Drug Addiction

Photo of the Day

John Phillips may easily be called one of the best pop songwriters of the later 20th century. He honed his songwriting and arranging skills with singing groups that gained a modicum of success. But his crowning musical achievement was the work he did with his '60s group the Mamas and the Papas. Photo: MTV

John Phillips may easily be called one of the best pop songwriters of the later 20th century. He honed his songwriting and arranging skills with singing groups that gained a modicum of success. But his crowning musical achievement was the work he did with his ’60s group the Mamas and the Papas. Photo: MTV

Forbidden Fruit

A Lifetime of Debauched and Reckless Behaviour

John Phillips, destructiveness was too extravagant even for Keith Richards, who once kicked Phillips out of his house for being too uncontrollable

Unlike some other musician/addiction profiles, the John Phillips story is not necessarily one with a cheerful ending.

Mackenzie Phillips, his daughter, was 10 years old when her father taught her how to roll a joint. She had her first taste of cocaine at age 11. At 14, she landed a role in the film?American Graffiti?, and one week after her 18th birthday, she was arrested for the first time.

When she was 10, her dad gave her, her first adult job.

?Dad said, ?I?m going to give you a project,? Dad had a job for me! This was exciting. I was in.?

?I got really good at rolling joints. I was the official joint roller for all the adults.?

McKenzie?says she was allowed so much freedom as a kid that the only rules her dad gave her were to spend one night a week at home and to always change her clothes before returning in the early morning.

?A lady never wears evening clothes during the day. It?s cheap,? John Phillips, who died in 2001, told her.

He did have one boundary. One day, Mackenzie found a purple pill in her dad?s bedroom.

She instinctively took it. But it turned out not to be just any pill ? it was the last of the LSD pills made by the famous drug cook Owsley Stanley, and it was a collector?s item among moneyed celebrity druggies of the time.

?It was as if I?d crashed a normal dad?s Porsche, he said, ?You took my last hit of Owsley. You?re grounded!? ?

Read more »

Fat bastards could lose benefits in UK, what a great policy

David Cameron says UK taxpayers shouldn’t have to??fund the benefits? of fatties?or drug and alcohol addicts who refuse treatment?that could help them get back into employment.

Obese people could have their benefits stripped if they refuse treatment in a bid to ensure they can lead a ?fulfilling life?, David Cameron has said.

A Conservative government will attempt to ensure that tens of thousands of people who claim welfare on the grounds of obesity, drug or alcohol addiction are ?incentivised? to go back to work, the Prime Minister said.

Mr Cameron said that taxpayers should no longer ?fund the benefits? of people who refuse to accept the treatment that could help them get back into employment.

He has asked Professor Dame Carol Black, a senior Government adviser of health, to conduct a review into how best to get people with treatable conditions back into work.

The review will focus on how to incentivise the people to get back to work and consider whether their benefits should be stopped if they refuse treatment.

Currently, almost 100,000 people are claiming sickness benefits because they say they are suffering from conditions such as drug or alcohol addiction, or obesity.

However, there is no requirement for such people to undertake treatment, meaning it is possible to claim without making efforts at recovery.

Of the 2.5 million claiming sickness benefits, around 1.5 million have been claiming for more than 5 years.? Read more »

And still no charges have been laid in the 9 year old booze boy botchup

Jonathan Carson reports

Police have yet to lay charges against those responsible for getting a 9-year-old boy so drunk he was sick, and a top alcohol counsellor warns the case is a symptom of New Zealand’s shocking drinking culture.

The video sparked international attention and was viewed more than 400,000 times before being removed from the internet yesterday afternoon at the request of police.

It showed the boy with a can of bourbon and cola struggling to stand, being abusive and slurring his words at Fairfield Skate Park in Hamilton on Tuesday – his ninth birthday. He consumed eight cans and two liqueur shots and became so sick that he vomited and calling an ambulance was considered.

Police interviewed several people in relation to the incident yesterday, but no charges have been laid.

Police know who supplied the alcohol.

No charges have been laid. ? Read more »

Photo Of The Day

Copyright : Doors

Copyright : Doors

When someone who has found fame dies young, it creates a mystique of legendary proportions.? Jim Morrison, Brian Jones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse all belong to a rather exclusive group of musicians and singers who died at 27.

When they died, their fans, deep in mourning, wondered what they would have done next.

The term “27 Club” was first used in Rolling Stone magazine after the death of Jim Morrison in 1971 after Jones, Hendrix and Joplin had all died within a span of a little over the two previous years. ? Read more »

Not just munters getting smashed and high

New evidence suggests that it isn’t just munters getting smashed and high, rather it?shows that drinking and drug taking in adults correlates with higher childhood intelligence.

Finnish researchers?gathered data on 3,000 fraternal and identical twins and found that the sibling who was the first to develop verbal ability?speaking words, reading and using expressive language?also tended to be the first to try alcohol and to drink more heavily throughout adolescence. Verbal development may be correlated with social intelligence; the verbally precocious twin also had, on average, more friends, and could be more likely to end up in social situations where alcohol is present: ?Good language skills reduce the likelihood of peer rejection? higher social activity predicts more frequent drinking in adolescence,? write the authors.

First to speak means first to booze and drugs?

Earlier speaking age is also associated with better academic performance throughout middle and high school and a higher chance of graduating from college?and achieving higher levels of education is also correlated with higher alcohol consumption. The authors hypothesize that intelligence is correlated with curiosity and a desire for new experiences: ?Cognitive performance and reading abilities in childhood are related to higher stimulation-seeking tendencies.?

My experiences are certainly not like this study.

Drawing on the results of the National Child Development Study, which tracked for 50 years all British babies born during one week in March 1958, Kanazawa found that kids who scored higher on IQ tests grew up to drink larger quantities of alcohol on a more regular basis than their less intelligent peers. He evaluated other factors, including religion, frequency of church attendance, social class, parents? education and self-reported satisfaction with life, and found that intelligence before age 16 was second only to gender in predicting alcohol consumption at age 23.

In Kanazawa?s model, illicit drugs constitute another evolutionarily novel experience?and he (and others) have also found a link between high IQ and experimentation with drugs. In Kanazawa?s study, the higher a respondent?s IQ before age 16, the more psychoactive substances he or she had tried by age 42. Another?study?found that 30-year-old women who had earned high scores on an IQ test at age five were more than twice as likely to have smoked weed or used cocaine in the previous year; men who had scored highly on IQ tests as children were 50 percent more likely to have recently consumed amphetamines or ecstasy.

Again not my experience, having never taken amphetamines nor ecstasy, and only ?very mild drinker.

Possibly smart kids go on to have jobs that allow them to spend more money on expensive things like booze and drugs?

Addiction is not Illness

? Mail Online

The excellent Theodore Dalrymple has a comprehensive answer to this Herald nonsense that addicts are victims of illness who should not be “stigmatised” as the nutty editorial puts it.?? Flat-out compulsion is the way to stop them & the government plan is a good first step.

This from an earlier 2007 Dalrymple demolition of the wet liberal detox myths:

Drug-addiction services have also grown massively. In our society, every problem calls forth its equal and supposedly opposite bureaucracy, the ostensible purpose of which is to solve the problem.

But the bureaucracy quickly develops a survival instinct, and so no more wishes the problem to disappear altogether than the lion wishes to kill all the gazelle in the bush and leave itself without food.

In short, the bureaucracy of drug addiction needs drug addicts far more than drug addicts need the bureaucracy of drug addiction.

The propaganda, assiduously spread for many years now, is that heroin addiction is an “illness”. This view serves the interests both of the addicts who wish to continue their habit while placing the blame for their behaviour elsewhere, and the bureaucracy that wishes to continue in employment, preferably for ever and at higher rates of pay.

Viewing addiction as an illness automatically implies there is a medical solution to it. So, when all the proposed “cures” fail to work, addicts blame not themselves but those who have offered them ineffectual solutions.

And for bureaucracies, nothing succeeds like failure. The Government spends more than a quarter of a billion pounds a year on drug treatment in the UK, despite there being little evidence of any reduction in the number of addicts.

Since the bureaucratic solution to waste is to waste even more, you don’t have to be Nostradamus to predict that funding in Britain will continue to rise.

Now people might say, “What the fuck would he know?”…well this is how:

I see up to 20 new cases a day in prison ? I began to think about it more. The medical perspective, that these people were ill and in need of treatment, seemed less and less convincing.

I discovered that most addicted prisoners stopped taking heroin in jail, even when it was available. They came into the prison starving and miserable, and went out relatively healthy.

But within a few months, many were back in their former condition, and when brought once more before the courts, some would beg to be imprisoned.

When, soon after their return, I asked them whether they intended to give up taking heroin, some would reply: “I’ll have to, I’ve got no choice.”

Asked why, they would offer replies such as: “Because my girlfriend’s just had a baby and she won’t let me see it unless I do.”

This answer was a strange one if these addicts truly thought of themselves as ill and in need of treatment. #

Instead, they clearly believed a purpose in life was enough to enable them to abstain. This is not how pneumonia, for instance, is cured.

No one would say: “I must stop having pleuritic pain each time I breathe deeply because I have just had a baby.” Yet the medical services allow addicts to focus exclusively on the physiological aspects of addiction, which in practice means the prescription of a drug such as methadone.

There is a strenuous, almost outraged, rejection of the idea that addiction is, at bottom, a moral problem, or even that it raises any moral questions at all.

That is a very good point.

Of course, addiction to heroin and other opiates has serious medical consequences. I often saw addicts with deep vein thromboses or multiple abscesses; they would have TB; they would be malnourished and infected with Hepatitis B or C, or both, and HIV.

It would be difficult to obtain blood from the veins in their arms or legs because they had injected so often.

But medical consequences do not make a disease. Many mountaineers get frostbite, but mountaineering is not a disease.

To conceive of heroin addiction as such seems to me to miss the fundamental point: it is a moral or spiritual condition that will never yield to medical treatment.

Hugs and cuddle probably won’t work either.

All powers of self-control are destroyed by heroin, and unless they take a substitute drug, such as methadone, or enter a lengthy rehabilitation programme, addicts cannot give up.

They are hooked for life and need help ? from the drug-addiction bureaucracy.

There is only a tiny grain of truth in all this. That physiological addiction exists is indisputable. But in practically all other respects the standard view is wrong, a masterpiece of rhetorical tricks.

It is to heroin addicts what Marxism was to the Politburo of the former Soviet Union: a systematic pseudo-scientific justification for everything they do.

The orthodox view is self-serving for addicts because it implies no possibility of self-control and so no blame.

What, perhaps, is more surprising is that many doctors, therapists and social workers swallow such nonsense. The truth is people who are genuinely exposed to strong opiates by chance, such as after an operation, rarely become addicted to them.

We saw that sentiment in the Herald editorial. “But, but, but”, the crim hugger will say, “what about withdrawal?”

Nor are the withdrawal symptoms from heroin anywhere as terrible as normally painted. In the popular conception, going “cold turkey” is dreadful beyond all description, involving cramps, insomnia, vomiting, shaking and sweating.

But not a single addict has ever caused me as a doctor to feel anxiety for his safety on account of his withdrawal.

And all the genuine symptoms, which are never severe, such as muscular aching, diarrhoea, crying, sneezing and insomnia, have been relieved by simple, non-opiate medication.

Certainly, most withdrawing addicts have portrayed themselves to me as being in the grip of dreadful suffering.

They writhe in agony, claiming they have experienced nothing as bad in their lives, and they make all kinds of threats if I do not prescribe “something” ? they mean an opiate ? to alleviate their suffering.

The threats range from damaging their cells to killing themselves, others or even me. (Withdrawing alcoholics never make such threats.)

In fact, heroin addicts rarely carry out their threats. Those who say they are suicidal quickly admit they were merely trying to get methadone when I suggest they be put in a cell so bare that there is nowhere from which to suspend a noose.

My counter-threat produces in most cases the most miraculous improvement in their mood.

Not all the addicts I see exaggerate in this fashion. Some admit with a laugh that anyone who says cold turkey is terrible is lying and more than likely trying to bluff his way to getting methadone.

It is?refreshing?to see such honesty from someone in the medical profession.

Who would have thought that Mao Zedong would have cured more heorin addicts than all the doctors of the world combined:

The great glory of withdrawal agony, from a career point of view, is that where suffering exists, it is necessary to employ more and more doctors, nurses, psychologists, social workers and counsellors to relieve it.

Yet consider what happened in China after Mao took power in 1949. At the time, China had more opiate addicts than the rest of the world put together ? about 20million.

But Mao gave them a strong motive to give up: he shot the dealers and any addicts who did not give up their habit.

Within three years, Mao produced more cures than all the drug clinics in the world before or since, or indeed to come. He was, indeed, the greatest drug worker in history.

The point of this story is not to advocate a repetition of Mao’s methods. It is to demonstrate that, when a motive is sufficiently strong, many millions of addicted people can abandon their addiction without the paraphernalia of help considered necessary today.

Right, I think we can safely ignore the carping of the liberal panty-waists now.

Smart play by a greenie

? Sydney Morning Herald

A very smart play by a greenie in Australia.?Get it out in the open and it is no problem any more…and her enemies look like a pack of heartless bastards.

IT IS less than a kilometre from Kings Cross to Sydney Town Hall. But, for Irene Doutney, it has been an epic journey.

The Greens councillor for the City of Sydney, who will recontest her seat at Town Hall this September, never expected to be telling her story publicly. Her past life, racked with mental illness and drug addiction, was kept firmly locked away. Only a few close friends and senior members of her party were aware of her background.

But, after the Greens learnt that one of Ms Doutney’s opponents in the election was compiling a dirt file on her, she decided to tell her story to the?Herald.

“It’s been an albatross around my neck,” she says. “It was always my concern it would pop up somewhere, and it didn’t, so I got lulled into a sense of security. Now it has become an item out there in the political sphere.”

Sensible on Drugs

? The Trentonian

Some sensible comments on drugs:

Philip Diaz, a distinguished social worker with more than 35 years of experience in drug prevention, said, ?Gov. Christie is one of the few enlightened governors who understands that addiction is a disease and criminal behavior is a part of the disease, and he understands they need to be treated and not punished.?

Diaz said Christie?s plan is ?compassionate? and ?fiscally appropriate,? adding that he believes ?it will set a national model? for how to tackle the cycle of crime and addiction in the United States.

Christie said New Jersey?s annual incarceration cost is $49,000 per inmate, whereas putting an offending drug addict in rehab can cost half that amount over the course of a year. ?We have statistics that will convince you that those who?ve gone through the current Drug Court program, those who get treatment, are significantly less likely to fall victim to recidivism than those who don?t go through the program,? Christie said.

Williams pissed again

At tonights Mayoral debate in Castor Bay on the North Shore Andrew Williams made an arse of himself again.

I have have?received?numerous reports from attendees shocked at his drunkeness and bully stand-over tactics against John Banks.

He arrived late, again, and staggered clearly drunk into the meeting, stating his usual excuse for when he is caught on the piss, that he was at an important council meeting. He also abused Len Brown (also late but at least had sent his apologies for lateness and wasn’t drunk), and incomprehensibly welcomed Len Brown to the meeting by saying “Good to see you here tonight Mayor…Len…Banks”. He had only been speaking for a few minutes and was swaying prodigiously.

He was abusive towards members of the public in the audience even defaming someone of being part of the “nasty national party brigade” and worse naming him but spectacularly getting the name wrong, not even the right person or the right name.

Andrew Williams is so blind drunk he doesn’t even recognise his political enemies.

But wait it gets worse. At one stage he shouted to John Banks to “Stop Lying”. John Banks retorted that Andrew Williams should “Stop Drinking”. Andrew Williams then bombastically stomped over and stood over and threatened John Banks (now this is hard for Williams because he is actually shorter than John Banks). He finally took hold of his addled senses and sat down before the hushed audience.

I recieved DM Twitter messages and txts, emails and Facebook messages of Andrew Williams appalling drunkenness at this public meeting.

Obviously the pressure is getting to him and he is hitting the bottle harder than ever before. The man is a disgrace and must resign from the race now, both for the?mayoralty?and for the sake of the residents of Albany.

I’ve faced my demons and conquered them, now it is time for Andrew Williams to face his and get help (follow the link Andrew, you need help).

Vote Slater – Albany

Keeping the buggers honest, AND sober.

Vote Slater - Vote for Whaleoil, not Well Oiled

Vote Slater - Vote for Whaleoil, not Well Oiled

×