Discussion of Internet Addiction as Mental Illness Resurfaces
Lone Writer writes "The editorial section of the American Journal of Psychiatry for March offers the opinion that Internet addiction is a 'compulsive-impulsive' disorder, and should be added to the official guidebook of disorders. The editorial characterizes net addiction as including 'excessive gaming, [online] sexual pre-occupations and e-mail/text messaging'. From the article: 'Like other addicts, users experience cravings, urges, withdrawal and tolerance, requiring more and better equipment and software, or more and more hours online, according to Dr. Jerald Block, a psychiatrist at the Oregon Health and Science University in Portland. Dr. Block says people can lose all track of time or neglect "basic drives," like eating or sleeping. Relapse rates are high, he writes, and some people may need psychoactive medications or hospitalization."
What if I had an addiction to orange juice and drank it ever hour, on the hour, or else I suddenly got shakey and had withdrawl symptoms - would they add "orange juice addiction" to the list?
Sounds like a bit of a "well, duh" to me.
Also, I love the first line of TFA (emphasis mine):
The new definition for the word "addiction" is the same as the old word for "habituation". OK, what is the new word for physical addiction, like with heroin or alcohol, where you can die from not getting your drug?
If you take away my reefer or my internet or my writing I may be agitated and unhappy, but I can still function. Take away my coffee and I get headaches and can't do my job because I can't think straight. Take away Amy's booze and she sees snakes and thinks there's bugs crawling on her skin. What do you call THAT these days?
You can't get addicted to the internet, or evercrack, or your crackberry. Internet habituation sure sounds like an obsessive compulsive disorder, and in some cases may need treatment, but it's not a true addiction.
Like homosexuals purposely changed the word "gay" to no longer mean "happy and carefree", anti-drug zealots (NOT health care professionals) have changed the meaning of the word "addiction". But physical addiction is still a curse to those addicted to certain substances, like heroin, alcohol, tobacco, etc.
I'm not negating the power of habituation. When I gave up cigarettes in 1999 I was amazed that the habit was as strong as the physical withdrawal from that deadly awful drug.
The anti-drug monsters waging their "war on (some) drugs" are doing no favors to addicts or those in danger of addiction. IMO they are a far greater menace to society than the drugs and addicts they hate.
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
"The DSM is usually reluctant to pathologize something unless it's really bothering the person themselves, or makes it impossible for them to live a normal life."
As a counter-example I call to your attention: Social Anxiety Disorder.
Not to be confused with "Seasonal Affective Disorder" (another real winner). The definition is vague, the symptoms can describe anyone who is uncomfortable in crowds, and yes, there is a pill. It's "Paxil" which is habit forming and has quite a colorful history: faked clinical trials, numerous lawsuits, all the way to a recent snafu where they dumped a batch on the market that was Ooops! missing the active ingredient...Did I mention it's habit forming? Lot of SAD people going into withdrawal while taking their pills. It's also another one where they marketed it agressively to kids, and, if you read the DSM definition of SAD, you'll find that kids who suffer it sometimes lack some of the vague-ass symptoms.
I don't trust the DSM anymore, frankly. The number of anxiety-style disorders that they've added in the last 20 years is staggering and obscene, and none of them have hard physical causes, and yet all of them respond to chemical treatment. That is extremely suspicious.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.