What is it with jocks and entertainers that self-destruct?

An addict can not stop without help. They must first honestly admit the problem and want to change, them accept the help, distance themselves from enablers, change their routine and do all the work necessary. Whether someone is rich and famous or a crack whore has nothing to do with it, but they are personally responsible for their own success or failure in the end. The blame game does not work here.

 

+1

There are people who choose to do addictive drugs recreationally and those who get hooked because of injuries, cancer treatments, etc...

IMO- the ones who do drugs recreationally are much harder to "cure" because they chose to do drugs in order to feel high/better, etc. The ones who take them because of injuries pretty much have to take them to get over the pain and don't actually need them once healed.

I was on Vicodin ES (Extra Strength) for over a month straight back in the mid 90's because of two herniated discs in my lower back. Vicodin ES was the only thing that actually relived the pain so I could sleep at night and not be in agony all day long. Well after taking Vicodin ES 3 times a day for 30+ days straight you start to get very dependent on it. Once the effect from the six treatments of corticosteroids injected into the spinal canal relived most of the pain I still craved the Vicodin. I knew I didn't need it any longer- but I guess my body got accustomed to it and "needed" it. I remember the first few days off the Vicodin- it wasn't fun, I remember breaking out in cold sweats several times daily for no reason, feeling nauseous and anxious and no appetite for food no matter how good it looked. I gradually got back to normal and the cravings stopped. It was pretty tough to get off the narcotics but I was motivated to get back to my normal life, so that helped.

I imagine it's very difficult for someone who chooses to make narcotics part of their normal every day life to kick the habit.

 

I think most of the things people are saying about addictions applies just as well to alcohol, which is the true 'gateway drug'.

 

Really is no difference between alcohol and drugs as both are used to "feel good". Some people can do either/or "recreationally" and never become "addicted", however for some this is not the case.

 

Speaking of addictions, the CVS decision to forgo cigarette revenue will be interesting. Is it a "moral" choice on their part or someone seeing the profit in providing other "stuff" to sell to smokers?

 

BINGO Bra...

But... who will listen to US or me.

 

CVS's move was due partly to their business plan to transition more into healthcare related services such as their 'minute-clinics', etc. I can see other retailers will eventually make the same move too, while others will try to exploit it and pick up more tobacco sales. But it's shrinking market anyway and CVS is possibly ahead of the time by just a bit.

 

I think NY_Rob proves my point! Thank your sharing it with us. In a Ny minute you could have strayed into that deep (ER) abyss. Good Doctors and some self awareness in your part saved you from the brink.

Icarus

 

Thanks,
One dr was very blunt when I was pestering him for refills "narcotic painkillers are a one way street!" he told me. It took a while for me to understand what he meant, but now I know- once you go too far down a one way street there's no turning back!

 

The same thing can be said for a wendy's frosty, a slab of bacon, or sex. the frosty will give you brain freeze the bacon will clog your arteries, and ...well i won't go into sex, rug burn is serious business...

Heck how many folks here have modded their prius because it "looks/feels good"...

Where do you draw line...

shees the folks in colorado better be careful... smoke a joint, and get the munchies and have sex. 9 months later you are 400lbs with bad cholesterol and your wife is popping out quintuplets... LOL

 

Freedom isn't free.


Where indeed do you draw the line????

HeckifIknow.....I just fix phones for a living.
It's a very complex issue with a lot of moving parts.

Motorcycle helmets/seat belts.
Some people think they should be mandated because it "costs society more" for the idiots who don't use them.
I think you can stretch the math in a lot of different ways, and let's face it.
Organ donation would go waaaaaaay up if you outlaw helmets and airbags....

Chemical dependency is much more complex issue, because most people won't ride in a car unbuckled ONE TIME, and then spend decades in rehap trying to kick that habit.
Individual freedom is always going to come at some societal cost.
Sometimes? It's rehab.
Other times? It's a heart or hip replacement, or giving your Uncle Leo crayons and coloring books for his 49th birthday because he wanted to 'ride free'.

I tend to support narcotics laws, and even though I'm against the death penalty I think that people who sell narcotics to children ought to be shot on sight.
I know that it would be a helluva lot "less expensive" to just let heroin users jab government issued needles and dosed opiates into their arms, and some libertarians think that this is a manifestation of their "individual" freedom.
...just remember.
Freedom isn't free.
Sometimes it can come at quite a cost, such as kids lying dead on a playground with a government issued needle in their arm....or teaching their buddies how to smoke....or getting shot in school with a .22 revolver.

As many times as I blabber on about what I would do if I were Kig for a Day?????
I don't want the power to draw the legal/illegal line where seatbelts, opiates, cigarettes, porn, alcohol, speech is concerned. Power is pretty addictive too...and humans have a nearly 100-percent record for screwing up benevolent dictatorships.


Oh...and CVS?
They still sell alcohol.
As reprehensible as cigarettes are????
I don't think anybody has ever smoked enough to cause them to drive the wrong way on an interstate and mow down 10 people

 

I can see the seatbelt and helmet issue as a public safety. I used to ride motorcycles... and I have been clocked in the head and face by stuff getting kicked up on the road, and a couple birds an large bugs. had I not had a full face helmet I could have had a bad accident which could have affected other drivers around me.

same thing with seatbelts. I have been in accidents with and with out. and the seatbelt will keep you behind the wheel. if you are knocked out of the drivers seat, you cannot control the vehicle. so even a light sideswipe or hitting a curb could jostle you out of the seat (well maybe not so much on the startship prius lol) resulting in a much worse accident for you and potentially those driving around you.

Personally I could care less about drugs... you want to do drugs, no problems. just don't burglarize my house or carjack me for your next fix. Hell, I think sports teams should allow drugs. Its entertainment right.. i want to see someone hit 95 home runs in a season, i wasn't to see someone run a sub three minute mile. Roid it up...

 

Rehab is one thing. The article that started this tangent was calling for wider availability of a medicine that can counteract an OD to EMTs and even police.

Funny, my exception for anti-capital punishment is for individuals that wreck the savings of many or the entire economy through white collar crime.

 

+1

bernie madoff hurt more people with out holding a gun than the average gun toting 7-11 robber..

 

Does that include those serving on the Fed, Legislative, and Executive Branches?

 

But secondhand smoke does kill more people than drunk and sober driving combined.

I have no interest in abolishing smoking by consenting adults, and believe my state has already gone too far in even banning hookah bars and special smoking rooms. As long as no one** has to involuntarily breathe second hand smoke, then I'll be happy.

** This includes children, including those still in the womb. I.e. smoking by, and in the presence of, women who are pregnant needs to be banned.

 

^ I'd dispute that point a little bit more aggressively, but like most reformed nicotine addicts I utterly despise smoking and people who smoke in public. Other than this being another case where science bends to the will of the political???
I don't have a dog in this fight.
It's interesting how our society is so completely hypocritical where legal and illegal drugs are concerned, but other than caffeine, I'm pretty clean these days so AFAIC you can ban them all or let the government profit from them all through taxes.
It's pretty much all the same to me.
I have no big problem with adults making the choice to pollute their bodies with chemical bliss.
I fully recognize that part of the price for this freedom will include my having to put up with bed-wetting liberals whining and crying about the injustices of my being able to make more money than a street wino and wanting to shank me for more taxes to pay for assistance programs.
Like I said......freedom isn't free.
Some idiots are going to get people killed either by mowing down other drivers on the interstate, or introducing their "friends" to a life altering addiction.
The only thing worse than having to put up with this would be for my beloved government to try to "fix" it.

However (comma!)
Keeping drugs like pot illegal has two huge benefits for me.
1. Generally speaking, the pro-hemp crowd still hides their habit....even in places like Colorado, so I don't have to subject myself to their filth in public.
2. Every full time job that I've had in my life has a drug and alcohol testing program, and they make smokers get their chemical enjoyment 50' or more from the building.
In addition to winnowing down the competition on the front side, I generally don't have to work with drunks, people who smell like an ashtray, or devotees of recreational pharmaceuticals.
Win.
Win.

Sorry.
They thought about that when they were cranking out the USC (as amended):
Sovereign immunity in the United States - Wikipedia