have their heads examined). |
apatch3May 31, 2013 3:41 PM
| Caze, you can argue all you want, but medical journals will prove you wrong(althoguh you clearly don't think they matter). I will admit that saying "they have proven" were not the right words, more "they have found extensive evidence that suggests". As I mentioned, it is understandable why someone would not want to compare addiction to cancer(I agree) but disease is a very broad term and doesn't specify how serious in nature the particular disease is. Keep thinking that you have more experience and evidence then the thousands of scientists and doctors that have gathered information on these subjects, you don't. Just to make it easy on you, here are the multiple ways the word disease can be used. Which you obviously are ignoring. You owe me, it was very difficult to google that. 1. a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment. 2. any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc. 3. any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society: His fascination with executions is a disease. 4. decomposition of a material under special circumstances: tin disease. apatch3 said: ^ I share your distrust of doctors, especially psychiatrists the DSM manual is a big fraud, they often try to treat 1 addiction by introducing you to another new addiction. For example they'll say - Oh you've been taking this because you're depressed - here have this lithium (another addictive drug) and take a tablet a day. Before you know it you will be addicted to lithium. I've never been to a shrink before, but my father (who is a doctor with many decades of experience) says this about shrinks. In fact I think scientologists are sometimes justifiably critical of the psychiatric profession (although scientologists are basically all crazy and need to have their heads examined). I partially agree with both of you, there are doctors/psychiatrists who just should have their license revoked. As for substitutes, like suboxone, methadone, valium, anti depressants, ext. Yes they can be negative in the overall picture, but depending on the situation(which is what good doctors should decided) they can be very helpful. I do agree that some doctors seem to prescribe stuff like they are getting paid to write scripts for certain meds or something, and there are also way to many meds being allowed into the market with what doesn't seem like adequate testing. Basically I would agree that disorder it a better way to describe addiction, but technically that still makes it a disease. It would make more sense if the medical community started refering to addiction and similar conditions as disorders. As of now in the medical community, they consider it a disease. It's like a mixture of the 1st and 3rd definition of disease, and disorder is a more fitting term. |
Suzune-chanMay 31, 2013 6:38 PM
TinkleTinkle-Hoy said: Caze, you can argue all you want, but medical journals will prove you wrong(althoguh you clearly don't think they matter). I will admit that saying "they have proven" were not the right words, more "they have found extensive evidence that suggests". As I mentioned, it is understandable why someone would not want to compare addiction to cancer(I agree) but disease is a very broad term and doesn't specify how serious in nature the particular disease is. Keep thinking that you have more experience and evidence then the thousands of scientists and doctors that have gathered information on these subjects, you don't. Just to make it easy on you, here are the multiple ways the word disease can be used. Which you obviously are ignoring. You owe me, it was very difficult to google that. 1. a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment. 2. any abnormal condition in a plant that interferes with its vital physiological processes, caused by pathogenic microorganisms, parasites, unfavorable environmental, genetic, or nutritional factors, etc. 3. any harmful, depraved, or morbid condition, as of the mind or society: His fascination with executions is a disease. 4. decomposition of a material under special circumstances: tin disease. Oh, so we are going with "possible correlation equates to causation"? You're right that disease can mean many things. Words and semantics are funny like that. Adhering to those definitions feeling weary by lunch time because you didn't eat breakfast is a disease, and spring fever is a real disease. If you want to call everything a disease that's fine. But when most people think of the word disease, they think of actual diseases, like meningitis, or HIV, not someone taking drugs until they get addicted to them. You keep bringing up how these wonderful professionals have proven that addiction is a real disease, even through genetics! Why then is it that I cannot bring my newborn child into any place on Earth you would feel is qualified, and ask for a test to see if he has this "addiction" gene in him? How have they proven that drug addiction is a genetic trait passed down? How do you know those tests aren't influenced by environmental factors, bias, and at most end up with possible correleations they pass off as causation? Where is my genetic test that I can go take? If it's not used in actual practice, and it's just all hypothesized behind the scenes, then it's worthless as of now. It would do nothing but put a stigma on drug addiction by lumping it in with "mental illness", piss people like me off, create extreme misconceptions of what drug addiction is, and accomplish nothing. Telling people who are addicted to drugs that they have a "disease" or a "disorder", is not helping them. It does not help them whatsoever, I would say it hurts them because it gives them an excuse to feel as though it's not their fault and "they can't help it". The feeling of "I can't help it because it's a disease it's not my fault" is a very negative doctrine that even encourages some to keep using drugs if you ask me. |
CazeMay 31, 2013 4:32 PM
Dipp-Fish said: Addiction is something that is solely unique to each individual. You ALONE battle addiction, if you come out of the other end, it will always be upon your shoulder, haunting you. So, in some ways it can be likened to a disease. Yet, addiction can be beaten with will power alone, no disease can be beaten only with thought and care. Possibly a bit of both then.. I have to disagree entirely. First of all, addiction is considered a "family" illness. It affects everyone you know and love. You didn't quite address that but i thought I would add. I don't have the exact numbers on me - omw out - but AA and NA are attended by millions of people who find help and solace in both "the program" and in their fellow member's stories and advice. Besides that, there are the conventional means such as rehab and outpatient treatment that are also very effective for many. People do not attend these in a vacuum. It only haunts people if they let it. They CAN change their lives, make amends to those they have hurt, learn to live normal lives, and move on. But they simply CANNOT use again. All progress towards a normal life will be wiped out. Trust me, there is nothing unique about addiction. Sit in a room full of other addicts and listen. You will hear your "story" over and over and over. It can be very stunning and powerful. |
Caze said: You are right. There are withdrawals that can very easily kill a man. In many cases you can't stop taking drugs suddenly without chance of death or very serious complications. But the point is that aside from people who naively got addicted to prescription drugs by taking them as prescribed, or other odd cases, people voluntarily chose to get addicted to a drug. They know the consequences. I agree with him that drug addiction is a weakness, a character flaw, completely the users fault, and something that can or could have been stopped by will. Drug addicts choose to be drug addicts. I chose with my own will to get addicted to drugs. You make a good point, however I still disagree about the character flaw part. Even if the problems that led to an individual becoming addicted are resolved, it can be nearly impossible to quit using the substance if it's reached a physical dependence. Furthermore, for things like alcoholism where you can never completely return to normal, a dependence can be retriggered without the individual's knowledge. |
| I don't have a signature. |
| People say it's a disease, and I say bullshit to that. The only time I'd think anything could be classified as a disease would be someone who is manic depressive, and during the manic times went out and gambled.....but then it wouldn't be an addiction to gambling, it would be the mania causing it....so it's still bullshit. |
 |
| Depression is very similar to addiction. A lot of the time they are even linked. Mild depression can be compared to something like marijuana addiction, while something more serious like bipolor/manic depression can be compared to heroin addiction(just examples of the extremes of the two, not saying they are the same). Just like addiction, where on here I'm seeing a lot of people say it is will power and personal choice, you could tell someone "hey, stop being bipolar, it's really not working to your benefit". I'm not treating either of those things lightly, and I know personally how difficult it is to deal with them. My point is, these conditions are things that should be considered a disorder that doctors can help you deal with. I get what caze is saying that yourself and doctors should not just fall back on "well this is something I can't help, it's my brain". I still think that it should be taken seriously in the medical field, and not just brushed off as something that has to do purely with will power/self control. |
| What really matters here are the chemical processes that result from taking drugs, which favor addiction being called a disease. For this reason I am pretty much disregarding every other post here because none of them seem to really hit the actual science of the issue. I think a better way to frame this question would be whether or not the addiction and continued use is a "choice" or "disease." Assuming this accurately portrays what you meant to ask, the answer is that it initially is a choice, but very soon becomes a disease that literally disables your ability to use proper judgement. Many drugs rely on their ability to keep some sort of neurotransmitter either in or out of a certain type of cell in the brain in order to produce a desired effect, and nearly always in the dopamine pathways that form the reward center of the brain. They (alcohol, cocaine, heroin, meth, ect.) rely on either inhibiting the reuptake of certain neurotransmitters to keep them out of the storage cells where they don't affect you or they mimic one of your natural neurotransmitters. In both cases, the effect is the same. The brain literally chemically re-wires itself so that you think in such a way that causes you to value taking the drug over other things you previously thought were important like say, sleep, food, or sex. This leads to a predicament. Yes, it was a choice to start. But eventually, the addiction literally becomes something they can't control. A classic example that is used to prove addiction is a choice is offering an alcoholic a free drink and then telling them you will blow their brains out if they do. 99.999999% of alcoholics decline the drink, but what is important is whats going on in their brain at the time. Their thought process is more like this. "Is he really going to shoot me?" "Is the gun even loaded?" "I wonder if the alcohol can hit my system before the bullet hits my brain." ect. They can show the restraint when placed in such an extreme situation but they are still diseased. Over time, resistance causes the brain to need greater and greater amounts of stimulus in order to produce the same heightened state of arousal that the brain is desiring, and an issue develops. People that normally have very low levels of normal arousal are more susceptible to any kind of addiction. Ultimately, the final answer here is that addiction is a disease of choice, not individually a disease or choice. Also, for those who are saying that gambling is very different. The actual truth is that it isn't. Gambling is affecting the brain in much of the same way that drugs do only the big wins are what produce the surge of neurotransmitters. |
ShaonovaMay 31, 2013 5:38 PM
 |
| any addiction is a psychological disorder AFAIK |
| ....of all the arts, for us the cinema is the most important. -- Vladimir Lenin |
| i wouldn't class addiction as a disease but i'd say that it should be treated like one (physical addictions, anyway, ie alcohol/drugs) going on that then i'd probably class addictions to substances as diseases but internet addictions as something else |
 |
| anything can be a disease as long as its harmful to the health be it mental or physical health |
| No, i can handle my subway groping addiction just fine, thank you. I dont need a cure. |
| I love naruto~kun he's my husbando~~~~ |
| Im anime addicted. |
 |
j0x said: anything can be a disease as long as its harmful to the health be it mental or physical health ^ |
| It is a disease. If we use the word as a synonym of just "being really into something" that's another thing. But in its clinical definition, it is. |
More topics from this board
» which country would you NOT want to visit? ( 1 2 )removed-user - Mar 27 |
71 |
by Zarutaku
»»
25 minutes ago |
|
Poll: » Do you live with regrets?Lightskynight - Apr 18 |
22 |
by _Nette_
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Are you mentally ill? ( 1 2 )Ejrodiew - Apr 24 |
54 |
by traed
»»
2 hours ago |
|
» whats your shoe size ?sussybakagirl420 - Mar 22 |
27 |
by cody
»»
4 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Do you pay attention to forum signatures?PostMahouShoujo - Apr 24 |
24 |
by Zedlin
»»
4 hours ago |