Addiction: Positive, Negative or a Combination of Both
by John Lawrence
There are both highly functioning and dysfunctional addicts. Most people are addicted to something and in many cases it helps them function better. Take coffee, for instance. It's addictive; it's active agent, caffeine, is a drug, but it is not contributing in a negative way to my life. I drink two cups a day, and it gets me going in the morning. I'm an addict.
I've been watching a YouTube video by Gary Bartz. about the heroin addiction of a lot of the jazz musicians in the Golden Age - the 50s and 60s. He mentioned that drummer Philly Joe Jones' heroin habit would start off costing $10 a day. Then he would be needing $50 a day, and finally he'd have a $200 a day habit which he couldn't afford so he'd kick, he'd detox and then, when he was clean again, he'd start over with just a $10 a day habit.
This is the phenomenon of tolerance where the addict needs more and more of the drug to get the same high as time goes on. This is what the drug dealers are counting on. This is how they make their money. What is happening in my opinion, or my thesis whichever the case might be, is that the drug induces an increased flow of dopamine in the brain. That part is a scientific fact as reported in the September issue of National Geographic magazine in an article, The Science of Addiction. The brain can only put out a certain amount of dopamine so that, when the drug opens the floodgates, the addict gets high, but for the next drug use, there is less dopamine in the reservoir so it takes more of the drug to induce the same high. The body needs more time to replenish the supply of dopamine and addicts are impatient.
That's where positive addiction, according to my thesis, gets the same results without depleting the reservoir of dopamine so it is a more sustainable addiction. In addition to my coffee habit I have an exercise addiction. I found in my teenage years that exercise would pull me out of depression and I have been using it my entire life to keep me out of depression. It is the antidote to my depression. One of the byproducts of this positive addiction is that, I believe, I'm generally healthier than the average person because of it. Another of the byproducts of good health is that, again according to my thesis, dopamine is not depleted except temporarily (think runner's high) but then it is built back up quicker and more robustly than it is for those using chemical substances to increase the flow of dopamine. Ergo facto, the phenomenon of tolerance, in which the addict needs more and more each day, does not set in. Just the opposite occurs. There is a balance between dopamine depletion and dopamine replenishment.
There are some heroin addicts who lead highly successful lives because they manage their addiction. Take jazz musician Art Blakey, for example, who had a heroin habit, but it never led to his downfall as it did to many other jazz musicians, some of whom were turned on and encouraged to use by Blakey. Lee Morgan, for example. The problem with street drugs is that they cost money, more and more money as the habit gets worse. Positive addiction also costs money, but not nearly as much. I pay $40. a month at the Y in order to get access to the pool and the gym, for example. The amount does not increase month to month as it would with a heroin habit.
Anyway, the National Geographic article is all about how neuroscientists are studying the brain and trying to come up with chemicals which cause addicts to stop using opioids, heroin, cocaine or other illegal or controlled substances. All substances cost money, one of the negative byproducts of street drugs and opioids. Also their purity is suspect, and there are no guidelines about safe usage so there are numerous lives lost to overdoses. 91 Americans die every day from opioid overdoses. 3.3 million worldwide die each year from alcohol. 1.1 billion people worldwide smoke tobacco, and we know what that leads to. A truly alarming statistic though, according to the article, is that every 25 minutes in the US a baby is born addicted to opioids.
We might conclude that addiction is a natural and universal phenomenon, but that some types of addiction are preferable to others. Voltaire said that it is better that we just all be content with tending our gardens rather than seeking thrills and excitement which just leads to misery. The problem with the article is that the scientists are seeking and actually using other drugs to cause an aversion to the drug that the addict is addicted to in the first place. This seems to work in many cases, but the question is what does the addict feel or do once their drug of choice no longer works? Just sit there with the blahs for the rest of their life? Anybody will seek substances or possibly a lifestyle that will bring pleasure and satisfaction. Knowing that there are positive addictions, addictions that produce positive results and cause sufficient dopamine flows to keep us happy is a good thing, again in my opinion.
Of course, functionality or dysfunctionality loses its meaning if one has lost their job. So what is the meaning of functional at that point? It's all about lifestyle, all about choosing positive addiction over negative addiction. I don't believe that just aversion therapy is sufficient for a useful and happy life in the long run. The neuroscientists are barking up the wrong tree to some extent unless they replace a negative addiction with some other addiction that does not require the use of a chemical. In the final analysis we are all addicts of one kind or another. It's just that some people make more intelligent decisions as to what to be addicted to.
