Jimba

I'll keep this simple because I don't want to poison the waters.

Can anyone tell me the difference between an addict and someone who is simply addicted to a drug.

I have seen family members die, I have seen family members binge to the edge of belief and quit in a snap for life just because, both got themselves into trouble, but something was different what is it. how do you identify it. I am talking like 35 years sober, drink a beer if I want, not a dry drunk.

And with benzos and opiates??

adore79

I think it depends on who you ask. I think anyone can become an alcoholic, but some can quit by willpower and some cant, and those who cant require something more, like a spiritual program. I dont even worry about the "is it a disease or not" question, whatever it is it is deadly and the only important thing is abstaining anyway you can.

Mark75

I think your question is only as complicated as you want to make it.

"Drug Addict" is a term when used in the way popular culture actually uses it evokes the image of a person who has become addicted to illicit drugs, like cocaine, heroin, speed... often this image is of one who injects drugs, lives in the outer fringes of society, not someone who gives a good first impression. I am sure you can conjure up that image.

A person who is addicted to drugs... that sentence can apply to the the individuals I described above... But it can also apply to someone who has become dependent, or addicted, to drugs in pill form... pain medication, tranquilizers, sleeping pills, stimulants... Technically these people could be referred to as "Drug Addicts". But, many who understand the popular use of the term, may flinch at using the term for someone who doesn't inject them, or someone who "looks normal" on the outside, has a good job, family, gets his or her drugs at a pharmacy, not on the street. Yet these people may be using this drugs for a use other than what the drug was intended, in other words they've been using the drug to feel good instead of, or in addition to, just, say, relieving pain.

This all gets even more complicated.... if you wish to complicate things further.... A person using a drug as medication prescribed for pain or anxiety can easily become physically dependent, and perhaps emotionally dependent to medication. The drug might still be used properly and for legitimate reasons, yet the person cannot do without the medication lest withdrawal symptoms develop. Addicted ?... yes. "Drug Addict" ?, well, I don't think that term would apply if you use it in a way that popular culture has come to use it (see above).

I think for the most part, I would let the individual decide which term they want to use... Addict, Drug Addict, chemically dependent person....

Why do you ask?

Mark

NoelleR

Difference between a drug addict and a person who is addicted to drugs......? To me, they are the same thing.

HOWEVER, IMHO, there IS a difference between a drug addict (as I was a drug addict) and a person who's body is physically dependent on drugs. Hospital cancer wards, for example, are filled with the latter----most are physically dependent on their pain meds (their morphine and/or fentanyl--the most commonly used pain meds on these wards).....BUT, I would NOT call them drug addicts (at least not the kind of drug addict I was), and I certainly would NOT remove their pain meds; make them go through detox; make them live in pain; take AA/NA meetings to them to help them live with their pain.....lol (I'm just being facetious here).

So, I guess what I'm saying here is..............for ME, there's NO difference between a drug addict and a person addicted to drugs, but there IS a difference between a drug addict (like me) and a person who's body is physically dependent on drugs..... (o:


NoelleR

christin1225

Thank you SO MUCH for posting this question. I wrestled with this for the first few months of this unveiling of an addiction that I didn't know that I had. I would like to reply by pasting in a series of posts involving me since I came to SR.

I posted, though I hadn't picked up a drug or drink in almost twenty years. I had no clue that I might be an addict, but I sensed something wrong. My anxiety increased until I finally quieted it with a few hydrocodone. I wasn't all that worried because I was sure that in just a few days, I would be back to normal. I had to be back to normal. I only had a handful of pills.

To this, Sugah replied:
When I first read that post, I didn't know Sugah. I thought that she had made a typo... "if you are what you suspect you are." I suspected nothing. Obviously this woman, Sugah, suspected something, but she was wrong.

A few days later, Sugah's words came true and I posted:
This was written by a woman who, before she took a few pills wouldn't even tolerate "mental reservation" type of lies in her home. If a phone was picked up in my house, noone was allowed to say that someone wasn't at home if they were. I lost my soul the night that I stole from my father. I continued to lose myself, but I was unable to stop it.

CarolID replied:
I appreciated her kind word, but informed her: "Thanks, I'm not addicted. I just can't find a way to get outside of my own head and stop these feelings by myself. But, that's all that I have at this moment ... me, my head, and a craziness that I can't listen to today."

If you haven't "met" Sugah yet, Jimba, I hope that you do soon. She has used her experience with addiction to help many on SR. She posted:
And she was right. I could see what was happening but I couldn't seem to stop it. I have many posts after this one, where I'm still not convinced that I'm an addict. I was sure that I was crazy. I was convinced that I had allowed myself to create a delusion that I couldn't escape. Of course, I had to have Lupus or something to explain my behavior. Anything had to be the answer, except that I was an addict.

I don't think that many people have a story as "compact" as mine. What happened in a matter of months for me, usually takes years for other people. So, the signs of the disease are less obvious. The explanation that I was given for the reason that mine progressed so quickly is that the disease of addiction is progressive. I had signs of addiction early on in my life but had a conversion of sorts and resolved to abstain. Abstinence does not equal recovery. It may not make sense on the intellectual level, but I've experienced the truth of that reality.

So, Jimba, this is a long post to say that I think that the difference is in the obsession and the compulsion to use. An individual who is "merely" addicted may continue to use because they like the high or because they're afraid of withdrawal. An addict continues to use (or at least this addict continued to use) because while in the bondage of active addiction, there's no peace inside an addict's head, whether or not he's due to take his DOC or has just taken his DOC. There is only a momentary relief from the obsession and compulsion once he uses, regardless of the intensity of the high. Although the need to use never completely abated, I kept using because something inside me was sure that just one more would stop the obsession, would sate the compulsion, would give me my life back. Of course, it never did.

I'm of the opinion that few (if any) true addicts (unlike those who are merely addicted, though there really is no "merely" about it) are able to taper their DOC. I'm convinced by my experience that the disease makes such an act virtually (if not completely) impossible. Of course, all this is just my opinion and perception. I may be way off the mark. So, I ask you take it for what it is, my experience. This was good for me to tell myself again, Jimba. Thanks for asking.

Edit: PS I was the first to reply to his post but had to leave to attend my AA meeting this morning before I was able to finish .

TryingisDying

I would just assume they are the same.......I might say that I am a addicted to drugs while another would call me a drug addict.....

coffeenut

Doesn't matter a bit....if there is a problem.

Bigger problem if you choose to label it, rather than treat it.

Welcome to SR!

flutter

In a job I had eons go, we had to change our wording from one to the other. From "He is a drug addict" to "He is addicted to drugs", this was mostly just PC stuff, it sounds better, they were seen as one in the same. Using the term drug addict seemed to define the person, saying that a person is addicted to drugs, identified more that we have a person here, who happens to be addicted to drugs. You see this verbage even with disease, like doctors trying to stay away from "he is a cancer patient" and now usually saying "he is a person that has a cancer diagnosis".

I think it's a semantics game, to be quite honest.

Just like I feel in my world, I am not an alcoholic, I was dependent on alcohol (those of you about to.. please don't argue this with me, we did this on another 29852987 threads, it's just my opinion). I wasn't a coke addict, I was me, but with a coke addiction. Clear as mud? I just think it's seperating the person from being defined by the problem. Same problem, likely needs the same treatment, just prettier wording.

christin1225

I'm going to say that it does matter because what works to get someone/keep someone clean who is not an addict but is addicted to drugs is different. Obviously, I feel strong about this (and that's why I am posting so soon again). It's an especially important topic on recovery forums where people come to hear about things that have helped other people to get clean. As I indicated in my earlier post, an addict can read about tapering programs until the cows come home but I sincerely believe that he will not be able to taper his DOC. "Just say no," does NOT work for the addict.

Those people who are addicted to drugs and who have successfully tapered (or detoxed at a facility) can go on their merry way and with absolutely no support can stay clean. To suggest that this is a viable avenue for an addict to take, can be deadly. At the very least, it would lead the addict to the worst imagineable self-loathing because he can't do it, the obsession and compulsion are just too great (dear God, I know!).

Personally, I think that this is a question that's not asked nearly enough.

Sugah

At the risk of stirring controversy, I'll share an analogy often used to distinguish alcoholics from addicts. Some will say, "Put thirty people in a room and feed them alcohol for a month, then withdraw it, and at the end of the month, you'll have 3 alcoholics" (about 10%). It goes on to say, "Put 30 people in a room and give them heroin for a month, then withdraw it, and you'll have 30 heroin addicts." The flaw in that analogy is mistaking physical dependence for addiction. Let's go further. Let those 30 heroin-dependent people complete detox, and once the drug is completely gone from their system, most will walk away and never touch it again. At least three of them will return, not at all daunted by the painful withdrawal or whatever other consequences may have resulted from their use. One of the reasons that drugs are seen to be different is that it IS very painful to withdraw from some of them, so people continue to use to avoid the withdrawal. With alcohol, physical dependence takes much longer to develop. But, I digress.

The point is that it is not the chemical make-up of what we put into our bodies, although we do believe that we respond differently than the normal person to those chemicals -- we develop the compulsion to take more. It's the obsession for those chemicals even in the absence of physical dependence.

I remember responding to Christin when she first began posting. I was floored that she was able to detect that she had a problem -- and that she had the balls to voice it to us. It took me twenty-five years of swapping one substance for another to finally realize that it wasn't the particular substance that was the problem. The problem was me. I was never going to be able to live a clean and sober life until I did something about me.

Peace & Love,
Sugah

Mark75

christin - You had an awesome answer to the OP. Mine came at it from a very superficial perspective, and I feel like I shouldn't have even answered it, I wasn't qualified...

I was addicted to pills. I could not taper them, I took them until they were gone, no taper (right!!). After 2 real attempts I was off, never really looked back. Not a big deal... Alcoholism, though, is what keeps me coming back to SR and AA.

I appreciated your answer because I have never really stopped to consider my own dependence, addiction, whatever, to "dry goods". Another thread here on SR started me thinking about it and you helped bring it home.

I took pills for years, and since my rehab (I had already stopped my DOC pill), I have come across pills in hiding places... while I was actively using them, before I kicked it, I would have not given it a second thought... I'd consume them. After rehab, though, when I have stumbled upon them, they were flushed, ... without a second thought.

I always thought that was weird... Because.... If I see beer in a cooler, an advertisement for Grey Goose vodka, neon signs, I still get pangs.... still can miss it, at least miss what used to be the good times. But pills, really pack little emotional force for me....

So I guess that I was addicted? But not an "addict".

If I've got it wrong, anyone, tell me... I'm really interested in understanding this.

Thanx again

Mark

tellus

This is a question that I've thought about a lot. In college, my friend C. and I drank about equal amounts. Her drinking got her into trouble a LOT more than mine got me into trouble. C. was, without a doubt, addicted to alcohol. But at the end of the day, she is not an alcoholic. She graduated college, moved on, no longer drinks to excess because her adult life can't accommodate it. She also dabbled with drugs, including coke, but she never became an addict. The only difference between us, as far as I can see, is that she didn't have the gene and I did. Put in the exact same circumstances, with the exact same drinking habits, only one of us came out an alcoholic. The only reason for that that I can think of is genetics.

PXYZ

"I don`t like the drugs , but drugs like me"

NoelleR

I think I'm just going to go along with all my dictionaries, wikipedia (and all my other "...ia's"), my personal f2f NA buddies, and even my NA acquaintances, and stick with the definition.............:

A drug addict is.........: a person who is addicted to drugs. Therefore, I would have to say that the terms 'drug addict' and 'a person addicted to drugs' are absolutely the same.....

I would also have to agree with Sugah and remember to NOT confuse a person who's body has become dependent on drugs (actually, usually only the drug they need to take, and not all drugs) with an addict/a person who is addicted to drugs. They are NOT the same.....and I can pretty much guarantee that the folks on the cancer wards would take grave exception to being called addicts. (o:


NoelleR

P.S. ....and what's this deal with not using the term 'cancer patient' but calling them 'persons that have a cancer diagnosis'.....? I worked for about 35 years for the Western Journal of Medicine (the magazine for the CMA---the California Medical Association) and I've never heard a doctor use that latter term. I also have a few friends who've fought and been beating cancer, and they (and their doctors) refer to themselves as cancer patients.....I mean.....a person can be too 'PC' ...... eh.....?

christin1225

Mark,

Because both addicts and alcholics suffer the disease of addiction, I think that there is a much (MUCH) higher risk of an alcoholic being an addict and vise versa. However, I don't think that it's a given. An alcoholic is not necessarily an addict and an addict is not automatically an alcoholic (although drinking tends to lead an addict to use and using tends to lead an alcoholic to drink).

That being said, we know that only an addict can label himself an addict just as only an alcoholic can determine if he is alcoholic. But, according to my experience and understanding of what makes an addict an addict, it sounds to me as though you've got the right idea. You are familiar with the obsession and the compulsion of addiction when it relates to drinking. Yet, you don't seem to relate that same experience to your drug use.

How about craving? (Just throwing this out there, folks.) Maybe this might be another criteria that one might use to determine if he is an addict or an alcoholic. Do people crave if they are not addicts, even if they are addicted? Obviously, someone who isn't alcoholic doesn't crave, at least not as the alcoholic does, even if a person were to express his desire for a beer as a craving. His craving would be the same as when the PMS sufferer craves chocolate. My experience, as an addict, tells me that that craving (and I'm assuming this applies to the alcoholic) is something much stronger than a mere desire, stronger even than a strong desire. For me, craving is so interwined with the obsessive and compulsion aspects of addiction that it more resembles the drives meant to ensure our species' survival (such as the appetite for food or sex). It is no typical desire, even one that is magnified.

Do all those who become addicted to drugs experience the phenomenon of craving? Do they find that it's similar to the experience of withdrawal, during which the brain signals to the detoxing individual that his life is in danger (anxiety). Do they crave in an equally desperate manner, as if their brains are warning them to satisfy their need because it is necessary in order to ensure survival? That's how I describe craving. Does everyone crave so intensely? If not, what might the reason be for the difference? Could it possibly relate to there being a difference between being addicted and being an addict? I would appreciate others sharing their experience and commenting on this.

It's not my intention to complicate matters. It's just that I think that Jimba's question is worth examining. I'm sure that more than one parent has asked, "If Tommy can stay clean, why does my Johnny keep relapsing?" The answer might simply be that Tommy is more dedicated to his recovery program. Then again, the answer might be that Johnny is equally dedicated but unlike in Tommy's case (that of a teenager fighting an addiction), Johnny is an addict who is battling the same disease but with his hands tied behind his back.

I'm not saying that addicts should look for excuses to stay in active addiction. After all, we profess that addicts DO recover. I'm just saying that I think that Jimba's topic is worth looking at in order to better understand addiction and those who are afflicted with the disease.

Sugah

Christin, the cravings, I suspect, are the result of where you are in your particular treatment. This might be just more semantics, but it's the way I understand the difference between craving and obsessing -- from my experience, the literature and what some others have shared with me.

I'll first reference "The Doctor's Opinion" in the prefacing pages of the Big Book:
As someone for whom the symptoms of addiction have manifested in both alcohol and drug use, I could substitute the word "alcohol" with just about any other drug and delivery method and it would hold true. Without a method of recovery and change to deal with that restlessness, irritability and discontented feeling, I'd keep chasing that elusive feeling by using alcohol or drugs. That's the obsession. Even completely clean, as I had been for short times, I'd still obsess, and it felt physical. The mind is a very powerful thing. It was not, however, a craving as I understand it. The craving came when I put something into my body, and I began to crave more and more of it.

Once the physical dependency is broken, the desire for a fix is a mental (and/or spiritual) battle -- one that many alcoholic/addicts find difficult, if not impossible to resist without some sort of tools to cope. Breaking the physical dependence ended my craving (compulsion to use). The experience of taking the steps took away my desire (obsession), with a few very weird, out-of-the-blue exceptions over the years.

There are a whole lot more questions up there in your post, but I think I'll step aside and let someone who's more concise tackle them

Peace & Love,
Sugah

Mark75

While I was using pills, if it was time for another pill...I craved... once I had a couple days not using, the craving ceased. It took me a couple of times to finally stop because I was using stimulants and I would get bone tired and that would last for like a month... The second time I was able to weather the fatigue and eventually my energy levels returned pre-stimulant. So it wasn't really craving, I just got sick of being so exhausted. I didn't feel that powerful draw that I always had to alcohol.

I don't know, maybe I am splitting hairs, but maybe not... I identify myself as alcoholic, not as an addict... and that feels right, so I guess it is...

I do agree very much about the inter-relationship... I am convinced that my (ab)use of the stimulants brought about much heavier alcohol consumption... In fact, now that I am sober, ie, not drinking...I can't even imagine wanting to take a stimulant!!!... now, whether the stimulants made me an alcoholic... well... It's getting late... maybe later!

Thanks for your posts, very thought provoking.

Mark

Angelic17

Drug addict? Person who is addicted to drugs? Both exactly the same thing. I don't think there is a difference. Am I missing something here?

Jimba

Angel, you are missing a great deal and in your position with your son you should reflect on this a bit more. His mental health depends on it.

christin is a bright girl who has done a lot of reflection and has a lot to say in her posts sugah seems to be wise and I would imagine has seen a lot. Between them you will find the best answer as to what the difference is, although I disagree with what christin thinks she is.

I know what I am but I don't know why.

Okay if we assume that addicts have longer term cravings or cravings long after the drug is gone or even before it is introduced. There is still a difference between addicts some its a lifestyle choice, some its a drive that ends in the street, jail, institutions death, some its a tool that achieves outcomes in environmental situations.

So you can break it down further into those who have cognitive goals and those who have a wide range of disorders chemically. Depression, anxiety, social ineptitude and some a light goes on "this is what was missing this is me". For each of us it is slightly different is it not. Though we may find solace in the things we share and that may mend or make bearable the true problem at least for those who the problem is cognitive and not chemical, are we really fixing the problem.

I guess we don't have a lot of options but in speaking with one person who I have found to be more than what she believes, I have realized that this is something that is missed or dismissed by many. Its so easy to put a label on what we are or they are we seldom take the time to truly understand what those labels and how they are just an abstract means to communicate not to understand. Like spam we all know what spam is but no one knows what spam is.

So, in a nut shell those who feel like thinking or responding, if we are talking about addicts and not someone addicted to drugs.

I am just another dumb *******, but

WHY? Can you elaborate for the purpose of helping other what might cause someone to be and addict or alcoholic besides the generic answers?

Jimba

"You cant understand the problem of defense until you understand the problem of attack."

Treat what?