… There are lots of people like that and it’s mostly genetic so I’m unsure if you’re agreeing or not with this standpoint… Because that’s a big fucking ethical issue lol.
I think both of y’all have a rough understanding of addiction. There is no such thing as people who get addicted to substances after a single use. There are instances of people trying a drug and then continuing to use it, usually due to availability.
Its a lot like any other opportunity that enters your life. Sometimes its really hard to turn down the idea of using to fix whatever problems you have in the short term. Noone plans to use forever you know.
Is it so shocking that average people are just as capable of addiction as the people they see at their local methadone clinic?
You are right that taking something once at a low dose is unlikely to make you addicted. It doesn’t make sense though to ignore psychological, situational, and genetic risk factors for addiction.
I never said that those factors should be ignored.
The point I’m making is that when people frame this as “some people just aren’t built to handle it” they put people into two groups: the easily addicted, and normal people.
People want to be part of and prove they are in the normal group. Something is wrong with you if you are in the addict group. Those in the normal group feel protected by being part of it. They think they aren’t capable of addiction that they must have gotten lucky.
I think that’s an incredibly dangerous framing of addiction. Everyone is capable of becoming an addict. Just because some never do, doesn’t mean they had some special mutation that protected them. Addiction is an incredibly social disease, and with how little we know about it we should be more cautious rather than callous when discussing it.
The point I’m making is that when people frame this as “some people just aren’t built to handle it” they put people into two groups: the easily addicted, and normal people.
What makes you think I am doing that? All I was trying to say is that something serious must be happening for someone to get addicted from trying low dose amphetamine once. Suggesting that’s a common outcome is the most DARE shit I have ever fucking seen.
I think that’s an incredibly dangerous framing of addiction. Everyone is capable of becoming an addict. Just because some never do, doesn’t mean they had some special mutation that protected them. Addiction is an incredibly social disease, and with how little we know about it we should be more cautious rather than callous when discussing it.
You’re aiming this at the wrong person. I am not the one suggesting here that addiction is purely down to genetics. Addiction comes down to a lot of different situational and psychological risk factors. Poverty being a big one, as well as stress, depression, anxiety, and so on. You don’t need any genetic predisposition to become an addict, I agree with you there.
You’re going to need some serious evidence for that one. Most people become addicts because they have something to run from like mental health issues or bad life circumstances. You can have a genetic susceptibility to addiction, but that would probably require you take it more than once unless another issue is in play.
Edit: in fact even then getting addicted to amphetamines on one try, from the relatively low doses doctors give for ADHD is very unlikely.
This is also the most DARE shit I have ever seen. People are very unlikely to become addicted to amphetamines from one low dose given by a doctor, not matter what their genetics might be. Genetics are only one small piece of the addiction puzzle, and alcohol is probably more addictive anyway.
The thing is that with ADD/ADHD specifically, we don’t have a reaction to low doses. My Adderall prescription is 40mg twice daily. That much Adderall would absolutely be enough to get someone without ADHD addicted, if they have the predisposition to get addicted to amphetamines.
… There are lots of people like that and it’s mostly genetic so I’m unsure if you’re agreeing or not with this standpoint… Because that’s a big fucking ethical issue lol.
I think both of y’all have a rough understanding of addiction. There is no such thing as people who get addicted to substances after a single use. There are instances of people trying a drug and then continuing to use it, usually due to availability.
Its a lot like any other opportunity that enters your life. Sometimes its really hard to turn down the idea of using to fix whatever problems you have in the short term. Noone plans to use forever you know.
Is it so shocking that average people are just as capable of addiction as the people they see at their local methadone clinic?
You are right that taking something once at a low dose is unlikely to make you addicted. It doesn’t make sense though to ignore psychological, situational, and genetic risk factors for addiction.
I never said that those factors should be ignored.
The point I’m making is that when people frame this as “some people just aren’t built to handle it” they put people into two groups: the easily addicted, and normal people.
People want to be part of and prove they are in the normal group. Something is wrong with you if you are in the addict group. Those in the normal group feel protected by being part of it. They think they aren’t capable of addiction that they must have gotten lucky.
I think that’s an incredibly dangerous framing of addiction. Everyone is capable of becoming an addict. Just because some never do, doesn’t mean they had some special mutation that protected them. Addiction is an incredibly social disease, and with how little we know about it we should be more cautious rather than callous when discussing it.
What makes you think I am doing that? All I was trying to say is that something serious must be happening for someone to get addicted from trying low dose amphetamine once. Suggesting that’s a common outcome is the most DARE shit I have ever fucking seen.
You’re aiming this at the wrong person. I am not the one suggesting here that addiction is purely down to genetics. Addiction comes down to a lot of different situational and psychological risk factors. Poverty being a big one, as well as stress, depression, anxiety, and so on. You don’t need any genetic predisposition to become an addict, I agree with you there.
You’re going to need some serious evidence for that one. Most people become addicts because they have something to run from like mental health issues or bad life circumstances. You can have a genetic susceptibility to addiction, but that would probably require you take it more than once unless another issue is in play.
Edit: in fact even then getting addicted to amphetamines on one try, from the relatively low doses doctors give for ADHD is very unlikely.
This is also the most DARE shit I have ever seen. People are very unlikely to become addicted to amphetamines from one low dose given by a doctor, not matter what their genetics might be. Genetics are only one small piece of the addiction puzzle, and alcohol is probably more addictive anyway.
The thing is that with ADD/ADHD specifically, we don’t have a reaction to low doses. My Adderall prescription is 40mg twice daily. That much Adderall would absolutely be enough to get someone without ADHD addicted, if they have the predisposition to get addicted to amphetamines.
All of the evidence is against this idea. Stop spreading misinformation. https://www.vice.com/en/article/exqm9j/reasons-why-you-cant-get-addicted-to-drugs-after-one-hit