Is Cannabis Addictive?

[Strider1974]

The question is, is there anything special with cannabis that makes cannabis addiction worse than, say food addiction?

Food addiction is not a good example because there are physical withdrawal symptoms when you try to cut back.
A much better example would be gambling addiction.

And my answer to this question is 'no'

 

[politas]

I fully expect the stoners here to wring their hands and shriek and say that such a thing is impossible, or that cannabis is a totally benign "herb," or that it isn't True Addiction^TM. But it's all the name of the Penn and Teller show that I am prohibited from typing here. You know it. I know it. Even they probably know it and would be willing to admit it except for the fact that they voluntarily put that stuff into their bodies and are so dedicated to doing it that they can't be honest.

Wow, great straw man you've built up, there!

Anyone arguing that cannabis is not as harmful as heroine or crack cocaine is obviously a stoner addict.

Well, bud, sorry to burst your bubble, but as one of the people who's been arguing the difference between harmful habits (though I think dependence is a much better word, I just couldn't think of it earlier) and physical addiction, I think I can safely call myself "not a stoner". For the last three years or so, I've had about half a cone of marijuana once a year. Prior to that, I used it more frequently and in greater amounts, but I've never been dedicated to it. It's always been a purely recreational thing. It is quite definitely possible to use marijuana recreationally without forming an addiction.

I have never in my life claimed that marijuana is harmless, and I have seen no one on this forum claiming that to be the case. Please argue with what people are saying, not with pre-conceived notions.

 

[Dancing David]

Strictly, such a thing is not an addiction, but a habit. Habits can be almost as harmful as addictions, but the treatment for a habit is quite different than for a physical addiction. Physical addiction, once broken, is gone forever. Habit-based cravings don't go away anywhere near as easily, which is why AA encourages sufferers to work on the premise that if you are an alcoholic, you are an alcoholic for life.

I suspect that most people who say they are addicted to marijuana are really talking about this "harmful habit" version of addiction, rather than a purely physical addiction.

You can develop a harmful habit about anything - Alcohol, marijuana, ecstasy, masturbation, brushing your hair, forum posting, computer games, etc.

It's when you prioritise a trivial part of your life over an important part of your life that a habit is harmful. If you skip work and lose pay or get fired because you're too busy refuting woos on JREF, then it's definitely a harmful habit.

Which is not stricly true,

it is the behaviors that create an addiction, not the substance. Some people are more prone to find a substance addictive, but they are not nessecarily going to. A person can develop alcoholism without any underlying family vulnerability to alcohol.

The problem is not one of physical withdrawl, the physical withdrawl from nicotine is only three days, yet the addiction lasts much longer, so obviously you are right when you say that addictions are just habits. But the question is not one of physical deprendance versus behavior, it is always about the behavior. Some mood altering behaviors have a physical withdrawl and some don't. It is the cluster of behaviors that creates the addiction, it can be to a substance or to a mood altering behavior. Compulsive shopping and gambling are very destructive, they follow the same patterns as the use of substances. yet they are soley behavioral.

So I politely submit that there is no distinction, addiction is a set of behaviors, some ingvolve substances with withdrawl potential and some don't.

 

[Dancing David]

Can interaction with other human beings be called an "addiction"?

Isn't that just being sociable? Something that we normally encourage in people?

The question is about wether it is a habit of behavior which creates substantial impairment in role functioning. We all engage in repetitive behaviors which may or may not be beneficial. The issue is wether the repetitive behavior leads to major and substantial imapirment in role functioning.

 

[Dancing David]

People get addicted to all kinds of stuff: food, sex, chocolate, biting on fingernails, watching TV, exercising, work, Internet forums... Any activity that gives a person some sort of pleasure or satisfaction can cause an addiction. People (some more than others) have a tendency to get obsessed by things, and sometimes they spend an unhealthy amount of their time and/or money on their obsessions, to a degree where it starts causing all sorts of problems.

There's no doubt that there are stoners who spend far to much of their time and money getting high and that their obsession causes problems in their lives. The question is, is there anything special with cannabis that makes cannabis addiction worse than, say food addiction?

No, it certainly is not as destructive as alcohol, cocaine or methamphetamine, it might cause cancer, it is definitly not good to smoke. But compared to the eating disorders, the risk of smoking is probably less destructive.

 

[politas]

Which is not stricly true,

it is the behaviors that create an addiction, not the substance. Some people are more prone to find a substance addictive, but they are not nessecarily going to. A person can develop alcoholism without any underlying family vulnerability to alcohol.

The problem is not one of physical withdrawl, the physical withdrawl from nicotine is only three days, yet the addiction lasts much longer, so obviously you are right when you say that addictions are just habits. But the question is not one of physical deprendance versus behavior, it is always about the behavior. Some mood altering behaviors have a physical withdrawl and some don't. It is the cluster of behaviors that creates the addiction, it can be to a substance or to a mood altering behavior. Compulsive shopping and gambling are very destructive, they follow the same patterns as the use of substances. yet they are soley behavioral.

So I politely submit that there is no distinction, addiction is a set of behaviors, some ingvolve substances with withdrawl potential and some don't.

I humbly accept your correction. My understanding seems to have been faulty.

The question, I suppose, is "Is Cannabis addictive in a way which justifies banning it like narcotic drugs?"

I submit that the answer is no.

Well, actually, I don't think narcotic drugs should be banned, either, but that's a different argument.

 

[jimlintott]

Well I have been addicted to both cigarrettes and weed and have given up both.

Cigarrettes are highly addictive and the addiction is a physical dependence. I had to smoke as soon as I got out of bed and I had to smoke at least every two or three hours max. I have heard of some tobacco smokers who wake up at night and need to smoke. When I quit I experienced a couple of weeks of physical withdrawal symptoms.

I gave up cigarrettes a couple of decades before quitting pot. In fact weed helped me quit nicotine. With weed the dependence or addiction was not physical but emotional. I did not have to smoke weed as soon as I woke up. I didn't need it every few hours. I didn't smoke before or during a regular work day. It was more like social drinking. Before I quit I started not enjoying it. I'd get high and be bummed out because I was high and didn't like it. Then I noticed that I was still getting high and hating it. This is what convinced me that I was either an addict or had developed a pretty tough habit.

So I quit. There were no withdrawals I just had to convince myself it was the right thing to do.

So is pot addictive? I'd say it is definately habit forming but not physically addictive. If there is a difference. I'm not trained or expert in these areas.

 

[epepke]

Wow, great straw man you've built up, there!

Anyone arguing that cannabis is not as harmful as heroine or crack cocaine is obviously a stoner addict.

You're wrong on at least two counts, possibly. Of course, correcting yourself would presuppose an ability to acknowledge your own straw men. I doubt that this will happen.

Well, bud, sorry to burst your bubble, but as one of the people who's been arguing the difference between harmful habits (though I think dependence is a much better word, I just couldn't think of it earlier) and physical addiction, I think I can safely call myself "not a stoner".

Not being a stoner is not a guarantee of intelligence, as you amply demonstrate.

I have never in my life claimed that marijuana is harmless, and I have seen no one on this forum claiming that to be the case. Please argue with what people are saying, not with pre-conceived notions.

Well, let's start with your straw men, shall we? Justify your caricature "Anyone arguing that cannabis is not as harmful as heroine or crack cocaine is obviously a stoner addict." Did I say "anyone"? Did I say "only"? Or did you just make that up?

I submit that you are either incapable of or unwilling to make a distinction between a necessary condition and a sufficient condition. Go ahead. Prove me wrong.

You know, maybe my sterotype of stoners is wrong, and I'll admit that it's provocative, which is pretty much the whole point of presenting it: to see if there's some reaction. But I'm saying that about the population of stoners. It says nothing about the population of non-stoners. That is, if you know how to think.

I'm actually quite surprised. For about five years I've been making snide comments about stoners. I'm surprised that not one of them has done a Winston Churchill and been able to follow basic logic. I'm also surprised at how many non-stoners get all shirty. The latter shows, at least, that dope isn't the only thing that can make one bad at logic.

 

[Dancing David]

I humbly accept your correction. My understanding seems to have been faulty.

The question, I suppose, is "Is Cannabis addictive in a way which justifies banning it like narcotic drugs?"

I submit that the answer is no.

Well, actually, I don't think narcotic drugs should be banned, either, but that's a different argument.

I agree but having talked to many of the casualties in the ED, I am not sure that the cost would not be very high.

 

[pgwenthold]

People get addicted to all kinds of stuff: food, sex, chocolate, biting on fingernails, watching TV, exercising, work, Internet forums... Any activity that gives a person some sort of pleasure or satisfaction can cause an addiction. People (some more than others) have a tendency to get obsessed by things, and sometimes they spend an unhealthy amount of their time and/or money on their obsessions, to a degree where it starts causing all sorts of problems.

There's no doubt that there are stoners who spend far to much of their time and money getting high and that their obsession causes problems in their lives. The question is, is there anything special with cannabis that makes cannabis addiction worse than, say food addiction?

This seems to me to be the real point.

So what if cannibis is addictive? If that is the basis for prohibition, then we have a long list of things that need to be addressed, starting with the 400 lb gorilla.

 

[brettDbass]

The so called 'cannabis withdrawal syndrome' would have to be almost purely psychological.
I have never heard of, or experienced, any withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking pot that couldn't be easily explained as a psychological symptom. With alcohol, meth, heroin and even nicotine the withdrawal symptoms are readily apparent and it is obvious as a withdrawal symptom.

Well, everyone's different, you know?

I was a constant stoner for many years.
When I gave up I noticed some distinct withdrawal symptoms: confusion, poor focus/concentration, disturbed eating patterns, mood swings and most of all CRAVINGS! I didn't give anything else up at the same time.

I also smoke tobacco. Having done the giving-up thing with tobacco a few times too, I can say with confidence that I get no withdrawal effects, ever. No short-temperedness, no change in my eating habits and NO CRAVINGS. Seriously, I just don't get them. Perversely, this makes it harder for me to give up permanently because I know that it's a breeze for me.. I typically only last a few months before falling off the proverbial wagon.

I don't get any problems giving up alcohol either, although I've never been a huge drinker.

 

[Strider1974]

brettDbass - The symptoms you have listed in regards to cannabis are psychological.
This doesn't make them any easier to deal with but they are different to the physiological withdrawal symptoms (eg the D.T.'s)

As for smoking - I had a friend who smoked 100 non-filter (Camels) cigarettes every day. When he quit cold turkey (that or die) he was in bed sick for a week and the doctor advised it was due to the withdrawal from nicotene

 

[asthmatic camel]

I have a (now deceased) uncle who was a severe schizophrenic. Most of the family blames his drug use using the same logic. He was perfectly normal before he started using the drugs in his late teens, and became a raving looney when he started using them, therefore it was the drugs that caused it. Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy.

There are two things wrong with that claim. 1) The time he started using the drugs was roughly the same time that schizophrenia symptoms typically begin to manifest, so there's a coincidental link. 2) Despite what the family claims, he wasn't normal prior to his drug use. His work (he was an artist) began to show characteristics common to the early stages of onset of some forms of schizophrenia. 3) Schizophrenics are notorious for their tendency to self-medicate beginning with acute onset of symptoms.

Read my post again. My ex was in her late twenties, holding down a responsible job when this happened. She rarely drank and had never used any kind of drug before. The results of smoking that one joint were acute paranoia and psychosis. The effects were immediate and clearly attributable to the use of the drug.

It's unusual for people to react this way but, there's no doubt that it happens.

 

[politas]

Well, let's start with your straw men, shall we? Justify your caricature "Anyone arguing that cannabis is not as harmful as heroine or crack cocaine is obviously a stoner addict." Did I say "anyone"? Did I say "only"? Or did you just make that up?

No you didn't. There seemed to be an implication in the way you phrased your statement, though, to which I had an emotional response, and posted without thinking clearly about your statement. Apologies.

I'm actually quite surprised. For about five years I've been making snide comments about stoners. I'm surprised that not one of them has done a Winston Churchill and been able to follow basic logic. I'm also surprised at how many non-stoners get all shirty. The latter shows, at least, that dope isn't the only thing that can make one bad at logic.

Is there not a point at which you look at your history of communication and think "All these people are mis-reading what I said, perhaps I should try to word things differently"?

 

[politas]

Read my post again. My ex was in her late twenties, holding down a responsible job when this happened. She rarely drank and had never used any kind of drug before. The results of smoking that one joint were acute paranoia and psychosis. The effects were immediate and clearly attributable to the use of the drug.

It's unusual for people to react this way but, there's no doubt that it happens.

And people occasionally die from their first dose of assorted medications. Human biochemistry is exceedingly complicated, and there are very few predictions about responses to drugs that can be made with absolute certainty. Are the rare reactions like your ex's sufficient reason for marijuana to be a banned substance?

And even if they are, I submit that banning substances is an ineffective method. Prohibition proved that making a substance illegal succeeds only in doing two things: making the available supplies of that substance more dangerous due to lack of quality controls, and allowing criminal organisations to profit from distributing the substance.

 

[Huntster]

Excellent topic.

....The main problem with requiring physical withdrawl is that it ignores the other cluster of things required for addiction,

some but not all should be present

-stated desire to quit but unable to do so
-multiple efforts to quit or limit use
-overuse , in that more is ingested than desired many times
-tolerance
-preoccupation of time spent aquiring, using or recovering from use
-*** use is detrimental to work and social relationships***
-***use continues despite major negative consequences to use***
-***substance becomes the dominant relationship in person's life***

These are the criteria I usualy use to determine if a person appears to have a dependancy issue on a substance, there are others in the DSM-IV, but the last three are the key, and I have met people who claim to be addicted to marijuana.

So have I.

In accordance with your above criteria, it would appear clear that cannibis is addictive.

Physical? Mental?

I don't know.

Is the difference significant if society refuses to address either possibility?

 

[Huntster]

....Addictions takes many forms, and varies from person to person, I have met about five people who claim they are addicted to marijuana, which is a lot less than the people I have met who claim to be addicted to cocaine , methamphetamine or alocohol, they number in the hundreds.

Another excellent point.

Is this the difference between physical and mental addiction?

 

[Huntster]

I wonder what constitutes addiction to forum posting and whether this screws up personal relationships. It seems to me that if someone posts tens of thousands of times per year to internet forums they run the risk of damaging relationships as well.

No doubt.

And there is no way that can be labeled a "physical" addiction.

 

[Huntster]

...Physical addiction, once broken, is gone forever....

No way!

Habit-based cravings don't go away anywhere near as easily, which is why AA encourages sufferers to work on the premise that if you are an alcoholic, you are an alcoholic for life.

Are you suggesting that alcoholism isn't a physical addiction?

If you skip work and lose pay or get fired because you're too busy refuting woos on JREF, then it's definitely a harmful habit.

Agreed.

But when you stop posting on JREF, you will unlikely suffer shakes, the runs, headaches, etc.

That's physical.

 

[Huntster]

....But to see a band go through a GARBAGE bag full in one session and have that not be uncommon? ...

Wow.