Showing posts with label recovery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label recovery. Show all posts
Monday, August 22, 2011
DEPENDENCE vs ADDICTION in Cannabis Users
Is Pot Addictive?
The answer to this question has eluded mankind for nearly one hundred years!
Prior to that, marijuana was not illegal, nor considered an addictive or harmful substance; at least, not by the U.S. government’s standards. Alcohol was the bane of society in the early 1900’s as prohibitionists marched in the streets, many of them quietly addicted to Opioid Tonics freely available from the corner druggist.
As with anything, the answer to the question depends on the presumed definition.
Addiction is a psychological state in which the object of addiction can be any number of drugs, actions, or substances. Calling cannabis addicting in this context is NOT telling the truth, but is a trick of semantics in a society where food has become the most common and dangerous addiction.
Dependence is a physical state in which the object of dependence causes enough physical distress as to make the user continue their addiction even through obvious deleterious consequences. Nicotine has been cited as causing the greatest dependence in humans.
Cannabis does not cause physical addiction or create a physical dependence. There are no dependency-causing chemicals in Cannabis. Any physical discomfort felt by a cannabis user on cessation is psychological.
Although Cannabis can cause psychological addiction, so can any substance or human action: Prohibiting marijuana for a psychological addiction is like criminalizing dice for gambling disorders.
Unlike opiates (Heroin, Morphine), cocaine (Crack), benzos (Xanax), nicotine, and alcohol, Cannabis carries no risk of physical addiction, and has no substances that create a physical addiction. A psychologically addicted user may report anxiety upon "withdrawal"; any "withdrawal" symptoms are purely psychological. Although many studies have proved this, the argument of addiction is one of semantics and medical terminology, as well as ICD-9/10 (Diagnosis) coding.
Cannabis cannot create the condition of "drug dependence"; however, cannabis can create "drug abuse", as can a can of hairspray and a package of bath salts.
Prohibition has not stopped the use, recreational or medical, of marijuana. Cannabis is freely trafficked into the United States from Mexico by violent, dangerous and warring cartels. Although billions have been spent, US Federal forces such as the DEA, INS, and ICE have been unsuccessful in stopping the influx of low-grade cannabis into the United States. This “Schwag” has no medicinal value, and is cheap and widely available and easy to get, especially for the young. Even IF the Feds got their way, and all of the progress in medical cannabis was reversed, the cartels will assure that their brand of blood stained pot is on American streets. Wouldn’t it be better if the sick, suffering, and dying had access to clean, quality Cannabis, safely and transparently available, and prescribed specific to symptomology?
The Green Association for Sustainability
K. Rojas,
BLS, MLS, CPC
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
“RECENTLY, I DID SOME CLINICAL WORK AT A METHADONE CLINIC”
This comment was a response to a posted blog in the Addictions Recovery Professionals group at Linked In (http://www.linkedin.com/). The original blogger is an addictions counselor discussing working at Methadone clinics. Please review the many comments at: http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers=&gid=862107&discussionID=4887361&goback=%2Eanh_862107
Mr. Jenkins, others,
Thank you for concisely and clearly stating the facts regarding the unique physiology of opiate addiction. Pure science dictates the intractability of opiate addiction in the malfunction of opiate receptors. It has nothing to do with “will power”, but rather with changes that occur in the brain and neurological synapses.
For many years I advocated for medicated recovery, specifically Methadone, and was deeply involved and invested in the passage and implementation of the Drug Abuse and Treatment Act of 2001 (DATA). In addition to changing methadone rules, this Act allowed for the private physician use of Suboxone for opiate withdrawal and maintenance. In my research and advocacy since then, I have come to believe that Suboxone/ Buprenorphine/Naltrexone may be a better choice in many circumstances. Methadone is very effective for long term treatment of heroin addiction. Still, it has many drawbacks, specifically, the difficulty in withdrawal; however, the stigma of Methadone also cannot be underestimated in its effects on the clients social wellness. As such, Methadone should be used as a last resort, only after other avenues have failed, including abstinence programs.
True stabilization and reorientation into a non-drug seeking lifestyle can take many years, and even then, it is not unusual for heroin addicts to relapse, often after many years of abstinence. True, intractable heroin addiction may best be treated with life-long Methadone, in terms of the client’s well being and social harm reduction. Too many times, though, clients are accepted into Methadone clinics before other treatments have been attempted. Often, these patients may be opiate naïve in comparison to long-term heroin addicts seeking methadone maintenance. The methadone may get them off of their “drug of choice”, but only addicted to one that is even more difficult to overcome. In these cases, if abstinence is not an option, then Suboxone should be used. Using methadone in anything but the most severe cases, i.e., the patient is at risk of IV related disease and social degradation, is like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer.
I also agree that your “Counselors-in-relapse” is a valid paradigm, and one seen much too often in recovery. While some addicts in treatment may prefer to have a counselor that is also a recovering addict, the value of learning the pathology and physiology underlying opiate addiction an educated cannot be understated, nor can the value of certification. The best of both worlds, of course, would be ideal, and fortunately many recovering addicts have gone on to receive certification and/or college graduation. When I hear of recovering counselors who have been clean for less than two years working in methadone clinics, I worry that they are not only ineffective, still fighting their own battles, but they are also putting their own recovery at risk by being in a drug-centered environment before they have had a chance to put that environment behind them, and think themselves “well”.
Mr. Jenkins, others,
Thank you for concisely and clearly stating the facts regarding the unique physiology of opiate addiction. Pure science dictates the intractability of opiate addiction in the malfunction of opiate receptors. It has nothing to do with “will power”, but rather with changes that occur in the brain and neurological synapses.
For many years I advocated for medicated recovery, specifically Methadone, and was deeply involved and invested in the passage and implementation of the Drug Abuse and Treatment Act of 2001 (DATA). In addition to changing methadone rules, this Act allowed for the private physician use of Suboxone for opiate withdrawal and maintenance. In my research and advocacy since then, I have come to believe that Suboxone/ Buprenorphine/Naltrexone may be a better choice in many circumstances. Methadone is very effective for long term treatment of heroin addiction. Still, it has many drawbacks, specifically, the difficulty in withdrawal; however, the stigma of Methadone also cannot be underestimated in its effects on the clients social wellness. As such, Methadone should be used as a last resort, only after other avenues have failed, including abstinence programs.
True stabilization and reorientation into a non-drug seeking lifestyle can take many years, and even then, it is not unusual for heroin addicts to relapse, often after many years of abstinence. True, intractable heroin addiction may best be treated with life-long Methadone, in terms of the client’s well being and social harm reduction. Too many times, though, clients are accepted into Methadone clinics before other treatments have been attempted. Often, these patients may be opiate naïve in comparison to long-term heroin addicts seeking methadone maintenance. The methadone may get them off of their “drug of choice”, but only addicted to one that is even more difficult to overcome. In these cases, if abstinence is not an option, then Suboxone should be used. Using methadone in anything but the most severe cases, i.e., the patient is at risk of IV related disease and social degradation, is like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer.
I also agree that your “Counselors-in-relapse” is a valid paradigm, and one seen much too often in recovery. While some addicts in treatment may prefer to have a counselor that is also a recovering addict, the value of learning the pathology and physiology underlying opiate addiction an educated cannot be understated, nor can the value of certification. The best of both worlds, of course, would be ideal, and fortunately many recovering addicts have gone on to receive certification and/or college graduation. When I hear of recovering counselors who have been clean for less than two years working in methadone clinics, I worry that they are not only ineffective, still fighting their own battles, but they are also putting their own recovery at risk by being in a drug-centered environment before they have had a chance to put that environment behind them, and think themselves “well”.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
WHY DO ADDICTS RELAPSE? Enterhealth (T) poll on LinkedIn
EnterHealth of Dallas Fort Worth posted this poll and discussion on Linked-In, in April, 2009. To review all comments, click on link.What have you noticed to be the biggest cause of an addict's relapse? We started a poll and would love your votes and feedback! http://polls.linkedin.com/p/33383/cbfam
EnterHealth of Dallas Fort Worth posted this poll and discussion on Linked-In, in April, 2009. To review all comments, click on link.What have you noticed to be the biggest cause of an addict's relapse? We started a poll and would love your votes and feedback! http://polls.linkedin.com/p/33383/cbfam
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
NEW YORK POLICY REQUIRES ALL RECOVERY CENTERS TO BE NON-SMOKING FACILITIES
New anti-smoking regulations that take effect this month for all addiction treatment centers in New York state have some center officials worried that the ban will dissuade some people with alcohol and drug problems from pursuing services, the Associated Press reported July 23.
Shocked by the random cruelty and negative effects of the New York policy requiring smoking bans in ALL Alcohol and Drug Abuse Recovery centers, whether public or private, I was even more incensed at the comments made by bloggers of JoinTogether.org, my original source. Being sorely disappointed in the flat affect of JoinTogether.org’s summarization, I turned to the original article by AP http://www.nysun.com/new-york/state-prohibits-smoking-in-addiction-recovery/82402/ . The original article explicitly argued that such a policy would have negative effects and the journalist’s outrage at such a ridiculous policy was obvious. I began to question the intentions, intelligence and integrity of both JoinTogether.org and its readers, in that most of them thought that this is somehow a good idea! As Join Together failed to chastise such a discriminatory policy that will prevent many from seeking treatment, and others from completing treatment, and the remainder enduring much more pain and frustration from being cold-turkey withdrawn from nicotine; THE MOST ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCE AVAILABLE. How does this help addicts?
Although I am disappointed in the lack of hutzpa by JoinTogether.org in not pointing out the many obvious flaws in the policy, I am even more disheartened at the comments. Kudos for one shout out for Harm Reduction policies, but I don’t believe that creating a cigarette smoking ban while trying to focus on more critical issues will separate those who are “serious” about recovering from illegal drug abuse.
There is a sad irony in such useless waste of legislation and power, to ban federally legal nicotine, while the mountain of evidence and public opinion in favor of legalization/medicalization of cannabis continues to gain power, and state support. Marijuana reform bills are finding their way to ballots in an ever increasing rate, and many are holding hopes for anti-prohibition in the election of the right (or, should I say, left?) presidential candidate this year.
Think for yourself, people. Giving “Kudos” to New York (Silva) is just plain ignorant, even if a “drug reform” organization posts it. IMPOSE your own beliefs on yourself…for too long prohibitionists have been imposing their beliefs on others. Making marijuana legal does not MANDATE that every one smoke pot – anti-prohibitionists do not want to IMPOSE their beliefs on anyone. They just want the RIGHT to CHOOSE.
Stop the War: Begin the Healing
New anti-smoking regulations that take effect this month for all addiction treatment centers in New York state have some center officials worried that the ban will dissuade some people with alcohol and drug problems from pursuing services, the Associated Press reported July 23.
Shocked by the random cruelty and negative effects of the New York policy requiring smoking bans in ALL Alcohol and Drug Abuse Recovery centers, whether public or private, I was even more incensed at the comments made by bloggers of JoinTogether.org, my original source. Being sorely disappointed in the flat affect of JoinTogether.org’s summarization, I turned to the original article by AP http://www.nysun.com/new-york/state-prohibits-smoking-in-addiction-recovery/82402/ . The original article explicitly argued that such a policy would have negative effects and the journalist’s outrage at such a ridiculous policy was obvious. I began to question the intentions, intelligence and integrity of both JoinTogether.org and its readers, in that most of them thought that this is somehow a good idea! As Join Together failed to chastise such a discriminatory policy that will prevent many from seeking treatment, and others from completing treatment, and the remainder enduring much more pain and frustration from being cold-turkey withdrawn from nicotine; THE MOST ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCE AVAILABLE. How does this help addicts?
Although I am disappointed in the lack of hutzpa by JoinTogether.org in not pointing out the many obvious flaws in the policy, I am even more disheartened at the comments. Kudos for one shout out for Harm Reduction policies, but I don’t believe that creating a cigarette smoking ban while trying to focus on more critical issues will separate those who are “serious” about recovering from illegal drug abuse.
There is a sad irony in such useless waste of legislation and power, to ban federally legal nicotine, while the mountain of evidence and public opinion in favor of legalization/medicalization of cannabis continues to gain power, and state support. Marijuana reform bills are finding their way to ballots in an ever increasing rate, and many are holding hopes for anti-prohibition in the election of the right (or, should I say, left?) presidential candidate this year.
Think for yourself, people. Giving “Kudos” to New York (Silva) is just plain ignorant, even if a “drug reform” organization posts it. IMPOSE your own beliefs on yourself…for too long prohibitionists have been imposing their beliefs on others. Making marijuana legal does not MANDATE that every one smoke pot – anti-prohibitionists do not want to IMPOSE their beliefs on anyone. They just want the RIGHT to CHOOSE.
Stop the War: Begin the Healing
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)