Narcissistic satisfaction and power is the all-important common denominator in substance and non-substance addictions. A recovering alcoholic person, for example, may become quite a mature and altruistic person. It is fairly well-known fact that the use of heavy doses of opiate-type drugs for the relief of chronic and severe pain seldom results in an opiate addiction. I think the explanation for this phenomenon is inextricably linked to the issue of narcissism.
The conditions of this strongly utilitarian use of opiates precludes enough narcissistic leeway for an addiction to develop. They are true sociopaths, who fail to show any compulsion to drink. Should the results of their alcohol use become too painful, they simply stop drinking quite easily- at least for awhile. I think the reason for this is that, in these alcoholics who are definitely not AA types , there is no inner conflict between the altruistic and narcissistic aspects of the self to fuel the compulsion to drink This is because the former is essentially absent.
The practice of any addiction is an exercise in narcissism. Regression, or the potential for same, is an integral part of any addiction. Substance dependency entails a greater risk of regression than for non-substance addictions.
This is largely because there is the added pharmacological effect of the substance to stimulate narcissism. The phenomenon of regression is very important to understanding substance dependency. By definition, enough regression can result in a psychosis. It is a new diagnosis that I am working to establish. Unfortunately, he erroneously assumed that the mental illness comes first in these cases. But a substance dependency therapist on a dual diagnosis ward schizophrenia and substance dependency reported that, in over half of these cases, it was clear that the dependency came first.
There is a link to an article on the diagnosis at the Mentalhealth. Although nearly all of the uses of the diagnosis involve addictive substances, its criteria completely ignore the issue of substance dependency. Its clinical value is minimal, except when non-addictive substances are involved.
It most certainly is- but it is no ordinary habit. Habits in general can be considered as usually having biological survival value for man and animals. The stronger the habit has become, the stronger is the sometimes irrational accompanying unconscious idea that it is dangerous not to practice the habit. In other words, the alcoholic person unconsciously and often also consciously has some fear of recovery. He writes. You have to reinforce them constantly by acting. The jealous person habitually reproduces his jealousy.
The confident person makes confident choices and thereby regenerates confidence. We all repeat the same kinds of acts, and the underlying premise- jealousy or confidence, whatever- is reinforced in our minds.
Every feeling, attitude, or belief that stays with you is being retained, reinforced, by strands that your choices weave. Choices you make constantly, habitually. This is the basic principle at work every day of your life behind the creation of your personality:. Therefore, it can be more or less ignored so as to be better able to concentrate upon that which is new and potentially dangerous. It is falsely assumed by not only the general public, but also by the psychiatric profession, that alcoholism has a strong genetic or biological element.
This understanding supports biological theorizing- because genes control the basic biochemical make-up of the organism. It also fosters hope that eventually a medication will be found to neutralize or eliminate the harmful effects of an alcohol dependency by getting at the inner-most source or workings of the disorder.
But the reality is that no such possibility exists like insulin for diabetes. This is despite the fact that women were also included in the study.
Most importantly, the use of identical and fraternal twin comparison studies has never supported a genetic etiology for alcoholism. And such a study is the most reliable genetic investigating tool available. The real diagnosis is usually one of a somewhat atypical substance dependency- with or without various psychiatric complications. And the use of not-indicated medication in their treatment is at best a needless risk and a waste of money- and too often acts as a direct hindrance. Very much contrary to current psychiatric understanding and practice, George Vailant wrote that bipolar illness is not more common in alcoholics than in the general population.
Once under-diagnosed, bipolar illness has become greatly over-diagnosed due to the subtle, but still seductive expectation of being able to effectively and easily treat it with medication. Here we have a sorry situation where a non-existent disease is being treated- while the actual disease was likely largely being ignored. Probably the worst thing about this type of false diagnosis is that it offers substance dependents a dangerous, though subtle rationalization to de-emphasize their need for complete abstinence from the substance.
And then the non-existent bipolar illness is simply considered to have gotten worse. There obviously is no intrinsic reason why an interest in biochemistry has to result in the antipsychological, mechanistic, and overly simplistic thinking of mainstream psychiatry.
Their work has obvious relevance for substance dependency and SDIPs. They write:. Are comparable needs being met through alcoholism, overeating, and membership in a spiritually oriented group? Today it is applied to a range of compulsive behaviors as disparate as working too hard and eating too much chocolate. In fact, there are essential biological, psychological and social common denominators between drug use and other habitual behaviors.
Whether your pleasure is meditation or mescaline, cocaine or cults, you are addicted if you cannot control when you start or stop an activity. In this book we examine the age-old search for pleasure, finally from a new perspective.
We transcend the inconclusive debate that surrounds substance abuse and focus instead on more basic issues of human compulsion and loss of control. The enslaving drive to feel good is inadequately explained as a function of a weakness of character, chemical imbalance, or spiritual defect….
The drug of choice is actually a pharmacological defense mechanism; it bolsters already established patterns for managing psychological threat. People do not become addicted to drugs or mood-altering behaviors as such, but rather to the sensations of pleasure that can be achieved through them.
One group of Lacandons put on one of their traditional ceremonies for us with a psychoactive drug called balche , a tree bark. The other sacred plant of this tribe — as of most Indians in the Americas — is tobacco. I have been with Indian tribes who will tell you at great length about their psychedelic plants and magical plants, but will not take you to see their tobacco plants; they are the big magic.
You could write volumes about how our civilization has gone wrong in its relationship with that most addictive of all psychoactive plants. The reason was that acid rain was coming over from petroleum refineries on the Vera Cruz coast, hundreds of miles from this rain forest.
That, to them, was a sign of doom, a sign of the end of their civilization. Not long ago a friend sent me an article that had appeared in Science magazine in From one billion to two billion was a tiny fraction of that time, but still long. The increase from two billion to four billion has occurred within my lifetime; it took about thirty years.
Of course, long before the population of the world could get near that point, there would be disasters of one sort or another — epidemics, wars, famines, or whatever. Very few scientists believe that the earth can support much more than twenty billion people. The view of population biologists at the time was that the rate of increase of population was slowing — an optimistic message. This means that the end of the world — or at least the end of civilization as we know it — is really not far off.
We can assume that the disasters that will accompany this population increase will occur well within our lifetimes. The reasons for our impending global catastrophes have a lot to do with addictive behavior.
The world population increase, for example, has a lot to do with addiction to sex. The destruction of the rain forests and the pollution of the oceans and the atmosphere have a lot to do with addiction to power and money. I believe that addiction is a fundamental problem at the core of being human, as well as at the core of all of the specific problems we have in the world today.
I also feel very strongly that addiction is a universal problem. Recently I watched a movie made in All of the characters in it smoked all of the time.
That was the thing to do. But the legacy of the s and the years before has conditioned our thinking about tobacco addiction. There was a belief in the s and s that smoking facilitated concentration. In World War II, soldiers were issued cigarettes in their rations. And you need only look back to the s to find doctors selling cigarettes in Life magazine. Only within the past ten years was the American Medical Association forced by its own constituents to divest itself of tobacco stock.
As a student at Harvard Medical School between and , I was taught that tobacco was not addictive — a health problem, yes, in that it led to emphysema and lung cancer, but not a word about its being addictive. It was considered a psychological habit and therefore unimportant. Not that we heard much about other addictions either, except for a little bit about heroin, which was presented as the model or prototype of addiction.
For years I have urged people to see smoking for what it is. If you pull up at a stoplight and notice a person in the next car lighting up a cigarette, look at that behavior: heroin addicts only have to do it once, twice, three times a day, but tobacco addicts have to get a fix every twenty minutes. Every twenty minutes the brain demands that hit of nicotine in that form — a discrete pulse of a high dose of nicotine coming through the arterial system.
Or take addiction to work, or addiction to making money. Addiction, understood in this way, represents a prominent feature of the entire Western civilization, which has lost the connection with its inner resources. First of all, if addiction is the attitude that various aspects of the material world make us feel all right, then what about sexual addiction?
Is that a material addiction? It may involve physical organs and other people, but it is an addiction to an experience, an inner experience. And how about addiction to thought?
You could look at universities as monuments to thought addiction, places where you are rewarded for the beauty, complexity, or novelty of the thoughts you produce. Given this social context with its social rewards, why would you even entertain the notion that thought could be addictive?
I maintain that the essence of addiction is craving for an experience or object to make you feel all right. Addiction is fundamentally human; it affects everybody. This is a common attitude, one that puts me off about some twelve-step programs. Proper guidance is highly recommended. Many after the experience claim to be healed from mental and physical ailments. Will the medical community embrace this alternate therapy and explore its possible uses in treatment for depression, alcohol and other drug related issues.
Weil is common in this new frontier where it is unclear where to stand on the issue of treating drug addictions with…drugs. Hmmm… with information about drugs like ayahuasca and Ibogaine surfacing in the treatment world we are excited to see what the future holds for addiction medicine.
I am super grateful! Find out if you qualify for free treatment to fight this deadly disease. Learn More. From two billion to four billion has occurred within my lifetime; it took about thirty years. Von Forster's prediction is that from four billion to eight billion will be about fifteen years, from eight billion to sixteen billion around seven and a half years, and so forth. On the basis of this, he drew a curve that described this expansion and concluded that somewhere around the year , plus or minus five years, the population of the world would reach infinity-that is all the mass of the earth would have been converted to people.
Therefore, the end of the world would be by squeezing to death. Obviously, long before the population of the world got near infinity, there would be disasters of one sort or another -epidemics, wars, famines, or whatever.
When the article appeared in it was roundly denounced in subsequent issues of "Science" by mathematicians and population biologists. The theme of population biologists at that time was that the rate of increase of population was slowing, and therefore population biologists were putting out an optimistic message. However, a long letter appeared in "Science" in April of last year by a population biologist who urged readers to remember von Forster and the doomsday curve, and pointed out that the actual increase in world population since has not only conformed to von Forster's prediction, but in fact is slightly ahead of it.
That means that the end of the world, or at least the end of civilization as we know it, is really not far off.
I would assume that the disasters that will come in the wake of this population increase will happen much before It could happen within twenty years - well within our lifetimes.
The reasons for the global catastrophes that are coming have a lot to do with addictive behavior. The world population increase has a lot to do with addiction to sex, for example. The destruction of rainforests and the pollution of oceans and atmospheres has a lot to do with addiction to power and to money. The subject of addiction cannot be taken out of the context of the imminence of the end of life as we know it.
Roger Walsh has said that he thinks that addiction is the fundamental problem. I could not agree with that more. It's fundamental in every sense of the word. It is a deep core problem. It is at the core of being human. It's also at the core of all of the specific problems that we have in the world today. I can think of no area in which it is more important to try to get help for ourselves and for everyone.
I also feel very strongly that addiction is a universal problem. All of us are taken up in addictive behavior. Hopefully, we are in a process of change now where we are beginning to see the universality of addiction. But still there is a tendency to focus on some kinds of addictions as the ones that are serious and to ignore others either because they are socially acceptable or because they don't fit our conceptual model of what addiction is.
I watched a movie the other night that was made in in black and white. All of the characters in the movie smoked. No wonder that generations of Americans were fascinated by smoking! We are living at a time when that social consensus is changing. Smoking is becoming unfashionable. If you talk to any smoker you will hear how irritated they are about how unfashionable it is becoming. It's a very different situation from the s. But that legacy of the s and the years before conditioned our thinking about tobacco addiction.
In World War II soldiers were issued cigarettes in their rations. There was a tendency in the s and s to encourage people to smoke in the belief that smoking facilitated concentration. You only have to look back to the s to Life magazine to find doctors selling cigarettes.
You will find full page ads of doctors in white coats with mirrors on their heads, holding out packages of Old Golds saying, "I recommend these to all my patients because they're soothing to the throat. That was forty years ago. It was only within the past ten years that the American Medical Association was forced to divest itself of tobacco stock by voices of protest from its constituents.
When I was a student in Harvard Medical School between and , I was taught that tobacco was not addictive.
I was taught that it was a health problem in that it led to emphysema and lung cancer, but there was not a word about it being addictive. It was a psychological habit and therefore unimportant. So it was not discussed. We didn't hear much about what they considered real addictions, either. Basically we heard a little bit about heroin addiction, which was the model or prototype of addiction.
Tobacco did not fit that model so it wasn't taken seriously. Nobody paid any attention to it, and that consensus was so strong and it so affected American science that no one even did research to find out why that substance had such a powerful control over people's behavior.
0コメント