BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

Mr. Luddite

On 7/5/2015 11:33 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 05 Jul 2015 04:58:53 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 7/4/2015 11:37 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 04 Jul 2015 18:40:49 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 7/4/2015 6:22 PM, wrote:

There is certainly an "addiction" gene or some other genetic disorder.
The drug may change but the addiction problem doesn't usually change.
It can be diverted to religion, certain types of hard work or some
other drug but it will still be there.

I always considered myself luck I dodged it because it is in my family
but I have no problem walking away from anything. I can smoke with my
buddies for several days and never think about it again after I leave.
Same with anything else I am willing to try. I do avoid opiates at all
costs. I have gutted it put after a lot of things where I had a
prescription for some knock out drug I wouldn't fill.

I disagree with you about the "addiction" gene. A responsible gene
suggests physiological evidence that can be isolated and identified.
To my knowledge, no such gene has ever been discovered. Many medical
docs and researchers have reported that there is "no" evidence or proof
of a medical reason for addiction. The ones claiming "disease" are
shrinks and other addicts.

There is plenty of evidence that these problems run in families and
show up even when the kids live away from the rest of their people.
We can quibble about the meaning of "gene" and even "addiction"
(overused in my opinion) but it seems clear that something is being
passed down from the parents.

The fact that "Many medical docs and researchers" can't find a surgery
or pill to fix the problem dies not mean it is not there. We have
really just started drilling down on the human genome in any real
detail and it is not surprising they haven't found the silver bullet.
I am not sure they have their finger on the gay gene either but the
supreme court says it exists. ;-)

You still can't avoid the anecdotal evidence that some families share
a tendency for addiction far greater than others. Lifestyle, means and
parental supervision does not explain it all. Just look at the
Kennedys.

You are arguing nature vs nurture. There still is *no* medical evidence
that drug abuse or alcoholism is passed on in the gene pool.
In fact, there is *no* medical evidence either is due to a physiological
condition or abnormality. Sure, a kid that grows up in a family of
alcohol or drug abusers or in a neighborhood where they are prevalent
stands a higher chance of becoming hooked but that doesn't mean they
were born predisposed to becoming an addict.

Certain areas of the south shore in MA are seriously affected by
kids and young adults becoming addicted to heroin. It's a major crisis.
You can't convince me that specific areas of a state or country is
populated with people passing drug or alcohol genes. The
problem is due to the social environment. Participation in social
pressures is a choice.

I could argue the same thing about being gay but that would be
contrary to the current PC thinking.

I think PC thinking is often screwed up for the same reasons social
pressures can dictate fads or "what's in" and "what's out".