Mortality stats

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Fawteen
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
If you disagree, I suggest you talk to a Doctor. We are talking about a disease.


I would fire a doctor who thought addiction was a disease.

I would suggest you read "The Biology of Desire: Why Addiction Is Not a Disease" by Dr. Marc Lewis (a neuroscientist and former drug addict).

Dr Gene Heyman, a Harvard psychologist also wrote a good book-"Addiction: A Disorder of Choice".

CMAJ published a paper in 2012 by Tim Holden that also clearly showed that addiction is not a disease. The conclusion was that at best, addiction is a maladaptive response to an underlying condition, such as a nonspecific inability to cope with daily life and stress.

Both dispel the disease nonsense by using reasoned, intelligent arguments and facts.

Addiction is a disease.


No it's not. It's a choice, at least at the beginning. It's a choice for me to go outside and have a cigarette to get my nicotine fix. It's a choice for an alcoholic to keep opening bottles. It's a pill popper's choice to keep taking those pills. It's the affects of the addiction that ends up being a disease. The result of me possibly getting lung cancer from smoking is a disease.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Originally Posted by Mr Nice
Quote
My 6'2" younger sister was injured playing college basketball at an NCAA division 1 school. She was fed pain pills by the team DR.
If you think that didn't happen in sports, your a fool.


Idiot reckless doctors like that need to be in jail.




The main selling point for the opioids was that they were not addictive. But now we know that the manufacturers did not have the scientific facts behind that claim.


Maybe in 1920. It's been a long time that we've known opiates are physically addictive.
 
My wife had some minor skin surgery and the surgeon asked her 3 times to take the Rx for an opiate. Said he couldn't call it in and she should take the Rx. She couldn't believe how much the dr pushed the pills on her and it's no wonder we have an opioid problem in this country. I'm having hernia repair surgery next week and the Dr. said he'd give me 20 narcotic pain killers. I think I'm going to stick with Tylenol or Celebrex. We need to make taking these high powered drugs more socially taboo. Just because it's legal and you have a Rx doesn't make them safe. My surgery pain will temporary. I can suffer through a couple days of discomfort without needing narcotics. Save the narcotics for the really severe pain.
 
My addiction was/is nicotine. Betcha can't have just one. Yup!! You would not believe the rationalizing I've done around that fact. I cannot smoke just one cigarette and why would I stop. Blah blah blah. I still smoke, I just don't smoke tobacco.. The synthetic Opiods were touted over opium derivatives because they were non-addictive. More doctors smoke Camels too. Except they are addictive. Can't get pills, go to heroin. Heroin cut with Fentanyl . Lotta people made money from peoples' misery. Candy flavored nicotine delivery systems are insidious and should be banned Nicotine should not be sold be sold in non-tobacco forms and those should be regulated by content.
 
Originally Posted by billt460
What has changed? Obviously not the medication. So it's the attitude and behavior of the consumer who is taking it..


Norton, Virginia is a city of 4,000 people. It is actually the smallest city (not town or village, actual city) in all of Virginia. At one point, the outright number of prescriptions written in Norton exceeded the number of people in the city and it would be enough to supply each resident with 306 pills. Over a six year period, the WalMart in Norton received 3.5 million pills. The CVS, 1.3 million.

That's the worst in the nation, but there are plenty more that are really close.

With numbers like that, you're gonna tell me that the pharma companies had no idea what was going on and they hold no responsibility? Pharma was the first to know of the abuse. What did they do? Kept shipping pills and collecting cash.

Not going after pharma is like locking up every coke user and dealer, but saying Pablo Escobar didn't do anything wrong and leaving him alone.

America tried to curtail drug use in the 1980s by heavily prosecuting on the demand (user) side. It was called The War on Drugs. America lost that war. This time around, it's not a cartel that pushed the product onto the streets, it was doctors and pharma companies. They all knew. Maybe going after them will be a fight America can win.
 
Originally Posted by Pew
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Addiction is a disease.

No it's not. It's a choice, at least at the beginning. It's a choice for me to go outside and have a cigarette to get my nicotine fix. It's a choice for an alcoholic to keep opening bottles. It's a pill popper's choice to keep taking those pills. It's the affects of the addiction that ends up being a disease. The result of me possibly getting lung cancer from smoking is a disease.

I agree. It's NOT a disease. That's a cop out. Ebola, cancer, muscular dystrophy, are diseases. You catch them. They "come to you". Alcohol and drugs are knowingly ingested. And you KNOW when you are abusing them.

"Heart disease" is another cop out. A guy smokes 3 packs a day, is 5' 7" tall and weighs 350 pounds and doesn't move a muscle all day long. And he eats bacon and eggs every day for breakfast for 45 years.... And all of a sudden he is plagued with, "heart disease". Nonsense. If he exercised, didn't smoke, and in the process harden and clog his arteries full of fat and cholesterol, he would have never contracted "heart disease" in the first place.

Just because you can't, or else refuse to stop drinking, or taking prescription medication beyond what the doctor prescribed, doesn't make it a "disease". Besides, as I pointed out in my above post, we've had these opiate pain killing drugs for almost a century. Why are we only now seeing a disproportionate amount of deaths? It's not the doctors fault. They don't put on the instructions, "Take all you want". All prescriptions come with very specific, limited dosages. If the patient ignores the doctors instructions and takes more, that is not the doctors fault.

Nor is it the drug manufacturers fault. The medication they manufacture is strictly regulated by the FDA. Just as guns are by the ATF. You have to be licensed to produce them. If laws are broken, and in the process people die, that is NOT the manufacturers fault unless they sold them illegally. That is hardly, if ever the case. Be it Smith & Wesson, or Eli Lilly.

It all comes down to the individual, along with PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. There is less of it today, and because of that we have a much higher per capita percentage of addicts. Most actual diseases are shrinking in numbers. As people and the health care industry come up with new medicines and procedures to combat them. Drug addiction is on the rise. And dodging personal responsibility to place the blame on doctors and drug manufacturers, along with tagging it with a cop out name like a "disease", is much of the reason why.
 
Originally Posted by MrHorspwer
Norton, Virginia is a city of 4,000 people. It is actually the smallest city (not town or village, actual city) in all of Virginia. At one point, the outright number of prescriptions written in Norton exceeded the number of people in the city and it would be enough to supply each resident with 306 pills. Over a six year period, the WalMart in Norton received 3.5 million pills. The CVS, 1.3 million.That's the worst in the nation, but there are plenty more that are really close. With numbers like that, you're gonna tell me that the pharma companies had no idea what was going on and they hold no responsibility?

The doctors who were writing the prescriptions are the one's who are responsible for prescribing the drugs. Along with the drug stores that were filling them. Not the drug companies for manufacturing them. If Smith & Wesson ships a large number of AR-15's to a licensed FFL dealer, in a given town, and that dealer indiscriminately sells them to unqualified people who should not have them, is that S&W's fault?

Going by your example, why didn't Wal-Mart or CVS start asking questions and making phone calls? They were the people who were putting all of these drugs directly into the peoples hands within their own community. Licensed pharmacists are not idiots. They knew the numbers were way out of whack before anyone else did.

Why didn't they call someone? You're selling tons of opiate medication well beyond the norm, and yet they said and did nothing? Something doesn't make sense here. Certainly not enough to point the finger at the manufacturer.
 
Originally Posted by JeffKeryk
In alcoholism or drug addiction there is no moderation.
Im my case there is no choice; no control. Otherwise I could have "just 1 beer".
Sobriety is a gift.

If you disagree, I suggest you talk to a Doctor. We are talking about a disease.

It is not a disease . You can call it a disease but what ever. I can decide to drink a beer or do some meth [making an effort to buy the booze or drugs] but I can not decide to get a flu or pneumonia [caused by a virus or bacteria].. Call it a disease if you want to. What ever keeps you clean and sober is 100% awesome to me. I give accolades for people doing something they are supposed to do.
 
Originally Posted by Alfred_B
Suddenly we have a lot of psychiatrists on the board.



Yeah, you gotta be crazy to see a psychiatrist.

Maybe we're all crazy?
 
A lot of bias confirmation. You can always find some expert somewhere to agree with any opinions you have. My ex wife is an alcoholic. My wife's ex husband is an alcoholic.

I have early stages of heart disease with LVH.

You can throw type 2 diabetes in the not a disease category if you want but it's always something.
 
Originally Posted by skyactiv


My 6'2" younger sister was injured playing college basketball at an NCAA division 1 school. She was fed pain pills by the team DR.
If you think that didn't happen in sports, your a fool.



I'm assuming your sister was at least 18 years old at the time? By college age, most of us are expected to be mature enough to make wise decisions for ourselves. We are allowed to vote, buy alcohol, buy firearms, and our parents are no longer legally responsible for us. By that age we should also be wise enough to know the importance of understanding the risk involved in important decisions. Like what medication to take. Are there alternatives? If I do take it, what is the minimum dosage that will still work? How long can I take it without risk?

Unless the doctors and pharmacies that prescribed and dispensed the opioids to your sister totally deceived her of the potential risk, then isn't she, as an adult, responsible for what addiction she may have had? Even 40 years ago, doctors and pharmacists would caution patients about avoiding addictive medications unless absolutely needed to manage pain. and then only use it as long as needed. So it's hard for me to imagine that ignorance of the risk is really a thing, unless you've been living in a proverbial cave for your adult life.

I'm a huge believer in personal responsibility for one's own actions. Sure, there are times when the actions of others are out of our control. There are some exceptions when we may not be ready to be fully responsible for our actions, such as mental illness or immaturity. But the rest of us need to step up to the plate and bat for ourselves. Stop expecting someone else to be responsible for everything bad that happens to us.

Why is it that the good ole USA is the worst country in the world where people expect others to be responsible when things go wrong? The cost of litigation in the USA, compared to the rest of the world, shows this.
 
Originally Posted by BHopkins
Originally Posted by skyactiv
My 6'2" younger sister was injured playing college basketball at an NCAA division 1 school. She was fed pain pills by the team DR.
If you think that didn't happen in sports, your a fool.

I'm assuming your sister was at least 18 years old at the time? By college age, most of us are expected to be mature enough to make wise decisions for ourselves. We are allowed to vote, buy alcohol, buy firearms, and our parents are no longer legally responsible for us. By that age we should also be wise enough to know the importance of understanding the risk involved in important decisions. Like what medication to take. Are there alternatives? If I do take it, what is the minimum dosage that will still work? How long can I take it without risk?

Unless the doctors and pharmacies that prescribed and dispensed the opioids to your sister totally deceived her of the potential risk, then isn't she, as an adult, responsible for what addiction she may have had? Even 40 years ago, doctors and pharmacists would caution patients about avoiding addictive medications unless absolutely needed to manage pain. and then only use it as long as needed. So it's hard for me to imagine that ignorance of the risk is really a thing, unless you've been living in a proverbial cave for your adult life.

I'm a huge believer in personal responsibility for one's own actions. Sure, there are times when the actions of others are out of our control. There are some exceptions when we may not be ready to be fully responsible for our actions, such as mental illness or immaturity. But the rest of us need to step up to the plate and bat for ourselves. Stop expecting someone else to be responsible for everything bad that happens to us.

Why is it that the good ole USA is the worst country in the world where people expect others to be responsible when things go wrong? The cost of litigation in the USA, compared to the rest of the world, shows this.


Very well said.
 
I recently had back surgery (fusion) and I have a multitude of tattoos and piercings and you should have seen the looks on the pharmacists and their aides when I filled my prescription (oxycodone) 10 mg and a muscle relaxer. They even asked if I wanted free Narcan with that, no kidding! My wife said the Narcan thing is normal now with most everyone, take it or leave it. They definitely were profiling my appearance and I don't even drink or smoke and never had a moving traffic violation and always have been completely drug free.
 
Originally Posted by SeaJay


If there are other substances that can be deadly for someone kicking a cold turkey, I'd be interested in hearing of them. Otherwise, it just takes someone that really wants to do it and be done with the addiction.


Trying to withdraw from benzodiazapines without medical aid, can cause seizures and death.
 
The ability to control addiction depends largely on a person's neuro-chemistry.

Everyone has different neuro-chemistry and some people can control their addictive nature no better than some other person can decide not to have leukemia or eczema. Yes, all addicts have to take that first step to start drinking or taking drugs but, people are not told in-advance that their neuro-chemistry is stacked against them or to what degree. Does someone in their teens know they'll develop rheumatoid arthritis in 30 years? Guess what... Neuro-chemistry and rheumatoid arthritis are largely controlled by hormones. I sure wish I could talk myself out of rheumatoid arthritis!

If you've ever known someone with lifelong, chronic depression, you know what an addict is up against. You can tell such a person to be happy and to exercise and do all the right things to not be depressed -and you just might find them hanging from the rafters someday anyhow. Once a person has a problem with neuro-chemistry, fixing that problem is not always possible.

Some people suffer with various forms of mental illness. Some are born that way, some turn that way once adolescent hormones kick in, some people begin to experience symptoms after traumatic experiences (PTSD) or long term stress. (In this day and age, I think we can all agree we're exposed to a lot of stress). A lot of people have underlying neuro-chemistry issues and as soon as they reach a certain age, they begin to seek-out drugs or alcohol.

There are plenty of cases where people without neuro-chemical problems decide to take drugs or alcohol and it becomes habitual for them. It doesn't take long for someone's neuro-chemistry to change because of those drugs or alcohol. Once the chemical changes have taken place, it may be difficult or impossible to reverse the effects. In those cases yes, it was self-induced. Yes, we're all supposed to make good choices -but sometimes people don't. Tell me you never made a big mistake...

Everyone is different. Some people can over-come addiction, some cannot.

Is drug and alcohol addiction a disease? I think so. Should addicts be self-responsible? To the extent they're able, yes. Is ever person in the world smart enough to always make good decisions? No. In every society in the world, approximately 10% of the population has a problematic addiction. Are all them going to recover? No!
 
Originally Posted by billt460
"Many states and municipalities have filed lawsuits against opioid drug makers that they blame for a national addiction crisis."

This is becoming the new norm. People are killing themselves left and right because they are misusing the product. And right away we have to blame the manufacturer. It's happening with firearms. Now it's with pain killers. It's completely insane. Oxycodone has existed since 1916. It was first introduced to America in 1939. Percodan came on the market in 1950.

Most all of these opiate pain killers have all been around in one form or another for close to a century. Now, all of a sudden, we have a big problem with people dropping dead to the tune of over 40,000 a year because they either can't, or won't follow the instructions that are printed on the bottle of every one of them that is prescribed.

What has changed? Obviously not the medication. So it's the attitude and behavior of the consumer who is taking it. When I had major knee, inner ear, as well as 2 hernia surgeries, I was prescribed narcotic pain killers for all of them. I followed the directions precisely. I never had a single issue. I quit taking them after the pain subsided enough to where I could go without them. With my first major knee surgery back in 1972, that was for over 4 months because I had complications.

It didn't matter because I never became addicted. Again, I followed the directions on the prescription bottle. "Every 4 hours, with no more than 4 pills in a 24 hour period", does not mean take 15 a day, and you'll get a great buzz on. This is what is happening.

Doctors are now forced to change how they prescribe this medication. Even to elderly patients who have never had an issue with it. And who many have been on for months. Even years on end because they live in constant pain. They now have to suffer, or else have to go through some B.S. "Pain Management" class, before their doctor can even write a refillable prescription for them.

Even then they have strict limitations they did not have to deal with before. As a result they now have to live in pain, when before they did not. They use the drugs properly, and without issues. But are now forced to suffer because others do not.

None of this nonsense is going to change anything. Any more than including these stupid "gun locks" will prevent firearm accidents. The easy way out never solves the problem. All of this falls under the, "Well, we have to do something!" pretext. Much like gun control, "Something" is rarely if ever the right thing.


Excellent synopsis.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Do you know your biological age vs. your chronological age?
Replies
8
Views
982
CharBaby
GON
Misleading headline regarding home foreclosures; is there any integrity in media sources?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
1K
SC Maintenance
S
Will generative AI take your job? Full paper
2
Replies
24
Views
948
Dave Hess
Torrid
Ford recalls 43,000 SUVs due to gas leaks that can cause fires, but doesnt fix leaks
Replies
12
Views
666
dogememe
buster
  • Locked
Chinese Hospitals Are Housing Another Deadly Outbreak
2
Replies
36
Views
2K
wwillson
Back
Top