Addictions: are certain addictions healthier than other ones?

[Stevicus]

There really is a difference between someone who uses a substance and someone who is addicted to it.

I like alcoholic drinks (beer, wine and the occasional mixed drink) and sometimes get mildly "drunk" but I don't drive after drinking, and my personality doesn't change negatively to affect others. I can go for relatively long periods without drinking and I don't crave it. I'm 82 and recent tests have shown me to be in good health. On the other hand, some people are truly addicted to alcohol and it ruins their health and lives.

I have no interest in gambling, I find it boring. My father would gamble small sums on horse racing, but it never went beyond that and I think he pretty much broke even on it. He enjoyed it. Some people allow it to destroy their lives.

Some substances seem to be so addictive that it's virtually impossible to use them in moderation.

The term "addiction" is misused a lot of the time. I don't think it's correct to call someone that spends a lot of time on the Internet (for example) an addict.

I think many people who do a lot of running for exercise are addicted to dopamine, but we don't seem to consider them addicts.

What's my point? It's a complicated subject.

I've heard the term "gambling addiction" used quite a bit, although I agree that it sounds like a misnomer. Still, the meaning is pretty clear. It's kind of like how people use words like "workaholic." Are people actually addicted to work?

I think the term "compulsive gambler" is also used. I've also heard phrases like "sex and love addicts."

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm not sure which one is healthier or not. Too much of anything can probably be harmful. I've used both alcohol and tobacco, and I'm aware of the effects of both. Chronic, long-term usage of either product will definitely have a deleterious effect on one's health and prospects for a long life.

I would differentiate between the personal effects on the health of the individual user, as opposed to how it affects those around them and society at large. Second-hand smoke is a problem for those in proximity to smokers, but no one gets drunk just from sitting next to drunks.

On the other hand, those driving under the effects of alcohol cause a lot more death and destruction on the streets and highways than anyone under the effects of tobacco. Those who grew up with alcoholics or have them in their lives might also have experience with alcohol-induced rage - which is not too fun for people in the same room. Sometimes it happens in bars, and it's only a matter of time before someone starts shooting.

All the strange and bizarre things that people do when they're drunk - I think tends to outweigh smoking in terms of overall damage. Although that's not to minimize the damage caused by smoking, which I'm not denying.

As for other addictions, it seems to vary depending on what one is addicted to. There are drugs that make you fly, and drugs that make you crash.

For those who really are addicted to the point where it does become a problem, I've always believed it should be viewed as a medical issue, rather than sending people to prison.

I absolutely agree with what you said.
The truth is: what is the threshold that, once crossed, turns a habit into an addiction?

After answering that, we can discuss whether an addiction is more harmful that other small addictions.
But as I pointed out in the OP, I won't be judgmental and addictions are part of the human nature.

After all, if the Government allows both tobacco and alcohol, it means that they entrust individuals the freedom to determine the quantity of these products they mean to consume.
And by the way, they are already taxed, because they are considered third necessity goods.

 

[Estro Felino]

There really is a difference between someone who uses a substance and someone who is addicted to it.

I like alcoholic drinks (beer, wine and the occasional mixed drink) and sometimes get mildly "drunk" but I don't drive after drinking, and my personality doesn't change negatively to affect others. I can go for relatively long periods without drinking and I don't crave it. I'm 82 and recent tests have shown me to be in good health. On the other hand, some people are truly addicted to alcohol and it ruins their health and lives.

I have no interest in gambling, I find it boring. My father would gamble small sums on horse racing, but it never went beyond that and I think he pretty much broke even on it. He enjoyed it. Some people allow it to destroy their lives.

Some substances seem to be so addictive that it's virtually impossible to use them in moderation.

The term "addiction" is misused a lot of the time. I don't think it's correct to call someone that spends a lot of time on the Internet (for example) an addict.

I think many people who do a lot of running for exercise are addicted to dopamine, but we don't seem to consider them addicts.

What's my point? It's a complicated subject.

Speaking of alcohol...in Europe it is not a taboo at all, among teenagers.
I know parents who encourage children to drink wine and sparkling wine at parties. Especially males.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Hello guys...
I was wondering about this, after reading some replies in another thread, about smoking.

From a medical and scientific point of view, it is a fact that certain substances are more harmful than others.
Tobacco is not the same as alcohol, because their chemical components are completely different.

To begin with, alcohol is made up (through very complex processes) of a must derived from edible things (grapes, potatoes, countless types of fruits, etc etc).
Whereas tobacco is derived from a non-edible plant.

What do you guys think? Please discuss.
It's a thread to discuss civilly, and not to be judgmental. We are all addicted to something.

The answer to your question is obviously "yes".

For example, suppose you are addicted to jogging for 15min every day.
Clearly that's healthier then being addicted to a daily dose of McDonalds

 

[PureX]

Hello guys...
I was wondering about this, after reading some replies in another thread, about smoking.

From a medical and scientific point of view, it is a fact that certain substances are more harmful than others.
Tobacco is not the same as alcohol, because their chemical components are completely different.

To begin with, alcohol is made up (through very complex processes) of a must derived from edible things (grapes, potatoes, countless types of fruits, etc etc).
Whereas tobacco is derived from a non-edible plant.

What do you guys think? Please discuss.
It's a thread to discuss civilly, and not to be judgmental. We are all addicted to something.

Addiction is characterized by a loss of control over the use of some substance or engagement in some behavior. So the problem is not the toxicity of the object of the addiction, it's the inability to use or engage these safely or reasonably.

 

[Estro Felino]

Addiction is characterized by a loss of control over the use of some substance or engagement in some behavior. So the problem is not the toxicity of the object of the addiction, it's the inability to use or engage these safely or reasonably.

Exactly. Often due to the fact that certain substances influence the human apparatuses, like the nervous system.
Just think of caffeine. Caffeine is addictive, hence the addiction to coffee, or espresso.

 

[Alien826]

For example, suppose you are addicted to jogging for 15min every day.
Clearly that's healthier then being addicted to a daily dose of McDonalds

Years ago I jogged, and my knees got painful. My doctor said something like "You won't die from bad knees but you could die from a heart attack so I don't want to tell you to stop jogging", and he gave me some exercises to help the knees. Now, I haven't jogged for donkey's years and my knees are OK and so is my heart. Go figure.

 

[Mock Turtle]

This is another possible addiction to be wary of - even if was often portrayed as the innocent solution to smoking:

Seven health risks from vaping to watch out for - including popcorn lung disease

The much-touted 'safer' alternative to traditional smoking is said to have its fair share of 'hidden dangers' - including lung disease and a potential increased risk of cancer

www.mirror.co.uk