She could have been so much more. RIP, Amy Winehouse, 1983 - 2011

[Goobers]

I would love to see urca, who apparently doesn't just share the role of sole arbiter of talent and musical taste, but apparently knows more than the physicians and medical scientists who do consider addiction to be a disease, argue with those scientists and the doctors who struggle to treat addiction or the general practitioners and family doctors who try to get people to give up everything from martinis and Marlboroughs to morphine.

 

You spend a lot of this thread putting down urca for simply having another opinion. That urca's opinion runs contrary to conventional wisdom doesn't mean he's wrong. Doesn't mean he's right, but doesn't mean he's wrong. He's not alone too, in his point of view.

[blue2blue]

I believe urca has a right to his opinion -- whether he represents a miniority of one or a majority of 6,852,472,822.

 

It is an opinion which, it seems to me, he expresses in a rather absolutist fashion without much equivocation or qualification, and to my thinking, largely without recourse to the support of facts, logic, or support from the consensus of widely recognized professional/scientific authority.

 

I also believe I have the right to argue against his opinion, which I've largely tried to do by using logic, reference to scientific and professional authoritative consensus, and which I've illustrated with personal (and sometimes quite frank and painful) experience.

 

Further, I believe I have a right to comment on the nature and tenor of urca's mostly unequivocal, absolutist and largely unsupported opinion.

 

And, of course, you have a right to comment on my statements and argument.

 

I believe that is how a public forum is largely intended to function.

 

At the end of the mutual efforts, those reading may draw their own conclusions or, perhaps, draw no conclusions at all.

[Ernest Buckley]

You spend a lot of this thread putting down urca for simply having another opinion. That urca's opinion runs contrary to conventional wisdom doesn't mean he's wrong. Doesn't mean he's right, but doesn't mean he's wrong. He's not alone too, in his point of view.

As I have stated in my posts as well, I know what the medical profession calls it as well, I just disagree. Not to seem redundant but a self inflicted chemical addiction is not what I would call a disease.

[roomjello]

George Micheal can REALLY sing!

Remember the first Wham album, "I'm your man"? Great jogging tune.

Jogging is great for depression and drug addiction.

[blue2blue]

George Micheal can REALLY sing! Remember the first Wham album, "I'm your man"? Great jogging tune. Jogging is great for depression and drug addiction.

 

I'll excuse you for injecting music back into the discussion...

 

[Jeff da Weasel]

You spend a lot of this thread putting down urca for simply having another opinion. That urca's opinion runs contrary to conventional wisdom doesn't mean he's wrong. Doesn't mean he's right, but doesn't mean he's wrong. He's not alone too, in his point of view.

 

I'm not sure that Blue was "putting down urca". What urca mentioned, in saying that all drug addicts can stop abusing drugs any time they want to, was stating what he believes to be a fact. There's nothing wrong with that; many people throughout history have tried to state a fact based on misinformation or lack of knowledge. "The world is flat" is a good one. At the same time, other people have a responsibility to try and inform people who may not have direct awareness of a topic. Since Blue apparently does, I think it's okay for him to state his side of the story.

 

If I say "all guitars have five strings", and show you a picture of Keith Richards playing a 5-string guitar as proof, I'd hope that someone here would let me know that this is not the case. I think Blue was doing urca a service, rather than putting him down. Just my take, of course. I'm willing to listen to other opinions.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Well, here's an interesting development that may or may not be true... but it does speak to some of the sentiments expressed in this thread:

 

Quitting Alcohol Killed Amy Winehouse, Family Sources Say

 

See, if you just up and quit cold turkey, you can die. Your body has formed a dependency on the external substance. When it's suddenly removed, you can die. I guess we'll see what the toxicology report says, but if this is true, perhaps it's a good education for some folks around here.

[blue2blue]

I'm not sure that Blue was "putting down urca". What urca mentioned, in saying that all drug addicts can stop abusing drugs any time they want to, was stating what he believes to be a fact. There's nothing wrong with that; many people throughout history have tried to state a fact based on misinformation or lack of knowledge. "The world is flat" is a good one. At the same time, other people have a responsibility to try and inform people who may not have direct awareness of a topic. Since Blue apparently does, I think it's okay for him to state his side of the story. If I say "all guitars have five strings", and show you a picture of Keith Richards playing a 5-string guitar as proof, I'd hope that someone here would let me know that this is not the case. I think Blue was doing urca a service, rather than putting him down. Just my take, of course. I'm willing to listen to other opinions.

I'll freely admit urca got under my skin and some of my posts addressed to him or his comments were far from dispassionate.

 

As I've noted previously elsewhere (I'm sure y'all breathlessly follow all my writings across the web and my 4 main blogs [EDIT: er... make that 5 blogs: 2 music blogs, 1 political, 1 web biz and one 'music outsider'])... I grew up arguing with a beloved family member, who was, herself born in the late 1870s or very early 1880s, who steadfastly maintained the earth was, indeed, flat. We also argued about various sociocultural issues, since she had some rather, shall we say, pointed racial and cultural attitudes. My best friend was never allowed to enter the house when she was there but my parents were not, because she never wanted to be alone under the same roof with an Irishman. (Perhaps I should point out that we were little kids in elementary school.) I loved her, but those arguments left a distinct imprint on my psyche.

[blue2blue]

 

Well, here's an interesting development that may or may not be true... but it does speak to some of the sentiments expressed in this thread: Quitting Alcohol Killed Amy Winehouse, Family Sources Say See, if you just up and quit cold turkey, you can die. Your body has formed a dependency on the external substance. When it's suddenly removed, you can die. I guess we'll see what the toxicology report says, but if this is true, perhaps it's a good education for some folks around here.

It may or may not be true in this case -- but it is certainly a possible and sadly not uncommon consequence of rapid withdrawal without other treatment.

 

 

 

Again, I'm perfectly OK with someone calling addiction a self-inflicted disease or a disease of choice, etc. But to appear to insist that there is no physical component to addiction is, I believe, right up there with insisting the earth is flat.

 

Let's leave the medical profession and medical scientists out of it and turn to two popular dictionaries for a definition of disease:

 

a condition of the living animal or plant body or of one of its parts that impairs normal functioning and is typically manifested by distinguishing signs and symptoms : sickness , malady

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disease

 

 

a disordered or incorrectly functioning organ, part, structure, or system of the body resulting from the effect of genetic or developmental errors, infection, poisons, nutritional deficiency or imbalance, toxicity, or unfavorable environmental factors; illness; sickness; ailment.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/disease

[BATCAT]

Again, I'm perfectly OK with someone calling addiction a self-inflicted disease or a disease of choice, etc. But to appear to insist that there is no physical component to addiction is, I believe, right up there with insisting the earth is flat.

 

 

I don't understand why when some people have weird hang-ups about certain words (as in, thinking that something being considered as a "disease" by doctors due to how it acts and how it affects people is actually some kind of maneuver to absolve addicts of their responsibility to try to get better) they decide to try to redefine how everyone else uses the word, instead of accepting and dealing with the reality that they have some baggage attached to it.

[blue2blue]

From the LA TImes: http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-winehouse-detox-20110728,0,2852707.story

 

While toxicology tests on Winehouse, who died Saturday, are still pending, her family supposedly told the [The Sun] that although the singer's doctor told her to stop drinking gradually, she might have ignored the advice and gone cold-turkey, a drastic process her body may not have been able to handle.

 

 

 

Can death result from a cold-turkey alcohol detox? Yes, says Dr. Karen Miotto, medical director of the

UCLA Alcoholism and

Addiction

Medicine Service

and an addiction psychiatrist, who spoke hypothetically about the situation, not specifically about Winehouse.

 

 

 

Cold-turkey alcohol detox may be dangerous for some people. "Often in our field we'll hear from people that they told their spouse not to drink and threw all the alcohol in the house away," Miotto says. "That's not a good idea -- they need to be medically evaluated first."

Medication may be necessary to help wean the person safely off alcohol to prevent harmful and possibly fatal seizures as well as other severe symptoms such as delerium tremens.

Other considerations for detox include how much and how long the person has been drinking, if there have been detox attempts in the past, if there is a history of prior seizures, and if other drugs or medications are being taken.

 

 

 

The

brain

, she adds, may reach a point where alcohol becomes necessary to function.

"In its absence the brain can release chemicals, flight-or-fight

hormones

that are released in response to what it thinks is imminent danger." That can also raise

blood pressure

and pulse and put a person at greater danger for cardiovascular problems and slightly higher risk for stroke and

heart attack

.

 

 

 

That imbalance of brain chemicals can also up the risk for seizures and possibly death. "You can hit your head on the corner of a table or aspirate fluid" during a seizure, Miotto says.

 

 

 

"Unfortunately, addiction treatment is poorly understood,"

she adds. "Some people feel a lot of guilt and shame about their ability to stop, so they convince themselves they're not going to get treatment and go cold turkey."

 

 

 

But Miotto says addicts should not be embarrassed about seeking help. "A medically supervised withdrawal helps to give dignity to the condition, and it helps people have a chance at a clearer thought process so they can engage in treatment."

 

[Goobers]

I'm not sure that Blue was "putting down urca". What urca mentioned, in saying that all drug addicts can stop abusing drugs any time they want to, was stating what he believes to be a fact. There's nothing wrong with that; many people throughout history have tried to state a fact based on misinformation or lack of knowledge. "The world is flat" is a good one. At the same time, other people have a responsibility to try and inform people who may not have direct awareness of a topic. Since Blue apparently does, I think it's okay for him to state his side of the story. If I say "all guitars have five strings", and show you a picture of Keith Richards playing a 5-string guitar as proof, I'd hope that someone here would let me know that this is not the case. I think Blue was doing urca a service, rather than putting him down. Just my take, of course. I'm willing to listen to other opinions.

Your Blue's friend, and you tend to stick up for your friends. But a "service"?! "Thank you sir, may I have another?" Bam!

Here's the thing. It's the exact opposite from what you've said. But your examples are good.

"The world is flat" was conventional wisdom, the "fact" of the day, the shared knowledge everyone at that time would be espousing... except for the occasional urca who dared question it, and was similarly roundly chastised. Only because a minority of voices question prevailing wisdom did knowledge advance.

Telling the "world is round" crowd that they're idiots would have also been perceived as a "service," correcting their folly. Except they turned out to be right, and their position is now so obvious to us that we barely remember they were the urcas.

Calling addiction a disease implies medical processes that may not be taking place any more than the world is flat. That doesn't mean addiction isn't physical, difficult, or deadly. But it may not be a disease the way rubella is a disease. And perhaps advancing the way people understand addiction as not the same as something like rubella will also advance the way it's treated and prevented.

[Jeff da Weasel]

Your Blue's friend, and you tend to stick up for your friends.

 

I consider most people here friends of sorts. Even you.

 

Calling addiction a disease implies medical processes that may not be taking place any more than the world is flat. That doesn't mean addiction isn't physical, difficult, or deadly. But it may not be a disease the way rubella is a disease. And perhaps advancing the way people understand addiction as not the same as something like rubella will also advance the way it's treated and prevented.

 

Sure, I agree with all of that. And yes, we've crossed into semantics (i.e. the definition of a disease) which I'm not going to argue. But my own problem with urca's statement -- that addicts can quit any time they want -- is because it flies in the face of not only conventional wisdom but of my own experiences. If it is proven that Amy Winehouse died specifically because she tried to quit alcohol cold turkey without being slowly weaned and medically monitored, it proves the point in a really sad and morbid way.

[UstadKhanAli]

 

Sure, I agree with all of that. And yes, we've crossed into semantics (i.e. the definition of a disease) which I'm not going to argue. But my own problem with urca's statement -- that addicts can quit any time they want -- is because it flies in the face of not only conventional wisdom but of my own experiences.

 

 

Or medical and psychological experience for that matter. I am not interested in debating whether it's a disease or not, but I can tell you unequivocally that not all addicts can simply quit any time they want. If it were that easy, we'd have a lot less addicts. It's simply a false statement. I also have a couple of friends who have worked as social workers downtown, counseling people with drug problems for a living, and they've told me about their experiences. I have a degree in psychology, a Master's in Sp. Ed., and am around doctors and nurses fairly often. We deal with parents who have had addiction problems, students who have the same, etc., and I can simply tell you that "addicts quitting any time they want" is complete and utter bull{censored}.

 

As a kid, I used to question this myself, thinking that people were simply "bad" or "weak-willed". But because of my experience and education, and as I will describe, a small personal experience with it myself, I am more aware of how false this line of thinking is and how ineffective it would be as a method of helping addicts.

 

And finally, I have a very small understanding of why it would be so difficult to quit. I do not have an addictive personality, and can be extremely focused when I wish to stop something. But I found that when I was taking Oxycontin as prescribed for severe and debilitating lower back pain, when it was time to get off it as my back got better, my doctor said that it would take me about two months to stop taking Oxycontin. And she was about right. I was surprised, even when taking this long for something that I was taking as prescribed, how difficult it was to stop taking it due to the body's craving for it and due to the nausea that it created. And again, I'm not trying to make it seem like I was curled up in a ball of misery getting off junk; I wasn't. But I have a small understanding. If it's this difficult to get off it when I am taking small doses and following a prescription to a "T", I can't even imagine how difficult it would be to get off it if I am snorting it, taking copious amounts of it, etc. AND have an addictive personality.

[blue2blue]

Moving forward, I just saw this piece:

Study: Can Teens Retrain Their Brains To Be Less Depressed?

 

http://commonhealth.wbur.org/2011/07/neurofeedback-depression/

 

 

Some of it reminds me a little of how I trained myself to break my 'negative thought patterns' when I was in sophomore and junior years of high school. I was frequent host to compulsively negative thoughts and moods. I'd previously, one way or another, not entirely sure how but exercise and losing weight were wrapped up in it (I'd had a very tough time in a school milieu that emphasized conformity and superficial attractiveness [not like your school, huh? ]).

 

At any rate, somehow I'd made it out of a deep downward spiral -- and I was determined not to sink back in.

 

So when I'd feel the old feelings and compulsive thought patterns creeping back in, I'd try to confront them head on and defuse them -- rather than pushing them down or trying to 'think about something else' (my subconscious has a way of grinding away on its own -- and the resulting vague thouthts and moods would surface in other ways, soon enough). So, when I'd have a dark/negative feeling, I'd try to figure out what thought/notion/whatever had triggered it, confront that, and deal with it one way or the other -- even if 'dealing with it' was merely consciously deciding to defer acting on the issue or even thinking further about the issue until some future date. And then, once I'd confronted the triggering thought stream, I would turn my attention to the immediate situation or circumstance, putting myself back in (you should pardon the expression) the now. I would also, after having used this technique to confront, deal with, or defer the triggering issues, use music or other positive thoughts or experiences in order to clear out remaining mood elements (probably brain chemicals -- I presume the music and positive thoughts would trigger neurotransmitters that work against or neutralize the previously release 'negative'/unhappy brain chemicals.

 

I think it's important, though, to recognize that the positive thoughts alone, at least for me (and seemingly for the writer of that piece) weren't enough. For me, I had to deal with the negative triggers in some fashion as well.

 

 

PS... one of the positive triggers I sometimes used (after clearing the negative ones) was the song that just came up in my MOG playlist, Astrud Gilberto and Stan Getz' liltingly swinging "It Might as Well Be Spring." Beats popping a pill.*

 

 

 

* Of course, those under a carefully set up course of treatment that involves medications should follow that treatment path, assuming it's working for them. And, with many mood-altering drug treatments -- even those that which don't seem to be working and one wants to abandon, it's frequently best to disengage from them slowly and under the continued supervision of a physician knowledgeable in the treatment regimen and its side-effects.

 

While we hope and assume most docs are both sincere and informed, there are, as we all know, some physicians, drawn from the larger pool of imperfect humanity, who do not sufficiently 'do their homework' and prescribe treatments that are inappropriate to the patient's condition or which interact with other drugs. I know of one such who is treating a friend of my mothers who is in her 90s, and he writes scrips for extremely strong drugs as though they were candy.

 

This poor lady -- who appears to have early stage dementia was being loaded up on Oxycontin because she kept complaining of pain. My mother and another friend of the lady sat down with the patient ombudsman at the [very nice and quite expensive] geriatric facility where the lady lives and laid out that they thought this lady was actually addicted to the oxy and that some of her apparent confusion and pain, not to mention lack of appetite and many hours of sleep and inactivity were related to the addiction. With the leverage of the social worker/ombudsman, they were able to talk the doc into weaning her off the oxy. Over a matter of some weeks, her activity level improved considerably, her confusion lifted to some extent, and her appetite returned. But without that intervention...? Who knows?

[temnov]

For those who were so sure it's not - addiction IS a brain disease:

http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-addiction-isbrain-disease-20110816,0,1680950.story?track=rss

[Ernest Buckley]

For those who were so sure it's not - addiction IS a brain disease: http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-addiction-isbrain-disease-20110816,0,1680950.story?track=rss

 

 

 

Addiction is

[Goobers]

Brain scans have demonstrated changes in the brain of a musician compared to a non-musician.

Does that prove music is a disease?

[karlw]

 

 

 

I just recently learned that this is what happened to my great-grandfather in the early 1970s. I knew that he had been an alcoholic, but I didn't know the cause of death was the DTs until my cousin recently pointed it out. Apparently, his wife (my great grandmother) gave him an ultimatum, so he quit drinking, then got sick from it and died.

[temnov]

Brain scans have demonstrated changes in the brain of a musician compared to a non-musician. Does that prove music is a disease?

 

 

Yes, didn't you know that?

[Goobers]

 

I just recently learned that this is what happened to my great-grandfather in the early 1970s. I knew that he had been an alcoholic, but I didn't know the cause of death was the DTs until my cousin recently pointed it out. Apparently, his wife (my great grandmother) gave him an ultimatum, so he quit drinking, then got sick from it and died.

 

I'm not sure if the moral of the story is listening to your wife will kill you, or not drinking will kill you, or both.

[Ernest Buckley]

 

Brain scans have demonstrated changes in the brain of a musician compared to a non-musician. Does that prove music is a disease?

 

 

Yes, music is without a doubt, a disease. Its the only way I can explain the insanity of a musicians life.

[karlw]

I'm not sure if the moral of the story is listening to your wife will kill you, or not drinking will kill you, or both.