https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...on/4776747002/
This article doesn’t make sense to me.
Quote:
"We try to get them off of the drug they're on," Kalfas said. "What we need to do is, treat the addiction. They're using (a) drug as a coping mechanism."
Addiction, which has been with us forever, is what needs to be fixed. With evidence-based treatment. The American Society of Addiction Medicine is still clamoring for more doctors to learn about such treatment and to attend to the problem as a disease.
|
Dafuq? Since when can there be an addiction without something to be addicted to? It’s like they’re using the word addiction as if it’s synonymous to mental disorder. The word addiction has such a broad definition now it’s pretty much meaningless.
Also, in education, “evidence based” usually means bull**** pseudoscience some *******s are trying to sell that isn’t in any ****ing way “evidence based” and it wouldn’t surprise me at all if this is the same ****ing thing.
They’ll call anything an addiction if they can make a profit off the quack ******* treatment programs.
Just wanting to be high doesn’t make you an addict. If you kick heroin and then you try meth you didn’t do meth because you’re addicted. You can’t be addicted to something you’ve never even done before that’s not even chemically related. That’s stupid af. If you’re going to say well they’re addicted to being high that’s not an addiction. At least not any meaningful sense. It just means they like to get high. There’s got to be some kind of tangible physical consequence for not doing something or it’s not an addiction. I know one of the first responses is cocaine isn’t physically addictive. Well just because there’s some grey area doesn’t mean you should go splashing the word all over crazy town.