addiction

[CPL.Luke]

if someone was given an addictive substance such as nicotine, but were unaware that they had been given such an addictive substance, what would te effects be?

 

it just seems odd because even though they are physically addicted they wouldn't know it and instead might just attribute it to being sick for a few days.

[AndrewMech]

I think an addiction may find a way of getting its fix whether your aware of it r not. i think a person may believe they simply like something and continue consuming it until they eventually realise that they are over doing it, then they probably try to quit or cut back and find it difficult and realise they have an addiction.

[Teotihuacan]

The measure of an addictive substance is whether or not more than 50% of a test poplation of naieve users return to use again. If so, it is declared an "addictive substance".

 

Wether or not the test subjects are human, conscious or not, makes little difference.

 

Interestingly, the substance you picked - nicotine. Under this definition it is the most addictive substance known to man.

 

Yes, it is also poisonous, but deletrious effects are not neccesarily a mark of an addictive substance.

 

Under the same definition, alcohol is not an addictive substance. Generally, the seeking behaviour is about 10%.

 

Yet alcohol addiction is the greatest in the entire world. And causes 10x as many deaths annually than all other drugs combined!

 

Further, with the advent of "designer drugs" being invented every day, the mis-nomer "non-addictive" simply means that not enough longitudinal studies have been done. Again, if more than 50% of subjects return to use, then it is declared an addictive substance. And, for our purposes, the subjects must represent the human race.

 

Perhaps the self-help groups like Narcotics Anonymous have the right idea: Addiction is in the person, not the drug.

 

Indeed, even with an addictive substance, a certain percentage of subjects do not return to use. It is probably more of a susceptability index for an inert substance, without any personal elements factored in.

[YT2095]

if someone was given an addictive substance such as nicotine' date=' but were unaware that they had been given such an addictive substance, what would te effects be?

 

it just seems odd because even though they are physically addicted they wouldn't know it and instead might just attribute it to being sick for a few days.[/quote']

 

I anticipate that they would probably be really cranky for a week and go back to normal again, a bit like forgetting to put your Nicotine patch on.

of course this will be entirely dependant on the individual too, withdrawl symptoms have certain comonalities amongst addicts, but no 2 are exactly the same.

[badchad]

There is no specific definition of "addiction"; and it is not quantifiable. The definition that I am most fond of is simply: "uncontrollable drug craving and seeking".

 

There are a number of factors contributing to addiction and it depends heavily on the individual. One of the more famous examples of factors contributing to addiction OTHER than the substance itself was vietnam. In a nutshell it basically says that while american soldiers had ready access to, and use of heroin while in vietnam a follow up study done years after the fact found that the percentage of soldiers still using the substance was very small.

 

With this in mind I'm inclined to agree with YT2095. The said individual exposed to nicotine may be cranky and irritable, however they would not crave or seek the drug because they wouldn't realize their withdrawal was due to lack of nicotine. A good example of how a person may become tolerant to (or experience withdrawal from) a drug without being "addicted".

[YT2095]

yeah, addiction fits into 2 catagories really, Physiological and Psychological, the one mentioned in the OP will endure the Physiological reaction alone, a smoker with that "Link" will endure Both, and thus have a "Target" to crave for.

[Glider]

The physiological definition of 'addictive' is anything which activates (increases the levels of dopamine in) the reward system (medial forebrain bundle, ventral tegmental area and nucleus accumbens). The definition of 'addiction' is the serias of physiological changes that occur in response to repeated delivery of an addictive substance that result in a withdrawal syndrome (a specific pattern of craving and other negative effects). The psychological definition of 'addiction' is the same, but extends to the psychological and behavioural components: a dependence resulting in feelings of craving and a compulsive behavioural drive (usually toward a maladaptive behaviour).

 

The basic function of the reward centres are to reinforce 'useful' or adaptive behaviours such as feeding, sex and so-on. Artificial stimulation of the reward centres with certain chemicals can 'hijack' them. That's to say that taking addictive substances causes more 'reward' than normal reward driven behaviours, so these get put on the back burner whilst the behavioural drive is switched to the behaviour that provides the greatest reward. This is why people strongly addicted to something will often go for that substance rather than food if they are forced to choose.

 

The degree of reward is not determined by the overall amount of dopamine released, but by the speed with which it spikes. Crack, for example causes an extremely rapid elevation in DA levels, which is why it's so addictive. Nicotine can cause rapid elevation too (taking bolus doses into the blood via the lungs results in a 'hit' in around 6 seconds). This is one reason nicotine is so addictive.

 

If you were to give somebody nicotine without their being aware of it, then they would simply form an association between the reward and whatever behaviour they were engaged in at that time, and that's the one that would be reinforced. For example, if you fed nicotine to someone in chicken sandwiches for long enough, they would develop a behavioural drive towards obtaining and consuming chicken sandwiches.

 

However, as normal chicken sandwiches would not satisfy the craving, the behavioural drive would be extinguished after a short time, although the craving would last several weeks, until the physiologivcal changes had reversed.

[Royston]

The degree of reward is not determined by the overall amount of dopamine released' date=' but by the speed with which it spikes. Crack, for example causes an extremely rapid elevation in DA levels, which is why it's so addictive. Nicotine can cause rapid elevation too (taking bolus doses into the blood via the lungs results in a 'hit' in around 6 seconds). This is one reason nicotine is so addictive.[/quote']

 

Exactly...dopamine works for a time, even if released in large amounts it's not sustained,that's why you get certain drugs that are used on a recreational basis are only used occasionally. Dopamine is a chemical much like serotonin that fluds inhibitors.

 

Drugs that have a more subtle, short burst (if you like) release dopamine in small but easily *sustained amounts (due to the short life span of it's activity) so prolonging the addiction. Nicotine being the most subtle...and most addictive. Drugs that are long in thier activity 'use' up dopamine to an extent that it's not addictive over a short period and so lessens the need to use the drug more frequently.

 

In essence the body needs to constantly 'top up' due to the short term effects of the dopamine release.

 

*'Sustained' meaning, prolonging a cycle.

[CPL.Luke]

is it possible tha the brain also forms a psychological addiction more readily with a fast acting dopamine stimulant? because on a long acting substance maybe the brain can't exactly recognize what caused the stimulation.

[Glider]

Yes, although it's not really to do with recognising the particular 'trigger' behaviour.

 

The brain will always form associations between behaviour and feelings of reward. The faster the onset of the feelings of reward, the stronger and more specific the association (It works the other way too. If the result of our behaviour is aversive, the brain will form an association and we will form an aversion to that behaviour).

 

It's not really a case of recognising the specific behaviour. If the reward has a slow onset, the brain still forms an association, although in this case it will be weaker and more likely to be between the reward and the situation. The resulting behavioural drive will be to put us back into the situation in which we experienced the reward.

 

However, as I said, the intensity of reward depends on the onset time (the speed at which DA levels spike), so where the onset of the reward is rapid, it is more likely to be associated with the particular trigger behaviour and will be much stronger.

[Royston]

Exactly...dopamine works for a time' date=' even if released in large amounts it's not sustained,that's why you get certain drugs that are used on a recreational basis are only used occasionally. Dopamine is a chemical much like serotonin that fluds inhibitors.

 

Drugs that have a more subtle, short burst (if you like) release dopamine in small but easily *sustained amounts (due to the short life span of it's activity) so prolonging the addiction. Nicotine being the most subtle...and most addictive. Drugs that are long in thier activity 'use' up dopamine to an extent that it's not addictive over a short period and so lessens the need to use the drug more frequently.

 

In essence the body needs to constantly 'top up' due to the short term effects of the dopamine release.

 

*'Sustained' meaning, prolonging a cycle.[/quote']

 

Small note...adding posts after the pub on an empty stomach is not recommended. The above is utter tripe...apologies.

[X facter]

My father and I recently discovered that Sobe contains "chromium polynicotinate". He (who is a very intelligent person, actually) says that they are trying to get people addicted through nicotine and labels that say "LEAN". He went so far as to say you might as well smoke a cigarette. I tell him that most people wouldn't look at the ingredients and see a product of nicotine (as the last thing listed no less). You would just drink it and even if you did get addicted, you wouldn't remember what you were addicted to. Here is the description directly from the Sobe site.

 

 

"Chromium Polynicotinate

A form of chromium that is readily metabolized and used by the body. Chromium is an essential trace mineral. Chromium functions to aid the regulation of blood sugar. The form of Chromium that is used by the body is called chromium III and is necessary for proper functioning of the body. This is chemically entirely different from the form of chromium that is used industrially and is called chromium VI. The dietary form of chromium is safe and an essential trace mineral. It is the industrial form of chromium, which we don't use, that has been associated with health risks."

 

 

Note that it only goes into any detail at all about the chromium. So I did an "experiment" last night. I felt no different after one glass of the stuff for the rest of the night. I don't feel addicted or want more right now.

 

Any comments?

[YT2095]

it maybe non addictive though, just because it says "nicotine" doesn`t mean it will be, I`m almost certain that breakfast cerials contain a nicotine compound (can`t rem the name) it`s something like: nicotinamide, and I`m pretty certain that Niacin is related too. memory might be wrong though!

[X facter]

That's what I tried to tell him.