Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems to me that since the whole purpose of hard drugs is that they make you feel incredibly good, you'll continue to want to feel that great high, so eventually, you will use them more and more. And of course after a time, you cross the line from one or twice a month, to as much as as possible.
Why doesn't that happen with social (not alcoholic) drinkers?
Or, rewritten like this:
It seems to me that since the whole purpose of alcohol is that it makes you feel incredibly good, you'll continue to want to feel that great high, so eventually, you will use them more and more. And of course after a time, you cross the line from one or twice a month, to as much as as possible.
When you get to my age you know A LOT of people who have been even very heavy users of hard drugs in the past, and survived to wonder how/why they did it.
Age and maturity has a way of curing you...if you survive long enough that is.
I can't say the same for alcohol which is the nastiest drug of all - it doesn't discriminate. Young and old, rich or poor, are equally affected.
So you are writing that age and maturity (or death) are the reasons there are no older hard drug users vs why there are older alcoholics?
If one hated the feel of H or crack, or whatever -- as some people do-- you don't use it at all, let alone occasionally. But if you do like it, eventually you will be hooked. I'm sure there can be some exceptions, but they are likely very few and far between. You could probably count the number of long-term hard drug survivors in any given block of a city on one hand. And the same goes true for meth addicts in small towns, heroin users in show biz, and pill popers in suburbia.
So your conclusion is hard drugs are different from alcohol because alcohol use can be controlled by some people (only a drink or two - not becoming an alcoholic) but a person can't have a controlled use of hard drugs?
If you think about the actual toxic, synthetic substances (like meth, which I understand has horrible ingredients) you might hesitate to introduce those into your body for any reason . . . if you are a junk-food eater and don't care what kind of crap you put into your body, you might not care - but toxic substances are going to have harmful effects on your well-being and if you don't think so, just look at the meth addicts . . .vanity alone should prevent people from doing such horrible things to themselves.
So you are writing that age and maturity (or death) are the reasons there are no older hard drug users vs why there are older alcoholics?
Well I know several drug and alcohol abusers who've died though I'm just 54 and generally the ones who are still alive are now sober. The problem is that of those who mostly abused alcohol, they probably occasionally used other drugs, or at least they did as teens.
Short answer, yes, someone can be an occasional user if just about any drug and be just fine.
I think it goes along with priorities as well. If one's priorities are their family and job, they could be a recreational user. Some are just more addictive in their personality and feeling good or high becomes their priority.
I'm really not suggesting its that simplistic though.
I've never met a pot addict and have worked with many addicts.
Short answer, yes, someone can be an occasional user if just about any drug and be just fine.
I think it goes along with priorities as well. If one's priorities are their family and job, they could be a recreational user. Some are just more addictive in their personality and feeling good or high becomes their priority.
I'm really not suggesting its that simplistic though.
I've never met a pot addict and have worked with many addicts.
I have met pot addicts. Weed is not a physically addictrive drug in the same way H or crack is, but it sure as hell can be psychologically addictive. Those who must have their weed do indeed wreck their lives, if not their health, as surely as those addicted to alcohol or hard drugs. I've know people whose continued pot use has resulted in eviction or foreclosure, the destruction of their marriage, the loss of thier job, school failure, and the near-total alienation from family and friends--except for other potheads. Stipulated it doesn't happen to most, but it definitely does happen. And I consider it an addiction because despite those negative consequences, these people continue to smoke.
As to OPs original question about the occassional use of hard drugs as opposed to alcohol. No one knows for sure what causes addiction. It is, medically speaking, an idiopathic condition.
But one of the big differences between booze and, let's say heroin, meth or cocaine, is the ability to feel good much, much more quickly and much, much more intensely. That is a chemcial difference in the structure of these drugs that is scientifically unchallenged. The feel good of heorin or crack, when it happens, can be achieved in a few minutes, or even a few seconds -- which isn't the case with booze. (And like I said before, if it doesn't happen quickly then there's not much point in using it at all.) That difference is what makes the hard drugs so alluring to keep using, and why the chances of addiction are so much greater than the chances of ongoing non-addictive casual use. That's why occassional hard drug use will catch up to you sooner or later. Like I first stated, there are probably exceptions -- they're exceptions to eveything. But they're few and far between.
Last edited by citylove101; 07-15-2013 at 10:00 AM..
Short answer, yes, someone can be an occasional user if just about any drug and be just fine.
Thank You. That's pretty much what I was asking. It's interesting that alcohol would allow some people to use with abusing but no hard drugs could be considered unabusable (if that is really a word).
Thank You. That's pretty much what I was asking. It's interesting that alcohol would allow some people to use with abusing but no hard drugs could be considered unabusable (if that is really a word).
I wouldn't just take someone's word for it. Took you awhile to get someone to agree with you so that should be a red flag.
I really think if someone is troubled and needs to escape that a better route would be to seek counseling about what they are trying to escape rather than medicate it away. Most cities have mental health centers that work on a sliding fee basis and most, if not all, Medicaid recipients have mental health services available.
There are, sadly, a lot of abusers and addicts that feel that they have their substance abuse/addiction under control and those are the ones that are really in trouble. What, they say you have to hit bottom?
Actually, you can't lump all drugs together like that. I know of no drugs that create immediate addiction on the first use, first off. Secondly, I know several people who have tried cocaine only once and never used again. Most of them didn't like it. Only one said she liked it but hated the come down and said it wasn't worth it because of the expense and shortness of the high. I know of someone who has tried heroin, didn't like it, doesn't use it. There is a musician, can't remember which one, stated he tried heroin, didn't like it, never understood why so many rockstars used it because he hated it. MDMA, I have used this drug 3 times over the past 5 years. Non-addictive and when used properly, safe and is not damaging to your body like alcohol is. You can't overdose on Marijuana and it's not physically addicting, it too is much safer than alcohol. Mushrooms, Mescaline, Peyote, LSD, not addicting and you won't die from an overdose. So you can't lump all drugs together.
Good post. Yes, not all drugs are the same. Cocaine isn't really physically addicting the way heroin is. It's psychologically addicting and once you start using it on an occasion, it's not always easy to stop ON THAT OCCASION, but most people aren't going to HAVE to have it again when they wake up the next day or go through the physical withdrawal that one would with heroin. That's why it's such a popular "recreational" drug. Lots of people do coke on weekends and special occasions and walk away from it when the party is over.
Heroin, on the other hand, is an opiate, and opiates are physically addictive to the human brain.
Your remarks on the rockstar were interesting. Years ago, I read Papa John, the autobiography of the late John Phillips, famous for singing with the Mamas and the Papas and a prolific songwriter for other famous bands. He had bigtime addiction issues that eventually destroyed his liver and killed him. But, he was good friends with Mick Jagger, and in his book, he said that Mick has never been addicted to anything. He partied like crazy, used a lot of different drugs, but has never allowed himself to become addicted. I thought that was interesting.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
