tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6737941.post109936502148028867..comments2024-01-14T17:27:30.511-05:00Comments on Law, Legislation, and Lunacy: Smoking Affects Brain Like HeroinDavidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14364155797420903461noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6737941.post-1100199679388433232004-11-11T14:01:00.000-05:002004-11-11T14:01:00.000-05:00Studies involving withdrawal symptoms for alcohol ...Studies involving withdrawal symptoms for alcohol and opiates (morphine) have been done where said symptoms were ameliorated via placebo. <br /><br />I'm not going to argue that all dependency is of this nature, but a strong psychological component is clearly operating in all such conditions. The chief influence on this psychological disposition is learned, I believe, via social interaction. See Howard Becker's "Outsiders" for an analysis of the drug-using jazz-culture. We learn, in effect, how to respond and feel about things - from coffee to pot (marijuana, that is). <br /><br />Three years ago I started drinking coffee. I hated it. Foul, nasty black stuff. But the thing was, I wanted to like it, so I kept drinking it, and eventually I did. I love the stuff now, roast my own beans fresh, and drink 2-3 shots of espresso every day. Somewhere along the line, I hijacked my brain, so to speak.<br /><br />The same thing happens with other comestibles; spicy food isn't naturally lovable, yet many people enjoy it, developing a taste for it (a useful turn of speech which illustrates the process of acquiring taste for a thing). Give a strongly spiced item to a child and you'll not likely get a happy child. They've not had the chance to rewire their brains. We have, and we do it all the time, and not just with food.<br /><br />Does it really surprise anyone that food can be addictive? My main objection to the present state of our consciousness of the issue in America is that we've made a biological problem out of it, thus effectively removing volitional impetus for change - you can't alter your genes, and if you believe that they cause you to overeat or become fat, then you're less likely to do anything about it. Even if true, it's an unproductive perspective because of this.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09791838562666800883noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6737941.post-1099878614601457912004-11-07T20:50:00.000-05:002004-11-07T20:50:00.000-05:00It's excellent science.
The question in this case...It's excellent science.<br /><br />The question in this case is not the presence of addiction, which has been long known. The issue being raised is the mechanism of addiction.<br /><br />Knowing the similarity of the mecahnism of addictive response gives us gretaer insight to the chemical mature of the brain, and could allow for the design of novel drugs.<br /><br />-Anonymous #3Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6737941.post-1099678465087249772004-11-05T13:14:00.000-05:002004-11-05T13:14:00.000-05:00Different drugs have different levels of addictive...Different drugs have different levels of addictive quality. Cocaine for instance, is not considered addictive by the scientific community, though it gives one serious pleasure. Ecstacy theoretically, is even more jacked up than cocaine in terms of it's results in neurochemistry, but it isn't addictive either.<br /><br />Alchohol and Heroine are called physically addictive because if you don't use, your body physically breaks down. If Cigs are like that, it's bad.<br /><br />The human body isn't just a pleasure-pain machine. If science looks to understand human nature, scientists can't be simplified moralists, they need to be bio-chemists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com