Progress thread for ne

[Doggygirl]

Progress thread for ne

The genetic evidence for predisposition seems pretty strong as far as my text books and teachers are concerned. Not the only reason addiction can develop, but certainly genetics seem to create a suceptibility that is difficult to deny. I am going on faith with my textbooks - have not hunted down the actual studies. But twin studies, etc.

Lots of discussion too about the mechanics of addiction in the brain in my classes. And discussion of pharmaceutical aids to recovery.

DG

[Bruunhilde]

Progress thread for ne

Couldn't agree more, DG.

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Progress thread for ne

I find the whole area so fascinating DG. The thing is, I can't get away from the fact that what I got, time after time after time, was no treatment, poor treatment or abysmally bad treatment. There is something fundamental missing in the equation in the treatment of alcoholics. And it's not just the fact that we get a bad rap. It has a lot more to do with erroneous information.

Part of the problem, for me specifically, was the search for comorbidity. The cause. It's ever more clear to me now that the cause of my alcoholism was brain chemistry. It's very simple. The rest? It simply muddies the water.

(I just erased a whole string of thoughts related to this, and will continue to refrain from suppositions and half-baked theories. God knows we don't need any more of those around here.)

But here is something I wonder, and the reason that I'm emphatically not studying addiction treatment: What if it is that search, the search for comorbidity et. al., that is one of the primary reasons that there is no real treatment?
If the classification of a disease is so broad as to cross all boundaries; those of socio-economic class, heredity, education, general health profile, trauma, and pre-existing condition, then it becomes simply another human vagary. This is not my experience. My experience is that we all have a common relationship and reaction to our disease (addiction) despite all of our incredible differences. Which makes me think that the rest is moot. (Or not moot, but unrelated in any specifically identifiable way to the disease itself.) If the specific disease is untreated then more of us will die than will get well. And this is fact. Many more of us die from addiction than get better.

The argument so far, as I understand it, is that not treating the underlying condition will result in continued addiction. I would suggest that we have no treatment for the disease of addiction, therefore we continue to try to treat any underlying condition. Until now. Now I am left with all of the same stuff I came to addiction with. Minus, of course, the addiction itself! It is a profound relief.

I would love to be a fly on the wall in your classes. A mute, wingless kind of fly, that wouldn't be able to consistently annoy everyone else in the class. Until then, I'll stick with biology! (but ftr, I welcome the discussion, though I have no interest in what passes for spirited debate around here. I imagine this is boring enough for the people that are still struggling to find a way out that most people will have no interest!)
xo

[Doggygirl]

Progress thread for ne

Gotta make this quick or I'll be late to class.

I think the problem is less complex. If my teachers are to be believed, there has been a historic gap between the mental health treatment community and the addiction treatment community. This has led to the problem of a high% of people seeking treatment in either domain to NOT be assessed for the other. You have already pointed out the problems with treating one and not the other. Considering the high rates of comorbidity, it makes sense that trying to treat only one chronic relapsing disorder, but not the other leads to chronic relapsing of both.

There is concerted push in the field to work in a more integrated fashion and do a better job of assessing clients for both mental health disorders AND addiction disorders. Integrated treatment models are evolving along with the goal and emerging requirement(my understanding, under Obamacare) for evidence based treatment models.

The treatment world really is changing, I think. At least it is in the educational environment and that feeds the system over time.

DG

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Progress thread for ne

Thanks, DG. Really looking forward to understanding more about this. I hope you'll provide more insight! It would actually help me reconcile some personal stuff too.
Hope you made it to class on time, don't doubt you did! Between MWO and MWO related stuff, I'm an hour and 37 minutes late for study time. I can relate, sister.

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Progress thread for ne

btw, RedT, powdered L-glut. Got it. Everything I take comes directly from your recommendations, sister. :h bacatcha.

[missyabby1]

Progress thread for ne

I went to see the Queen today..........along with about another 100,000 people here in Perth today. The joy was palpable. Little kids, families, old ducks like me. Just wanting to catch a glimpse of her. I got a wave from Prince Phillip too, and my sister said, I bet he was thinking you're a bit of a goer! And my older sister said, he will have nightmares tonight! lol. Anyway. I didn't have a hangover this morning. So the day was lovely. I chatted to the people crushed in next to me and the little kids who didn't know who the hell the "Queen" was but eager to find out. The day was full of good feelings.

I was by myself and wandered back through the streets of Perth with a grin on my face, and feeling embraced by the goodwill we offered to her maj (don't do a political challenge here, it won't work). I seriously thought about this woman as I was lining up for the train home. I was actually named after her, by my seriously British mum, the other two sisters too. Bloody British Queens. Well at least my namesake didn't get her head chopped off.
I thought what a wonderful, self dignified woman she was. (and yes I know all the other negative stuff). I have no idea what this all means to sobriety, but in a way , I do. it was just a good day, and we need those days to counteract picking up a drink. Or even those who don't still pick up a drink. We need the days of feeling connected.

Missy xxx

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Progress thread for ne

missyabby1;1200083 wrote: I have no idea what this all means to sobriety, but in a way , I do. it was just a good day, and we need those days to counteract picking up a drink. Or even those who don't still pick up a drink. We need the days of feeling connected.

Missy xxx

If that's not the queen's honest truth! :H

Actually, queens are kinda cool. In a weird, weird way for Americans. (At least this one.) Funny that they changed the rule this week about chicks and succession. And cool, too. Even antiquities need updating.

Sounds like a really nice time, Missy! Glad you partook! (Like our memorial day parade here, maybe. The oldest one in the country is in my little part of the world. But very different, too, because it's, well, lame. :H If you've got a convertible you can be in it. Still, the feelings generated might be the same. Camaraderie, and patriotism or something akin, and kids and all those feel-good-y things.) Plus, as I say, a queen is kinda cool. Princesses and stuff, too. Anyway. Yay! Good to hear!
xo

[Otter]

Progress thread for ne

Ho hum. Queens are cool for Americans cuz you don't have to live under one. We went to France for a holiday a few years ago and there was an old building in a village north of Paris where a plaque said this was the place where the first Carolignian King of France was ELECTED 400 years ago. What happened? I think we should have a king here but go back to electing them like they are supposed to be. None of this free ride hereditary stuff. We might get a King Murphy for a change.

Can I start a Republicanism thread here or is that under General Discussion?

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Progress thread for ne

Otter;1200246 wrote:

Can I start a Republicanism thread here or is that under General Discussion?

Heredity is the only thing that makes it cool, Otter. Otherwise they'd just be prime ministers and presidents and such. And then for sure they'd have to be born male.

And republicanism? What's the opposite? democraticism and socialinism? 'member I like to play amurrican every now and then. again.

I just like the tiaras and crowns, ftr. And also, ftr Otter, they have to wear ugly shoes. That's a deal breaker for me.

[SlipperyPete]

Progress thread for ne

Otter;1200246 wrote: Queens are cool for Americans cuz you don't have to live under one.

Well, that's simply not true. Queens are stupid. Especially YOUR queen.

Princesses, on the other hand...

[SlipperyPete]

Progress thread for ne

NE, shouldn't you be studying about trapezoids or some such?

[SlipperyPete]

Progress thread for ne

SlipperyPete;1200249 wrote:
Princesses, on the other hand...

Except for YOUR princess. She's stupid, too.

[Otter]

Progress thread for ne

Yeah, heredity. Just like Gadaffi and son and Assad and son. I want a dancing Queen.

Go see this film Anonymous next week and watch the Virgin Queen having one son's head hacked off while she shags the other son. Cool...and we have her great great great still ruling us.

She had ugly shoes, methinks.

[Otter]

Progress thread for ne

Princes are also stupid don't forget.