(Tell me again, why are we doing this?)
"I'm no wheelbarrow!" You know, everyone says that and the louder they shout the more predictable they become and eventually the easier they are to 'set up'! You see, wheelbarrows are powerless and empty objects that are filled with 'whatever' and go wherever the 'pusher' wants it to go!
Our first world market driven, consumer culture sets us up with three primary values. These suck us into a place where we believe the following values are so important. Now we may not write them down and rehearse them, but they are powerfully reinforced in culture and if left unchecked, they end up 'bumping' other values aside, values like courage, honesty, compassion and service.
These new 'values' are...a) Is it fun? b) Is it comfortable? c) Will it make "ME"'happy'?
If a couple of these three 'biggies' aren't on the table, or at least looked at, then we tend to walk away! But what are we walking away from? And ultimately where are we gunna end up? "Who cares" may be the 'try hard' reply... well, YOU DO! Unless you're so dysfunctional and messed up of course!
ICE wasn’t Andy’s first drug – no that was alcohol. He started bingeing at only 14. After using cannabis and some heroin, and then stopping for a season, Andy commenced ICE use after the death of his mother – it motivated him to get out of bed…but sadly much more than that followed.
Andy candidly, but unemotionally shares his concerns about the poor use of drug policy and the utter madness of ‘ICE Smoking Rooms’. Check out the full interview here…
Recovery and the ‘Nanny State’ – A note to the ‘right to recreational drug use’ lobby!
When elements of a society (most always from the ‘grown-ups’) say, “I don’t want a nanny state, with laws and regulations keeping me from doing what I want”, then ‘movements’ emerge seeking to mandate the removal of prohibitions and preventions on that risky edge. Of course, this is no more apparent than with the vociferous minority seeking to normalize illicit drug use in our culture.
Of course, the lesser protections there are in place, the greater the incidences of harm will follow, and invariably for the most vulnerable – our young.
Besides the utter disregard for ‘others’, what is not only incongruent, but breath-takingly hypocritical, is that this decrying of the ‘Nanny State’ interference only works one way for the societal saboteur!
At the commencement of their campaigns, these egocentric self-indulgers demand to be left alone to do what they want but seem to have no repulsion in lining up quickly for free health care, welfare benefits and tax-payer funded reparations when their hedonism eventually fails them.
So, if we are to stop being a Nanny State, then that must work at every level and in all directions, right? Let us permit all drug use, but also permit that only the user pays for both the harm to themselves and others, and without any burden or impost on society they chose to carelessly ignore!
Even the oft quoted anti-nanny state libertarian and 19th Century social commentator, John Stuart Mills insists some lines be drawn in society, and when it comes to drug use, his following statements couldn’t be more relevant or poignant.
“No person is an entirely isolated being; it is impossible for a person to do anything seriously or permanently hurtful to himself without mischief reaching at least to his near connections, and often far beyond them.” And, “If he deteriorates his bodily or mental faculties, he not only brings evil upon all who depended upon him for any portion of their happiness, but disqualifies himself for rendering the services which he owes to his fellow creatures generally, perhaps becomes a burden on their affection or benevolence; and if such conduct were very frequent hardly any offense that is committed would detract more from the general sum of good.
And even (it will be added) if the consequences of misconduct could be confined to the vicious or thoughtless individual, ought society to abandon to their own guidance those who are manifestly unfit for it? If protection against themselves is confessedly due to children and persons under age, is not society equally bound to afford it to persons of mature years who are equally incapable of self-government? If gambling, or drunkenness [we would add drug use, of course]… are as injurious to happiness, and as great a hindrance to improvement, as many or most of the acts prohibited by law, why (it may be asked) should not law, so far as is consistent with practicability and social convenience, endeavor to repress these also? …There is no question here (it may be said) about restricting individuality or impeding the trial of new and original experiments in living. The only things it is sought to prevent are things which have been tried and condemned from the beginning of the world until now; things which experience has shown not to be useful or suitable to any person’s individuality. There must be some length of time and amount of experience, after which a moral or prudential truth may be regarded as established, and it is merely desired to prevent generation after generation from falling over the same precipice which has been fatal to their predecessors.”1
Of course, not all current drug users are of this epicurean ilk, and many are trapped in the tyranny of addiction and need support, care and empowerment to recover. However, make no mistake, the current lobby is all about engagement with illicit drugs for anything but trauma alleviation!
Drug use exiting recovery is best practice for the well-being and restoration of those currently living with the consequences of decisions to enter the world of drug use – motivators/invitations from everything from uninvited trauma, to the careless and reckless decisions ‘to smash as many drugs as I can and party hard!’. This Recovery Month we encourage all in such situations to seek out and at least commence that journey to drug use exiting recovery.
However, the adage remains irrevocably true – “Prevention is ALWAYS better than cure!” When it comes to illicit drug use, and the misuse of the legal and most damaging drug, Alcohol, please think not only of yourself, but of those nearest to you. The life you enrich may not just be your own!
L’chaim – To life, not instead of it!
Shane Varcoe – The Dalgarno Institute.
JULY 18, 2018 BY COREY W. HUNTER, MD, FIPP
While opioid medications may be effective for treating pain in the short-term, they have an extremely high propensity for addiction and do nothing to address the underlying cause of the pain.
The good news is that there are many alternatives to opioids that can help alleviate your son or daughter’s pain. Below, we’ve helped to spell them out for you and have provided guidance on how to ask your doctor about these alternatives.
What if My Child Has Chronic Pain?
Chronic pain is defined by the CDC generally as pain that lasts more than three months. It’s a complex issue to manage successfully, but especially so in the case of someone you’re concerned about developing an addiction, or someone in recovery. The CDC actually recommends against opioids as the solution for chronic pain management, as they say the risks from opioids greatly outweigh the benefits for most people. Fortunately, there are several other methods to help manage these chronic issues that you and your child can discuss with a physician.
Results: Overall, 32.2% (95% CI=29.7–34.9) of patients with a substance-induced psychosis converted to either bipolar or schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. The highest conversion rate was found for cannabis-induced psychosis, with 47.4% (95% CI=42.7–52.3) converting to either schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Young age was associated with a higher risk of converting to schizophrenia. Self-harm after a substance-induced psychosis was significantly linked to a higher risk of converting to both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Half the cases of conversion to schizophrenia occurred within 3.1 years after a substance-induced psychosis, and half the cases of conversion to bipolar disorder occurred within 4.4 years.
Conclusions: Substance-induced psychosis is strongly associated with the development of severe mental illness, and a long follow-up period is needed to identify the majority of cases.
Nearly 33 percent of young adults in the U.S. are at risk of being addicted to cocaine, take prescription medication for non-medical use, and become alcoholics. One in three people between the ages of 21 and 24 habitually consumes energy drinks, and a new study suggests they are more likely to abuse drugs or alcohol later in life.
For the study, researchers from the University of Maryland followed the health and risk-taking habits of 1,099 college students over a four-year period. At the end of the analysis, the participants that drank highly caffeinated drinks were more likely to be addicted to cocaine, alcohol, or other substances than students who avoided the beverages.
“This study gives evidence of a specific contribution of energy drink consumption to later substance use,” said Amelia Arria, an associate professor and lead author of the study, as cited by NZ Herald. “The results suggest that energy drink users might be at heightened risk for other substance use, particularly stimulants.”
While the study seemed to find an association between energy drinks and future substance abuse, the researchers could not determine exactly why such a link should exist. Some possibilities for a connection include peer pressure, a higher inclination for risk-taking, and even effects on the brain that cause a craving for more potent stimulants.