Which is worse, booze or pot?
Early in my life I consumed mass quantities of both booze and pot, although I might be lying if you are in law enforcement. I've always felt that pot was better for the individual and society. My reasons:
- Alcohol can give you cirrhosis of the liver.
- pot does not
negatively effect your health.
- Pot doesn't give you a hangover.
- Stoners don't have the ambition or the train of thought to get into a bar fight.
- Pot leaves no bottles or cans to overflow landfills.
- You don't have excessive urination when smoking pot.
- Pot is calorie free - although munchies may offset that point.
- Pot is not physically addictive.
What do you think?
Neither is good for you (I will get to that later) even though I agree that booze is worse.
Pot can give you panic attacks if you smoke too much and it will give you the motivation of a snail. It isn't technically addicting but it can ruin lives from people becoming obsessed with it. Usually that will just involve being broke and not moving.
I won't go over the side effects of booze since we all know them but I will say this. When I get a house and have teenage neighbors I would much rather have them be paranoid stoners than obnoxious drinkers. I won't have cups, bottles, and pee all over my yard and I will be able to sleep on weekends.
Booze is much, much worse.
I don't think smoking some weed will result in driving north in the southbound lanes of an interstate.
I don't think smoking some weed will result in driving north in the southbound lanes of an interstate.
At 5 mph in a 35 mph zone
I don't think smoking some weed will result in driving north in the southbound lanes of an interstate.
At 5 mph in a 35 mph zone
That way you can be sure you aren't speeding!:worried:
I have asked several cops if they have ever apprehended a violent criminal who was on pot alone, all have said no.
Everything in moderation. That's my motto. ;)
Discussion must include references to a movie created to warn about this 'danger'. Movie was often shown in college so we would be informed. The 'powers that be' never understood what it really was - a comedy:
Reefer Madnesslol...sounds like a trip (yep, that was a drug reference). Now that we're on the subject, what about acid? Is is worse than booze or pot?
- pot does not negatively effect your health
Not correct. There have been several research papers released over the last year or so, that indicate that long term use of pot causes various forms of psychosis. This does not suggest that alcohol is OK, BTW. In moderation, alcohol is not a problem. Like most "drugs", over use and excess will lead to real medical problems.
One of the main psychosis' becomming more apparent is the increase in diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia. There's heaps of literature which supports this argument in relation to dope smoking.
My best friend has been diagnosed with it and her doctor firmly believes it's because she smoked too much dope during her formative years.
A friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 27 years. He's the most intelligent person I know.
A friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 27 years. He's the most intelligent person I know.
Why thanks, UT. :blush:
JUST KIDDING...I KID!
There is really no contest here:
Alcohol:
1)Prolonged, heavy use of alcohol can lead to addiction (alcoholism).
2)Sudden cessation of long term, extensive alcohol intake is likely to produce withdrawal symptoms, including severe anxiety, tremors, hallucinations and convulsions.
3)Long-term effects of consuming large quantities of alcohol, especially when combined with poor nutrition, can lead to permanent damage to vital organs such as the brain and liver.
4)In addition, research indicates that children of alcoholic parents are at greater risk than other children of becoming alcoholics.
Marijuana:
Marijuana smoke contains some of the same cancer-causing compounds as tobacco, sometimes in higher concentrations.Studies show that someone who smokes five joints per week may be taking in as many cancer-causing chemicals as someone who smokes a full pack of cigarettes every day.
From
here.
These are from the long term effects sections from the Partnership for a Drug Free America. Source is National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA).
The alcohol section is excerpted. The marijuana section is not. That's the most they could say.
Now, pass the bowl. :D
Then again, a friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 30+ years, and he rarely leaves his house except to go to work.
Then again, a friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 30+ years, and he rarely leaves his house except to go to work.
Can I get his address please? :p
Now what about acid?
I've never done acid. As I understand it, acid makes schizophrenic people normal, and normal people pschysophrenic. If you lose touch with reality, you might think you can fly, or that an innocent bystander is an alien who needs to be killed. You might cause harm to yourself and/or others.
Can I get his address please? :p
Only if you pay me a conjugal visit when you're in town to get squiffed. :p
Disclaimer: I've never used the evil weed.
From a medical standpoint, I'm certainly willing to consider the concept that weed might less harmful than more socially acceptable and legal substances like booze and tobacco.
But it just seems like inhaling smoke--any smoke--is just plain bad for your lungs. Am I wrong?
Disclaimer: I've never used the evil weed.
From a medical standpoint, I'm certainly willing to consider the concept that weed might less harmful than more socially acceptable and legal substances like booze and tobacco.
But it just seems like inhaling smoke--any smoke--is just plain bad for your lungs. Am I wrong?
You are correct. But we're comparing and contrasting.
Only if you pay me a conjugal visit when you're in town to get squiffed. :p
Eh, why not? I never said I didn't have a price. :rolleyes:
A friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 27 years. He's the most intelligent person I know.
Does his name start with XOXOXO?
Pot is better. But try loading your car with it when the cops are around and they kind of pissy about it. Where as, if you load your car up with vodka, they don't even blink.
My drugs of choice is food (amphetamines and opiates are nice, too). Every bit as dangerous as pot or booze.
Like Aliantha said, my motto is everything moderation (including moderation).
Compulsive, addictive behavior over any substance is a Bad Thing.
Alcohol can be a very good thing. In moderation, as part of life's passages and enjoyment.
Marijuana, when partaken excessively, is surely not good for you.
Acid---um, what can I saw about acid?
. . . I forget. :)
That being said---
it's always 4:20 somewhere!
it's always 4:20 somewhere!
Not really...only if it's 5:20, or 6:20, or 7:20...etc somewhere. :rolleyes:
metaphorically speaking!
Awesome...now WHERE is that bowl I keep asking for? :p
Since I have little knowledge about grass and too damn much about booze. Voted booze. bb
71
Alcohol probably kills more people than anything...in one way or another. But in comes in better flavors than pot.
I don't think smoking some weed will result in driving north in the southbound lanes of an interstate.
Neither will drinking
some alcohol.
There a consequences to all excesses from water to heroin.
lol...sounds like a trip (yep, that was a drug reference). Now that we're on the subject, what about acid? Is is worse than booze or pot?
Alcohol is the toughest on the body. The others are a toss up, acid won't ruin your lungs, pot rarely gives you flashbacks.
Oh, and people that try to fly off tall buildings, not the acid, they're just nuts.
A friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 27 years. He's the most intelligent person I know.
I know some people that smoke regularly and are dumb as rocks. I don't think the pot effects either. :haha:
If you look long and hard you'll find some sort of tie, either coincidental or similar, between any substance and any ailment in the world.
Booz is of course the worst thing for u weed can do a lot of good things for u, but the government wont let people do full studies on it so how will the general pop know. All u know now is that it is very helpful for people going through medical conditions and thats it, but i think that it can do a lot more than that. Also it dont slow ur reaction time down that much i would knw
are you crazy??? if the amount of people that drink beer smoked pot, and did it in the same amounts, the world would spiral down into a gutter. neither is good in large quantities but the day marijuana is legalised in australia will be the day i lose all faith in its people.
people smoke weed and think amazing things are happening to them, people drinks alcohol and know that its a bad thing. a society can function with booze but not pot.
i've had my good time on pot and other drugs. but the only one that i felt had the least evil sense to it was alcohol.
nicotine was the worst. make that illegal.
i've had my good time on pot and other drugs. but the only one that i felt had the least evil sense to it was alcohol.
That's because it's both legal and mostly socially acceptable. :cool:
Definitely alcohol.
From my own personal experience, by observation of people I know and from the facts.
I will offer one supporting example - I have known some lazy stoners in my time who decided one day to stop/ seriously cut back on their habit and change their lives. I have not known anyone whose life was as dependent on alcohol capable of doing that. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I'm just suggesting it's harder to come back from a serious drinking habit.
and if you make pot socially acceptable people wont stop, more people will take it up and you'll have a world full of stoners.
What can you do drunk that you can't do stoned?
(I've never been either, so I wouldn't know.)
and if you make pot socially acceptable people wont stop, more people will take it up and you'll have a world full of stoners.
A - it is already socially acceptable, but illegal. :D
B - is a world full of stoners any worse than a world full of drunkards?
C - what if alcohol were made illegal, and pot legal?
What can you do drunk that you can't do stoned?
(I've never been either, so I wouldn't know.)
Throw up on yourself. :rolleyes:
What can you do drunk that you can't do stoned?
(I've never been either, so I wouldn't know.)
This just blows my mind. You're
not high when you make those tape thingers???
and if you make pot socially acceptable people wont stop, more people will take it up and you'll have a world full of stoners.
Just like legalizing alcohol made the world a full of alcoholics?
I think pot use would jump up if it was legalized but would eventually even out when that fad goes away.
This just blows my mind. You're not high when you make those tape thingers???
No, I'm watching TV. Very similar effect, I gather.
Just like legalizing alcohol made the world a full of alcoholics?
I think pot use would jump up if it was legalized but would eventually even out when that fad goes away.
And at the same time, alcohol use would probably drop.
I don't smoke pot. Haven't in decades. If it was legal, I might once in a while.
Compulsive, addictive behavior over any substance is a Bad Thing....
Does anybody on this site feel that they are addicted to the Cellar? Or can you all just quit, any time you want?
I'm finding it very strange that many in here seem to think that if someone smokes pot at all they are a "stoner". Makes no sense at all and not what I have experienced.
I'm finding it very strange that many in here seem to think that if someone smokes pot at all they are a "stoner". Makes no sense at all and not what I have experienced.
I think it's just a term of endearment. :)
I'm finding it very strange that many in here seem to think that if someone smokes pot at all they are a "stoner". Makes no sense at all and not what I have experienced.
And if you steal low value items or small amounts of money, you're not a thief.
I can't compare -one works for me, the other doesn't -I guess the one that doesn't is better for society ....or maybe not :D
They both pretty much suck, IMHO.
BUT...
Beer : wine coolers :: pot : "chick pot"
The day they invent chick pot, I might be on board.
Alcohol is a huge problem in society as most seem to have acknowledged through the course of this thread.
They tried banning it once and look what happened. Then they legalized it and keep on tinkering with the rules for consumption etc and yet there is still a problem.
Why would anyone think that if a drug like marijuana were legal there'd be no problems or at least, there'd be less than there are with alcohol?
Both are drugs, and there will always be people who abuse substances legal or not. The biggest benefit to legalizing pot is for the government, so think twice before you go ahead and agree it'd be a good thing.
A friend of mine has smoked every day for the last 27 years. He's the most intelligent person I know.
A "friend," eh?
Worse or not, alcohol is legal.
From my own personal experience ... I do admit that I have never sent anyone to rehab just for smoking the weed.
From my own personal experience ... Weed can be an awful lot of fun. However, once I found out that I wanted to move on to a new activity and
couldn't, I was done with the weed. Permanently.
Both are drugs, and there will always be people who abuse substances legal or not. The biggest benefit to legalizing pot is for the government, so think twice before you go ahead and agree it'd be a good thing.
Absolutely right on. I voted pot, but I agree that any substance that is abused, is not a good thing.
Wolf, you have medical training, what's the amount of water that is lethal, if consumed in one sitting? I think it is something like 10 litres (over 2 gallons), but I am not sure of the number. Let's ban water. :D
It's gotta be more than 10 litres. they make you drink that much for your first ultra sound when you're pregnant. ;)
I think I looked up the water intoxication numbers before, but I can never keep that particular bit of information in my head. It keeps getting crowded out by things that are infinitely more important, like Star Trek Trivia.
Lethality results from more than two gallons of water per day (so you are correct on that score) with there being more input than output.
I knew they were trying to kill me!
I think I looked up the water intoxication numbers before, but I can never keep that particular bit of information in my head. It keeps getting crowded out by things that are infinitely more important, like Star Trek Trivia.
Since you have raised the topic, have you heard of the new Star Trek movie that is being made by ST fans with the support of couple of old cast members? I'll have to try to find the link, but I suspect it has gone. I think George Takei and/or Walter Keonig is supporting it.
I could not find a movie, but there are some "guys" writing gay episodes of Trek:
http://www.newvoyages.com/. I don't know if this is the same group of people that I was referring to.
I'm finding it very strange that many in here seem to think that if someone smokes pot at all they are a "stoner". Makes no sense at all and not what I have experienced.
I know that I used the term, but I wouldn't consider
anyone who smokes to be a stoner. To me it is a slightly tongue in cheek label for someone to whom smoking is the most important thing in their life. I wouldn't call anyone who had a glass of wine a lush, but I might use the term affectionately to describe someone who drank a lot.
A "friend," eh?
Not me, honest! If it was me I would reply with the blushing smilie.
And as far as demotivation goes, this guy is exactly the opposite - it motivates him. I think demotivation is the primary problem with weed, and a lot of people have real trouble with it, but this guy proves, we're all wired a little differently. He gets a TON of stuff done all day, then he smokes at night, every night, goes to bed stoned then wakes up early to another big day.
Originally Posted by Kagen4o4
and if you make pot socially acceptable people wont stop, more people will take it up and you'll have a world full of stoners.
In Amsterdam, they really don't have much of a problem with pot. About the biggest problem they have is people visiting from countries where it is still prohibited and going kid-in-a-sweetshop-crazy on the weed. The locals are a lot less excitable about it.
What's the difference between a drunk and a junkie?
They'll both steal your billfold.
But the junkie will help you hunt it.
:lame: bb 75
... I think demotivation is the primary problem with weed, and a lot of people have real trouble with it...
Back when I smoked a lot of pot, I wanted to overcome this problem, but decided it was much more important to laugh at the TV and order people to bring me beer and junk food. :blush:
define junkie.
Junkie
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The most common term of the word junkie (or junky) is to describe a drug addict. Also, people enthusiastic about any specific thing sometimes call themselves junkies (as in the term "science fiction junkie" or "political junkie").
Heroin has the street name "junk", which would offer an explanation of the word "junkie".
Therefore it doesn't really apply in a discussion about pot and alcohol.
They tried banning it once and look what happened. Then they legalized it and keep on tinkering with the rules for consumption etc and yet there is still a problem.
Why would anyone think that if a drug like marijuana were legal there'd be no problems or at least, there'd be less than there are with alcohol
Banning alcohol was an unmitigated disaster. Legalization was unambiguously the right thing to do. Why would weed be different?
Lethality results from more than two gallons of water per day (so you are correct on that score) with there being more input than output.
When I worked on the ranch I drank more than that before noon.:rolleyes:
One of those who is a member of the AMA study and still smoking several marijuana cigarettes a day still works as a very successful stock trader.
And if you steal low value items or small amounts of money, you're not a thief.
That is ridiculous, there is no equivalency.
Yes, you are a thief.
But, if I drink a beer that does not make me an alcoholic, if I smoke one cigar a week I am not addicted to tobacco, if I play the lottery once every two weeks so I can dream about "what if" for a week for fun with my wife I am not a gambling addict, if I bungee jump once in a while at the fair because I like the thrill I am not an adrenaline junkie, and if I steal low value items or small amounts of money every now and again
consciously I am not a kleptomaniac.
If everyone who does not think like me is "bad" I am an ass.
The poll is prejudiced, with three negative words in the title (Which is
worse,
booze or
pot?). Alcohol and marijuana both have demonstrated positive benefits at the right doses (e.g. Cannabis extract shrinks brain tumours:
http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/dn6283?DCMP=ILC-Top5&nsref=dn6283)
If you asked the question as "Which is better, alcohol or cannabis?" I think that you would get a different result. Of course, that would lead to the debate "Better for what?"
Therefore it doesn't really apply in a discussion about pot and alcohol.
Notice the lame smilie below the post?
When I worked on the ranch I drank more than that before noon.:rolleyes:
The key is that input needs to exceed output for there to be a problem ... if you're sweating or peeing out an equal volume of your intake, you'll maintain homeostasis. Too much output, too little input, dehydration. Too much input, too little output, water intoxication and your blood chemistry becomes too dilute to sustain bodily functioning.
Hunglikejesus- I think this thread is identifying the negative effects of both drugs and are getting us to subconsciously wonder why one is legal and one isn't.
Also, just because one has better positive effects doesn't mean that it is also better for society. Both heroine and Advil can cause pain relief and heroine is much better at it but heroine is also much worse for society and that individual.
Marijuana is not bad for society.
Hunglikejesus- I think this thread is identifying the negative effects of both drugs and are getting us to subconsciously wonder why one is legal and one isn't.
Also, just because one has better positive effects doesn't mean that it is also better for society. Both heroine and Advil can cause pain relief and heroine is much better at it but heroine is also much worse for society and that individual.
Piercehawkeye,
You are right, I should have used a smiley. I was just pointing out that question design can lead to biased poll results.
Though reviewing the original question, I noticed this:
...
I've always felt that pot was better for the individual and society.
....
What do you think?
Alcohol.
I have to ask: how frequently/how much pot do you have to smoke in order to "smoke yourself stupid"? How bad of an addict do you have to be in order to have the perpetual delayed speech, the permanent "lost" gaze, and the constant need to fill conversational gaps with "uhhhh...."?
Everything in moderation. That's my motto. ;)
Moderation in moderation! That's my motto.
You cannot do permanent harm with pot, you cannot "OD" on pot, urban myths.
Alcohol.
I have to ask: how frequently/how much pot do you have to smoke in order to "smoke yourself stupid"? How bad of an addict do you have to be in order to have the perpetual delayed speech, the permanent "lost" gaze, and the constant need to fill conversational gaps with "uhhhh...."?
...
Some people don't need uhhhh.... to uhhhhh... smoke at all.... to.... uhhhh..... what was the question?
You cannot do permanent harm with pot, you cannot "OD" on pot, urban myths.
Possibly, although it is pretty easy to figure out who is a "heavy user" by simply watching or verbally interacting with them. It might not be permanent but there is, at the very least, an effect that lingers well beyond the intended one.
Some people simply zone out, while others are more active in thought while high. My guess is that the active people don't lose/scatter brain pathways.
I giggle a lot and tend to pass out...ah, the good ol' days...
Better of two evils maybe Hung? (not sarcastic) I really don't know because I didn't make it but I am assuming this only has to do with the negative affects of the two drugs.
Possibly, although it is pretty easy to figure out who is a "heavy user" by simply watching or verbally interacting with them. It might not be permanent but there is, at the very least, an effect that lingers well beyond the intended one.
Sounds like cholesterol...
Possibly, although it is pretty easy to figure out who is a "heavy user" by simply watching or verbally interacting with them. It might not be permanent but there is, at the very least, an effect that lingers well beyond the intended one.
The brain has an amazing ability to heal itself even from those drugs that do harm it. Even from heavy meth use the brain will be back to normal dopamine production within a year. Marijuana does not kill brain cells or inhibit production of any hormones. If someone has retarded their social skills through isolation and lack of education you may want to lay that at the door of one aspect of their life, I put it where it truly lies, choice... unless they were born limited. Then marijuana use would not have made a difference.
As stated by another here, the larger town next to me has a city planner, someone I know, who smokes daily, and has since his teens. One of the most articulate, intelligent and outgoing men I have ever known.
The "pot-head" being created by smoking is a myth and always has been.
Hell, I have known people who were competative bodybuilders (before the days of rampant testing) who smoked before they worked out. Not a choice I would have made, but to each their own. He said it helped him to calm down and relax.
the people i know that smoke pot a lot cant seem to get along with people that aren't smoking.
i also know a couple of guys that love their beer and other alcohol and are highly competitive triathletes.
maybe i should be putting my thoughts in the "unpopular opinions" thread?
That is ridiculous, there is no equivalency.
Sorry you can't see it. Do you fear being labeled?
The brain has an amazing ability to heal itself even from those drugs that do harm it. Even from heavy meth use the brain will be back to normal dopamine production within a year. Marijuana does not kill brain cells or inhibit production of any hormones. If someone has retarded their social skills through isolation and lack of education you may want to lay that at the door of one aspect of their life, I put it where it truly lies, choice... unless they were born limited. Then marijuana use would not have made a difference.
As stated by another here, the larger town next to me has a city planner, someone I know, who smokes daily, and has since his teens. One of the most articulate, intelligent and outgoing men I have ever known.
The "pot-head" being created by smoking is a myth and always has been.
Hell, I have known people who were competative bodybuilders (before the days of rampant testing) who smoked before they worked out. Not a choice I would have made, but to each their own. He said it helped him to calm down and relax.
So you recommend it and ascribe benefit?
I do not understand what "chick pot" might be.
But, if I drink a beer that does not make me an alcoholic, if I smoke one cigar a week I am not addicted to tobacco, if I play the lottery once every two weeks so I can dream about "what if" for a week for fun with my wife I am not a gambling addict, if I bungee jump once in a while at the fair because I like the thrill I am not an adrenaline junkie, and if I steal low value items or small amounts of money every now and again consciously I am not a kleptomaniac.
If everyone who does not think like me is "bad" I am an ass.
And even better with pot, eh? You can smoke like an old Rambler and not even approach addiction.
Sorry you can't see it. Do you fear being labeled?
Not remotely, people that do that are ignorant and should be ignored.
So you recommend it and ascribe benefit?
Depends on the individual, how and why they use it.
For me, I use it for medical benefit. Due to my pain level I do not get high off of it, so yes, for that absolutely. There are days that go by when I could not eat without it. It also reduces muscle spasms drastically for me and affects of nerve damage.
As for recreational use, it is very relaxing and fun and does not have the lasting negative affects that alcohol has. Between the two there is no choice IMO. Though this is no longer an option for me and I had long stopped using it for that when I became very ill, I never felt it was a bad thing.
As for the above statement, there is nothing in marijuana that is physically addictive. Some may become mentally dependent on it, but they would become so on
something anyway.
Some may become mentally dependent on it, but they would become so on something anyway.
Wow, that is quite crass and dismissive for such an enlightened fellow.
Please enlighten me.
Someone becomes dependent one something that is not even addictive?
Be serious.
Dude I think ( and I agree) what he is trying to say is some folks are prone to getting hooked on ANYTHING ,
I have seen ex drinkers switch over to Most any thing , from religion to being fanatical about flyfishing ,
Some folks chan't just do and enjoy they just go overboard
I do not understand what "chick pot" might be.
Alcohol tastes like ass (beer even moreso.) But those alcoholic beverages commonly referred to as "chick drinks" are sweet and fruity and taste good. Likewise, pot tastes and smells like ass. But if they ever manage to invent a form of pot which is sweet and fruity and doesn't smell or taste like smoke (not saying it's possible, just making unreasonable requests :)), then its use among college co-eds will skyrocket.
... But if they ever manage to invent a form of pot which is sweet and fruity and doesn't smell or taste like smoke (not saying it's possible, just making unreasonable requests :)), then its use among college co-eds will skyrocket.
Mix one off the shelf brownie mix with desired amount of mary-ja-wanna, bake, and eat.
Mix one off the shelf brownie mix with desired amount of mary-ja-wanna, bake, and eat.
What time is dinner?
Another good, quick, thing one can do if in pain is a Leary biscuit.
A cracker, bud, cheese on top, microwave until cheese is completely melted. Must heat the bud well, microwave a bit before placing the cheese. The heat activates the THC. It works well. Not as fast and "strong" as smoking, but mitigates the negative effects of smoking and the positive effects lasts longer.
Those with muscle spasms and nausea tend to smoke because they want faster relief. Those with nerve pain tend to eat theirs so the effects will last longer. A combination of the two is desirable for those like myself where spasms tear muscle and cause nerve damage.
What can you do drunk that you can't do stoned?
My bf. When I drink too much (more than 2 drinks) I fall asleep.
Weed makes me tired too but still "functional". ;)
You got that backwards. That's something (someone) you can do stoned that you can't do drunk.
I would argue that most addictions are just as much mental as physical. There is research to back this view.
It's very difficult to define why some people become addicted to some things and other people become addicted to other things. Mostly it's about fulfilling some need that isn't being fulfilled through 'normal' means.
Addiction is personal and it's pointless being judgemental either way because you never know when you might be the one addicted to something that society views as inappropiate.
I have a real problem with calling what people are to things like the internet, porn and marijuana "addicted".
I think it is a cop-out.
Addiction is a disease, something physical.
There is nothing physical about a compulsion for something that you are not physically addicted to, they are not the same thing and should be separated semantically.
Would an addiction mean that you experience withdrawal if you do decide to quit?
The "pot-head" being created by smoking is a myth and always has been.
The more I think about this, the more I agree with you. I think I've probably met a lot of people who could be classified as "heavy users" that didn't show it and, therefore, I never knew it. I think the group I'm thinking of tends to conform to the myth, itself, and actively play the part.
Would an addiction mean that you experience withdrawal if you do decide to quit?
Physical withdrawals, not psychological compulsive discomfort... the two have nothing to do with each other.
That is like saying someone is "addicted" to Nintendo or YouTube because they use it as an escape and tension release. It is not a physical addiction.
Correct, it's not a physical addiction. There is, I believe validity in the concept of psychological addiction/dependancy.
new study says alcohol and tobacco are worse than drugs:
Study used "three factors to determine the harm associated with any drug: the physical harm to the user, the drug's potential for addiction, and the impact on society of drug use."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/23/AR2007032300284.htmlCorrect, it's not a physical addiction. There is, I believe validity in the concept of psychological addiction/dependancy.
Certainly, and they are as destructive, but the treatments are different and reasoning for continued use is different.
No one is physically addicted to gambling or stealing either but no one sane argues that they are valid addictions.
Marijuana cannot be classed with schedule 1 drugs or treated like them by anyone with half a brain. It is just politics and
nothing more.
There is no physical withdrawal from crack, but I assure you that you can be addicted to it.
You can be physically addicted to cocane. Duh.
What the fuck difference does it make if it's a physical or psychological addiction? Both types are destructive and both require treatment.
Is there a suggestion that one type of addiction deserves less compassion?
How did you read that into my posts?
I didn't read anything into it. I just asked a question.
They are so different that I don't think they should be classed together.
Someone who has an addictive personality and chooses to get addicted to working out, playstation, pot, religion, etc, etc, etc... and someone who becomes addicted to a substance that their body needs without their wanting it to cannot be compared on any level.
Sure, some of the first choose substances that are physically addictive, but that is only a coincidence and nothing more.
While I understand your point rkz, and also respect your right to hold the opinion you do, research would indicate that it's not as simple as you'd like to suggest.
The links between physical and psychological addictions has been widely documented and is quite contrary to the view you're expressing here.
I believe anyone with any addiction whether it's physical or psychological, or a combination of both deserves the same level of compassion.
While I understand your point rkz, and also respect your right to hold the opinion you do, research would indicate that it's not as simple as you'd like to suggest.
Could I see the research?
Sure you can. I'll give you a few links to look at. Obviously because these sites are free online they're not necessarily recognized as clinical references or the whole article is not available however, if you care to step into any university library you'll find more scientific references which will tell you the same things.
The first one I have here is from
Addiction at Allexperts
The medical community now makes a careful theoretical distinction between physical dependence (characterized by symptoms of withdrawal) and psychological dependence (or simply addiction). Addiction is now narrowly defined as "uncontrolled, compulsive use"; if there is no harm being suffered by, or damage done to, the patient or another party, then clinically it may be considered compulsive, but to the definition of some it is not categorized as "addiction". In practice, however, the two kinds of addiction are not always easy to distinguish. Addictions often have both physical and psychological components.
Another one
A general theory of addictions is proposed, using the compulsive gambler as the prototype. Addiction is defined as a dependent state acquired over time to relieve stress. Two interrelated sets of factors predispose persons to addictions: an abnormal physiological resting state, and childhood experiences producing a deep sense of inadequacy. All addictions are hypothesized to follow a similar three-stage course. A matrix strategy is outlined to collect similar information from different kinds of addicts and normals. The ultimate objective is to identify high risk youth and prevent the development of addictions.
One more
The concepts of dependence, addiction and abuse comprise overlapping clinical phenomena. The earlier anxiolytic drugs, in particular the barbiturates, were prone to abuse, i.e., non-medical use, and to high-dose misuse. Their modern counterparts, the benzodiazepines, are abused in a patchy way and are sometimes taken in regularly high doses. However, the main problem is physical dependence as manifested by a withdrawal syndrome on discontinuation of the drug. The withdrawal syndrome has been carefully described and comprises physical and psychological features.
The resources for these types of studies are not great online, but they're available if you care to do the research through more traditional means.
While I understand your point rkz, and also respect your right to hold the opinion you do, research would indicate that it's not as simple as you'd like to suggest.
The links between physical and psychological addictions has been widely documented and is quite contrary to the view you're expressing here.
I believe anyone with any addiction whether it's physical or psychological, or a combination of both deserves the same level of compassion.
I never said anything about compassion, or a lack thereof.