Addiction not a disease
OPINION: When did excessive drinking, watching porn instead of working, or surfing the net all day long, become mental illnesses?
When pseudo-scientific busy bodies called psychiatrists decided that certain behaviours, now termed addictions, were the result of incurable brain diseases, which needed urgent medical treatment - for the rest of the patient's life.
However, even today, there is no scientific medical evidence that any of these so-called diseases exist.
Not for alcoholism. Not for drug addiction.
In comparison to genuine diseases like cancer, psychiatrists have yet to devise one single biological test to prove scientifically that any of their diseases actually exist. Why? Because they don't exist!
Addiction is a behaviour, and a person's behaviour can never be a disease. Doctor's don't diagnose cancer based on the way a patient behaves, they use various medical tests. By contrast, psychiatrists ask their patients to describe their behaviour, and or observe them, in order to make a diagnosis, and it's wrong. It's not just wholly unscientific - it's quite evil.
Historically, the meaning of addiction stemmed from Roman laws regarding slavery, but it wasn't until the American temperance movements of the 1920s when the puritans decided that drinking excessively was a "disease of the will" and its meaning slowly began to change to resemble the one we think of nowadays. Psychiatrists regard any excessive behaviour as a chronic relapsing brain disease, but the scientific evidence suggests otherwise.
Studies of Vietnam veterans who smoked heroin during the Vietnam conflict were able to kick their habit without any medical intervention once they returned home to the United States, demonstrating that their previous heroin use was nothing more than a strong habit.
When shrinks tell people they have a disease of addiction, they disempower them from taking action, because according to them addiction is a chronic disease, and you can't think your way out of a disease - you have to treat it with... well, with drugs.
So, this type of nonsense empowers a multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry, forces people into ludicrous 12-step God-based treatment programs, often through court intervention, which have at best a 5 per cent success rate, and more often than are designed to make the patient worse, not better.
Since when has cancer been treated by handing over your will to the power of God? But this is exactly how psychologists recommend alcoholics treat their drinking problem.
Addiction is nothing more than a form of self-medication, an adaption response mechanism to the various pressures of life.
Those who take too many drugs, watch too much porn, and drink too much alcohol might not be having a fun time, in fact, they may be entirely miserable, but their own self-inflicted proclivities are not diseases, and therefore any so-called treatments must be completed by the patient, not imposed by a medical fraternity built on lies and deception.
As Shakespeare noted in his play Macbeth:
Macbeth: "Canst thou not minister to a mind diseas'd, pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow, raze out the written troubles of the brain, and with some sweet oblivious antidote cleanse the stuff'd bosom of that perilous stuff which weighs upon the heart?
Doctor: "Therein the patient must minister to himself."
These are difficult words to swallow for people who think they need medical intervention to treat their non-existent diseases, but they are the only ones which can work.
* This opinion piece has been edited since it was posted.
View all contributions
Which reader's plan would you support?Related story: (See story)