Uh, I think you need to learn more about both. Dependency on either is often a side of a far deeper health problem: mental illness. Both dependencies begin as a coping mechanism to relieve the severity of clinical depression, bipolar disease, among other potentially treatable illnesses if only the government would force the damned insurance companies to lower their excessive profits and pay for mental health treatment too.
Yes. Ow-www. Medical rather than criminal, are addictions. Addiction, including alcohol, drug, are not a choice but an illness. Ignorant "sees" what eyes tell them, response is, "Just?, don't!" And THAT is victim-blaming. "Stop being ill." (Try that with cancer). Behavior addictions like gambling and eating disorders--debilitating, requiring "an intervention" and long-term sustained forms of support, but still ignorance is strong and an ignorant-form of kindness says, "You must enjoy it or you'd stop," restricting behaviors, excessive exercising behaviors, gambling behaviors, or, say, living outside in public, scared to be alone, when a person is mentally ill. Assume Karen Carpenter's parents were kind and wanted for her what "she" apparently wanted, but she was mentally ill and required care and treatment to veto her illness's irresistible behaviors, fighting on 2-fronts, inability to resist and efforts of supporters to separate a person from their debilitating impulsive irresistible behaviors or addiction. Doubting observers say, "I can't see your problem ..." UNDERSTAND instead that The person is ILL. Treatment, including long-term supports are required, some people need help to live their life and they'll say it, though they may not have the insight to understand themself--pendulum that did treat mental illness swung. While behaviors appear to be choices, a complaint is/ was that mal-coping behaviors were TOO medicalized so people feel defeated--helpless to learn to defend themselves against illness (in care and treatment OR struggling alone).
Medicalized-solutions for mental illness, including addictions and debilitating behaviors (like gambling and eating disorders), seem expensive, especially when hardly understood--a person seems hopeless at caring for themself, as they cycle through episodes of illness (recovery, remission, relapse, recovery, etc.) Solution was to make THEM find strength within themselves, or die because of "personal preferences," to remain ill (as if illness were a choice). The Thatcher, Reagan era decided on model to "pull yourself up," individualism. Which is cruel assessment of people that cannot understand their OWN inability to control their own behaviors and (apparent) decisions. Relapse requires supportive treatment over a period of time for an ill person to recover reliably-uninfluenced capacity to make uninfluenced decisions, apply judgement, to be able to continue in life without perception of pressure, fear, struggle, indecision, inability to function without behaviors or substances that episodically grip them when they are vulnerable. Application of time is required to recover, but people feel impatient, both (frail susceptible) people and both their medical and personal long-term supporters--impatience is leverage for disease. Addictions are NOT uninfluenced decisions. A person is under-the-influence of their illness. Re pendulum on how society views addictions, this year's Reith lecture series, 2023, Darren McGarvey.
Furthermore, let me ask you this. What do you gain by characterizing addiction as a "voluntary disability." You will claim, I assume, that various funds shouldn't be used to help these people. BUT . . . as with most societal issues, it costs us more to deal with the fall out of NOT helping these people. It is cheaper, always, in the long run to help people to not only get rid of their addictions (or any bad circumstance), than to pay for police interventions, judges, juries, and incarcerations.
My understanding is that people who become addicted to alcohol may start out consuming an amount that is quite safe for most people. However, their bodies metabolize the alcohol differently, causing it become an addiction. So . . . it really is medical.
I don't think it is metabolized differently, it's more of a probable conditioning - enjoying the rush from that first "kiss." Then the body gets addicted to that rush. It's probably more neurological. Having studied this, they haven't come up with a specific gene for alcoholism, hence my disagreement.
Both alcoholism and drug addiction are voluntary disabilities.
Uh, I think you need to learn more about both. Dependency on either is often a side of a far deeper health problem: mental illness. Both dependencies begin as a coping mechanism to relieve the severity of clinical depression, bipolar disease, among other potentially treatable illnesses if only the government would force the damned insurance companies to lower their excessive profits and pay for mental health treatment too.
You could say that about any vice. It killed a few of my family members and I'd be OK with severe punishment if it saved their life.
Yes. Ow-www. Medical rather than criminal, are addictions. Addiction, including alcohol, drug, are not a choice but an illness. Ignorant "sees" what eyes tell them, response is, "Just?, don't!" And THAT is victim-blaming. "Stop being ill." (Try that with cancer). Behavior addictions like gambling and eating disorders--debilitating, requiring "an intervention" and long-term sustained forms of support, but still ignorance is strong and an ignorant-form of kindness says, "You must enjoy it or you'd stop," restricting behaviors, excessive exercising behaviors, gambling behaviors, or, say, living outside in public, scared to be alone, when a person is mentally ill. Assume Karen Carpenter's parents were kind and wanted for her what "she" apparently wanted, but she was mentally ill and required care and treatment to veto her illness's irresistible behaviors, fighting on 2-fronts, inability to resist and efforts of supporters to separate a person from their debilitating impulsive irresistible behaviors or addiction. Doubting observers say, "I can't see your problem ..." UNDERSTAND instead that The person is ILL. Treatment, including long-term supports are required, some people need help to live their life and they'll say it, though they may not have the insight to understand themself--pendulum that did treat mental illness swung. While behaviors appear to be choices, a complaint is/ was that mal-coping behaviors were TOO medicalized so people feel defeated--helpless to learn to defend themselves against illness (in care and treatment OR struggling alone).
Medicalized-solutions for mental illness, including addictions and debilitating behaviors (like gambling and eating disorders), seem expensive, especially when hardly understood--a person seems hopeless at caring for themself, as they cycle through episodes of illness (recovery, remission, relapse, recovery, etc.) Solution was to make THEM find strength within themselves, or die because of "personal preferences," to remain ill (as if illness were a choice). The Thatcher, Reagan era decided on model to "pull yourself up," individualism. Which is cruel assessment of people that cannot understand their OWN inability to control their own behaviors and (apparent) decisions. Relapse requires supportive treatment over a period of time for an ill person to recover reliably-uninfluenced capacity to make uninfluenced decisions, apply judgement, to be able to continue in life without perception of pressure, fear, struggle, indecision, inability to function without behaviors or substances that episodically grip them when they are vulnerable. Application of time is required to recover, but people feel impatient, both (frail susceptible) people and both their medical and personal long-term supporters--impatience is leverage for disease. Addictions are NOT uninfluenced decisions. A person is under-the-influence of their illness. Re pendulum on how society views addictions, this year's Reith lecture series, 2023, Darren McGarvey.
Thank you for your support VJ
Criminal behavior is linked to MAOA genetic variants. We still don't condone it.
Furthermore, let me ask you this. What do you gain by characterizing addiction as a "voluntary disability." You will claim, I assume, that various funds shouldn't be used to help these people. BUT . . . as with most societal issues, it costs us more to deal with the fall out of NOT helping these people. It is cheaper, always, in the long run to help people to not only get rid of their addictions (or any bad circumstance), than to pay for police interventions, judges, juries, and incarcerations.
My understanding is that people who become addicted to alcohol may start out consuming an amount that is quite safe for most people. However, their bodies metabolize the alcohol differently, causing it become an addiction. So . . . it really is medical.
I don't think it is metabolized differently, it's more of a probable conditioning - enjoying the rush from that first "kiss." Then the body gets addicted to that rush. It's probably more neurological. Having studied this, they haven't come up with a specific gene for alcoholism, hence my disagreement.
you don't know anything about them, obviously.
... a show-stopper response. I mean, go ahead and expand.