What is Digg?Sponsored by wix.com
The Ultimate Flash Website Design Tool view!
wix.com - Design a stunning website in 10 easy steps.
121 Comments
- dvsbastard, on 11/12/2008, -3/+47It's the same gene for "Cool"...
- Totz83, on 11/12/2008, -1/+37It's a hell of a gene
- autonomic, on 11/12/2008, -4/+36Correlation does NOT mean causation.
- haydukeqc, on 11/12/2008, -0/+18I got these cocaine genes....
- wukillabee, on 11/12/2008, -5/+23cocaine's a helluva drug
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -1/+18i got cocaine all over my jeans
- ICSU, on 11/12/2008, -3/+20wrong
Correlation may NOT mean causation
It can in some cases. - roijen, on 11/12/2008, -0/+14Is stupidity genetic?
- mickstephenson, on 11/12/2008, -0/+12The gene may genetically predispose you to be able to afford the addiction, coz ***** knows money is the major factor which sets aside cocaine addicts from other addicts
- harrisbradley, on 11/12/2008, -1/+12You mean Gene Simmons?
- DigitalHippie73, on 11/12/2008, -4/+15I agree, that,s why I do meth instead.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -0/+9you're doing it wrong
- isleepyx3, on 11/12/2008, -0/+7Thank you for your product review. I shall consider it carefully when shopping for drugs.
- philomatic, on 02/08/2009, -5/+12Just because addicts were 25% more likely to carry the gene variant than people who did not use cocaine, does NOT mean that the gene causes cocaine addiction or that it causes you to be addicted more than most people.
- divinediva, on 11/11/2008, -0/+7It's going to be very difficult to find a developmental process.
- redwolfwalker, on 11/11/2008, -0/+6No easy trip to be drug free
- feignNU, on 11/12/2008, -1/+6noumuon:
Are you aware that the negative physiological effects of cocaine depend on the frequency of use, the form it's taken in, and a number of other factors? I've never used cocaine outside of coca leaves, and have no real desire to, but even the federal government agrees with me that there are acceptably safe ways to use it (look for yourself, it's a schedule 2 drug). All I'm saying is that it's not really possible to paint cocaine as an unqualified "bad" thing. Everyone's body and personality are different, and everyone should have the right to make the risk assessment for themselves. - benologist, on 11/12/2008, -3/+7You're missing the point..... which is to find a way for everybody to feel good, blameless, and in fact the victim we should feel sorry for, for the choices they make.
- 28dayslater, on 11/12/2008, -3/+7Wow, who brought captain buzz kill to the party?
- maximoo2, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4If I could had a dollar for every time I could have gotten laid if I had some cocaine on me ... I'd had like at least 5 dollars or so. 5 very nice dollars.
- Terasiel, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4"Addicts were 25% more likely to carry the gene variant than people who did not use cocaine, a study found. " I hope that's just bad wording. Unless it's applying that trying cocaine even once is genetic.
- zephyr42, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4yay logic!
- alpharaptor, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4good news for doctor roxo the rock and roll clown, he does c-c-c-c-cocaine. seriously, he does a lot of cocaine.
- subterfuge, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4i do meth because i did meth once.
- spritom, on 11/12/2008, -1/+5So if I'm reading (and extrapolating) the article...
* Cocaine addiction is what a person is, and not what a person does
* Therefore, making laws against it would be discrimination.
Free the cokeheads! Cokehead rights! - maximoo2, on 11/12/2008, -0/+4Saying "Chances are you are not very intelligent for consuming the addictive drug in the first place" is being extremely judgmental.
Personally I do not believe a government or organization should have any right to tell me what I can or not put into my own body. Do you think it is not very intelligent to drink alcohol? If not, is this because one is legal and one is illegal? That isn't grounds to judge something.
Many, many, many people have used drugs for enjoyment RESPONSIBLY since the beginning of time, continuing into the present day. Don't tell me how to lead my life. Personally I think it is a sad choice to never drink or do any drugs in at all in your life -- but I won't push my views on others, I think everyone should be able to do what they choose with their own bodies.
***** even Sigmund Freud loved cocaine. Was he a bad, unsuccessful person?
I'd bet my every dollar I'll ever make that at least one of your personal heroes enjoys recreational drugs responsibly on a regular basis. - mrsinister2424, on 11/12/2008, -2/+5If you wanna hang out you've got to take her out; cocaine.
- JulioHJ, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3debbie downer aka debbie *****
- feignNU, on 11/12/2008, -1/+4Hm. I understand what you're trying to say, Haphaz, and I agree to an extent, but you are really oversimplifying an awful lot of things here. First of all, phrases like "chemically addictive" are pretty much meaningless. Addiction research is a hot topic and there's a lot of debate about its mechanisms, and it really doesn't boil down to "psychologically" vs "chemically" addictive drugs or anything like that. And besides that basic point of contention, I think you are really oversimplifying your judgment against anyone who would choose to use addictive drugs. Am I stupid because I choose to drink coffee every morning? It's certainly addictive, and it's certainly a drug.
Second of all, the empirical evidence gathered by the researchers who conducted the study you JUST read about contradicts your magical knowledge that drug addiction is most likely not "because of" genetics. I will grant that they have certainly not established a direct causal link, but regardless, this scientific evidence does implicate genetics in having some kind of role. You see, you don't get to just disagree with the results of scientific research like this, not without having a little more substance to your thoughts. You're just being a dogmatic anti-drug crusader when you say things like you did.
Finally, lots of highly intelligent people end up addicted to all kinds of things. I would suggest that it has more to do with emotional and psychological issues, and that instead of stupidity, you should see that great suffering is often at the bottom of those addictions. I'm not saying we should pretend as though addicts carry no blame for their addiction, just that it's possible to remember this fact and still have a little compassion as well. - Dino451, on 11/12/2008, -1/+4The crackhead gene
- zbeast, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3danconia i'm sure what you had was not coke... or if it was coke it was cut to *****.
if you do two solid "rails" of good stuff... that would change your tune.
Coke is a very good, when used responsibly.
As for adiction I know lot's of people use but I don't know anyone who's adicted.
I know how do you tell, if your using coke your aditected right?
no, I have no cravings for coke, I don't have to get my next fix, I don't do coke every day or even every week.
I don't get coked up to go out to go to work. I don't get any type of shakes or withdraw.
I don't have to have coke to deal with my problems Now meth on the other hand...
steer clear of that. I know of very few people who that didn't ***** up .
It's a crapy high, all you do is grind and knod...
Coke on the otherhand is a very sexual experience. - Bith8654, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3Well obviously both nature (genes) and nurture (environment, people, exposure to drugs, etc) play a role. Only crazy people, people looking for an excuse, or people who don't know psychology try to argue that it is all determined through nature alone. The fact that addicts were only 25% more likely, instead of 100%, actually gives evidence that genes aren't the only determining factor.
The point of looking for genes that can assist people in becoming addicted is to look for factors that scientists can control on a wide scale. Nurture factors are different for every individual, and altering them in any way to prevent cocaine use would probably mean altering the individual's life. Instead, scientists look for genes that suggest one might be more likely to become addicted. That way they can tell the individual they are more at risk, and the individual can become more aware of that and alter their own environment to ensure nurture factors don't cause them to fall into cocaine addiction. For example, if someone knew they could be at risk for cocaine addiction and their friend yells "COKE PARTY AT MY HOUSE" they could just avoid that situation.
Now with all that being said, 25% does seem like a pretty low percentage for them to decide that this is definitely the gene associated with cocaine addiction. But really, it seems like the worst case scenario is that someone is screened for the gene, tests positive, and consequently never tries cocaine. Even if they later find out that the gene isn't related to addiction, is it really that bad that the person never tried cocaine? - Sherman901, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3exactly. nobody wants to take responsibility anymore. OH MY GOD, MY PARENTS ARE THE REASON I'M FAT AS ***** AND ADDICTED TO COCAINE...
AT THE SAME TIME!! - alclone, on 11/12/2008, -4/+7So many stupid retards post about how bad cocaine actually is. We're all educated and told that drugs are bad, but have you actually done it?
If you have ever done ecstasy, cocaine, heroin, amphetamine salts (adderall+ritalin), you know that it gives you the best feeling in the world that lasts for hours. Someone who is depressed might do this just to feel happy.
Also you should consider that many students or people who work long hours use these psychoactive stimulants so they can function longer and better than any normal person. - nathanbutnet, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3Are you riding the white horse right now?
- zdiggler, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3I did a lot of coke and smoked a lot of crack. It was fun and all but I quit. Never craved for it, even at parties where everybody else is doing it, I can resist.
- inactive, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3finally... we can get high and not be paranoid.
- slochewie, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3 "I never liked cocaine, I just liked the way it smelled" Steve Lukather
- wishninja, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3You know 10, 20, or 30 years after we end the drug war, the human race will look back on this era as being a backwards and ignorant time. Like the dark ages when they would bleed people with leaches, or later in the 1890 when they would shock people or torture them for their mental illness.
All of this is known already we know genetics, and environment helps get people hooked but all we do is continue to lock them up. It is a waste of time and resources. The way we treat addicts is inhuman.
End the war on drug lest abandon tough on crime and get smart on crime. - lul101, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3I said God damn!
- feignNU, on 11/12/2008, -0/+3"Granted I am dubious on the whole 'this is a disease' thing, but I tend to be on the fence about what the true nature of addiction is."
Finally, a sane statement. Pretending addiction is a disease like diabetes is ludicrous, but so is pretending like it's merely a choice. There can be biological factors and psychological factors involved. This may come as something of a shock, but reality is nuanced, and one-sided pronouncements like jscnet's almost always miss the point, and even if by some miracle he turned out to be right, he's still just a dogmatist.
Not to mention that his suggestion is downright dangerous. Certain drugs can be quit cold turkey and nothing worse than an unpleasant withdrawal will follow. Others can kill you if you stop taking them suddenly. If you are addicted to a drug and want to quit, for god's sake talk to a doctor first and figure out what the best way to handle the situation is with someone who's actually in a position to know. - MajorOutage, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2>>Only crazy people, people looking for an excuse, or people who don't know psychology try to argue that it is all determined through nature alone.
You mean like 99% of drunks or drunk enablers? - jadez03, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2LOL. Win.
- djmphoto, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2"so what did you eat for dinner"
"was it cocaine?" - TheVirus, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2GUAGGAGCUUCGGAGUAG is a hell of a gene.
- feignNU, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2Uhm....you know the part where you told people to "just quit"? Yeah, that part. The part where you said that addiction was nothing but a psychological issue and the only thing any addict needs to do is man-up and stop being an addict? You know, the part where you said JUST quit, instead of "go to a doctor and make sure quitting cold turkey won't MAKE you a cold turkey?" That part. That part is the part where you suggested people not get help, because that is the part where you claimed to know the answer to all addiction - "just quit".
Look, I'm not going to argue with you about whether or not addiction is "in the genes" or "in the head" because you A.) don't care about scientific evidence to the contrary, B.) think for some reason that it has to be only one or the other, and C.) have already made up your mind what you believe. ie, you are a dogmatist, and dogmatists can't be reasoned with.
With that said, and for the benefit of anyone else who might be reading this, let's just pretend that you are 100% correct, and there is no genetic basis for addiction. It is still a cold hard fact that if you suddenly quit a serious alcohol habit, or a barbiturate addiction or addiction to some other GABA-ergic CNS depressants, that you can *die*. Dead. On the spot. There are addictions which cannot be "just quit" because they affect the functioning of the body so fundamentally that it literally cannot continue without the drug. So even if I overlook your very-likely-to-be-wrong dogmatism, I cannot overlook the AWFUL, DANGEROUS, potentially FATAL advice you dispense.
For someone urging so strongly for people to think critically, you sure aren't very good at it yourself. - winstonsmith303, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2They should call it the Rockso gene.
"I doo cocaiiiiiine."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZRe_Poi9l8 - Bezukhof, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2They actually have that. They implanted electrodes into a pleasure center of some monkeys' brains and wired the electrode to a button and gave the button to the monkeys.
Basically the monkeys just sat there and pressed the button until they died of starvation because they didn't care about eating. - TheMachine1, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11391129
People with Parkinson often display the same impulsive addictive behavior you see in drug addicts. Including the abuse of drugs. So your saying those Parkinson suffers still walked the line and became addicted by choice? - pullablank, on 11/12/2008, -0/+2This article is vague and makes no mention of what kind of study was done. These articles from the Guardian are horrible, and are the equivalent of reports from the National Enquirer.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 124 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is