![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 15 of 15. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by utopizen on August 8, 2005, at 10:24:27
No drug, including Heroin, is addictive. If it were, that suggests there's a pathology to it all, which there isn't. Isn't not even a mental disorder, but a symptomology, if you scrutinize the DSM-IV (this is ellaborated in the book, "Addiction is a CHOICE")
Heroin takes 6 days to go off of completely. Methadone takes 6 months.
Stop believing these drug researchers reinforcing your habituation by making you feel powerless to drugs. Your brain does not force your hand to ingest medicine into itself. It's a conscious choice you make while you are aware of your surroundings. Not until AA was founded by religious zealots that the word "addiction" entered a negative light.
In other words, nothing's your fault, except taking substances. There's no such thing as "chemical dependency" either. People might need some Klonopin to prevent seizures during withdrawl, but that's it. I've taken lots of methamphetamine from my doctor, for years, and not once have I ever become "dependent" on it. People who use that word couldn't even explain to you what the heck it means. It's like someone using the word "instictual."
[Birds fly South for the winter out of instinct = I have no clue, but hopefully that makes you think I answered your question, son."]
And if I hear the word "neurotoxic" one more time, I will scream.
We still are figuring out at what level corrosive metals are toxic to the body, let alone the brain. And people think they can figure out if METH is neurotoxic?
How the heck do you control THAT study? Does it not dawn on anyone meth users tend not to eat, sleep, become malnourished, never exercise, etc., which they typically would do whether they took meth or not (e.g., truck drivers)?
And am I the only one who realizes that neurons have extremely short half-lives? And that methamphetamine's primary mechanism of action is to prolong a neuron's half life?
The neurons are restored in sleeping, eating, and absitence from the meth. That said, if anyone here thinks meth on the street is actually meth, they probably deserve to get messed up in it. I just take it for ADD like lots of people do these days.
So if I hear one more post about "neurotoxicity" in a drug, please for my own sanity note that "toxicology itself is a very primitive science, and neurotoxicity is confined to rodent experiments alone."
Researchers have already admitted MDMA and METH are far more different in their affect to the brain than they are in humans.
There is no way to measure neurotoxicity in a human brain. You'd have to work with primate animals, and that neglects the fact that primates trapped in cages all day tend to enter depressed states, which is known to lead to brain atropy. (Hence, the cause of holes in the brains of apes brain scans showed after MDMA was ingested).
Don't do drugs, but if you think you're "addicted" to benzos, alcohol, or amphetamines, keep in mind the only real thing anyone's addicted to in this case is loneliness, meaningless lives, and living without a vocation to call their own.
Drugs become the make-up for the hallow men we all are.
Posted by john berk on August 8, 2005, at 10:24:28
In reply to Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by utopizen on August 7, 2005, at 8:50:15
HI!! ALCOHOLISM WAS A TERM COINED BY RESEARCHERS IN THE LATE 1800'S, WELL BEFORE A.A., TO DESCRIBE PEOPLE WHO SEEMED INCAPABLE OF CONTROLLING THEIR ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION!! I DON'T TOTALLY AGREE WITH THE "DISEASE" THEORY OF ALCOHOLISM OR ADDICTION, BUT I KNOW AT SOME POINT, IN CERTAIN BIOCHEMICALLY PREDISPOSED INDIVIDUALS, ALCOHOL IS NO LONGER PROCESSED THE SAME BY THE LIVER, AND BRAIN CHEMISTRY HAS BEEN CHANGED WHEREIN A SUBSTANCE KNOWN AS THIQ [I BELIEVE] REACTS TO INGESTION OF ALCOHOL SO THE ALCOHOLIC CANNOT, I REPEAT, CANNOT CONTROL HIS ALCOHOLIC CONSUMPTION!! I COULD TAKE OR LEAVE ALCOHOL FOR YEARS, AND WAS KNOWN AS A "LIGHTWEIGHT AMONGST MY TEENAGE CREW, BUT AT A CERTAIN POINT, WHERE I WAS EMPLOYED AND NOT DEPRESSED, ALCOHOL WAS NO LONGER AN OPTION, AND WHEN I DRANK IT BECAME A NEED!! I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT NEUROTOXICITY, BUT I DO KNOW ABOUT SELF-RESPONSIBILITY, AND I KNOW QUITE A FEW PEOPLE, LIKE MYSELF, THAT "CRAVE SOBRIETY, BUT IT IS MUCH EASIER SAID THAN DONE!!
ALCOHOL, LIKE DRUGS, ARE TOXIC TO THE MIND AND BODY, AND I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR ALCOHOL, BUT IT DOES CAUSE SUBTLE, BUT PERMANET CHANGES IN BRAIN CHEMISTRY!!I KNOW PEOPLE WITH 10 YEARS SOBRIETY, WITH GREAT JOBS AND FUTURES, WHO ARE STILL HAUNTED BY THE PROSPECT OF DRINKING!! THEY CAN'T ALL BE SELF-ABSORBED PEOPLE WITH NO SELF-CONTROL !! FURTHER RESEARCH IS NECESSARY!! PEACE...JOHN
Posted by Declan on August 8, 2005, at 10:24:28
In reply to Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by utopizen on August 7, 2005, at 8:50:15
As a six month methadone person I have mixed feelings about this. I dunno, some drugs are more toxic than others. The morally compromised and ethically hopeless categories arising from such as the war on drugs need no further comment from me. But addiction is one I do use, for opioids, benzos, barbiturates, alcohol, is all, I think. I don't like the extension of that category to stimulants, THC, gambling etc etc.
But hey, utopizen, I did like the stuff about hollow, lonely, empty, meaningless lives without a vocation. You did a great post ages ago about this where you talked about small, good, meaningful actions. Some of us have to live with courage, go without meaning, and be as good as we can.
Declan
Posted by linkadge on August 8, 2005, at 10:24:28
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable. » utopizen, posted by Declan on August 7, 2005, at 14:52:01
Meth is as neurotoxic as it comes. Brain scans of long term meth abusers look like swiss cheeze.
Linkadge
Posted by djmmm on August 8, 2005, at 10:24:28
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by linkadge on August 7, 2005, at 17:02:31
> Meth is as neurotoxic as it comes. Brain scans of long term meth abusers look like swiss cheeze.
>
>
> LinkadgeCheck out FACES OF METH...a pictorial of meth abusers (before and after)
naturally, there are many factors that would cause such sudden changes in these people. I have to believe that neurotoxicity is one of the many effects oxidative stress has on one's body.
Posted by Dr. Bob on August 8, 2005, at 10:26:50
In reply to Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by utopizen on August 7, 2005, at 8:50:15
> AA was founded by religious zealots
Please be sensitive to the feelings of others.
If you or others have questions about this or about posting policies in general, or are interested in alternative ways of expressing yourself, please see the FAQ:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
Follow-ups regarding these issues should be redirected to Psycho-Babble Administration. They, as well as replies to the above post, should of course themselves be civil.
Thanks,
Bob
Posted by linkadge on August 8, 2005, at 22:02:30
In reply to Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by utopizen on August 7, 2005, at 8:50:15
There is some reasearch to suggest that certain genetics play a role in weather a person will continue to administer certain substances.
We've known for a long time that there are certain breeds of mice that are more resistant to the reinforcing properties of cocaine. Some will sit there and press a lever indefinately while others will let go and get back to eating.
Linkadge
Posted by rjlockhart98 on August 8, 2005, at 22:02:30
In reply to Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by utopizen on August 7, 2005, at 8:50:15
I asked for advice on a couple posts about stimulant withdrawl, guess you had other plans.....
Matt
Posted by Phillipa on August 8, 2005, at 23:10:31
In reply to Re: utopizen where have you been lately, posted by rjlockhart98 on August 8, 2005, at 19:34:44
Yikes! What happened to those people's faces? Why the red marks on some and some almost look better. Fondly, Phillipa
Posted by linkadge on August 10, 2005, at 15:47:20
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by djmmm on August 8, 2005, at 8:36:39
Yeah, I checked out that "faces of meth" page. That one picture was shown on Oprah. That is where I saw some of the brain imaging photos too.
Linkadge
Posted by AMD on August 17, 2005, at 9:23:40
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by linkadge on August 7, 2005, at 17:02:31
The question I have is, does one-time use of meth cause serious, irreversible damage? And, if not, how long would it take to recover from that?
I ask because I'm spooked I may have taken some in a blacked-out stupor last week -- not sure, as I crashed a couple hours later, and don't remember much -- and I'm freaking out that now my mathematical abilities will be gone, my concentration kaput, etc. I know this is a horrible, horrible drug, and I'm wondering if recovery from even a single dose is possible.
amd
Posted by Declan on August 17, 2005, at 15:40:56
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable. » linkadge, posted by AMD on August 17, 2005, at 9:23:40
'Single dose' can cover a lot of territory. I took a single dose once that took me a week and some Stellazine (and the rest) to get over. It would kill me now (stroke, BP).
Declan
Posted by ed_uk on August 19, 2005, at 14:53:42
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable., posted by Declan on August 17, 2005, at 15:40:56
It would take me a week to get over a single dose of Stelazine ;-)
~ed
Posted by Declan on August 19, 2005, at 16:54:27
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable. » Declan, posted by ed_uk on August 19, 2005, at 14:53:42
Hey Ed, even though Stellazine is such awful stuff......I once was silly enough to eat a lump of pharmaceutical methylamphetamine the size of a pea, so it must have been, God knows, the best part of a gram.
Anyway I didn't really come down, several days later my mood was very labile alternating between euphoria and suicidal depression, and no sleep of course. Benzos had no effect. (Maybe I'd created in myself a bipolar state, is this what is meant by rapid cycling?)
In desperation I took a few mgs of Stellazine and it all just stopped like magic. I went to sleep and returned to normal. Only needed one dose.
I must have been a worry to my parents.
Declan
Posted by ed_uk on August 21, 2005, at 7:30:21
In reply to Re: Neurotoxicity is not conclusively provable. » ed_uk, posted by Declan on August 19, 2005, at 16:54:27
Hi Declan,
Antipsychotics are pretty good for meth overdose huh? Serenace starts to look nice ;-)
~ed
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Substance Use | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.