Slashdot Mirror


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."

59 of 279 comments (clear)

  1. Maybe by a+whoabot · · Score: 4, Funny

    I definitely reject eating when I'm doing stuff on the computer, but not sleeping.

    1. Re:Maybe by abe+ferlman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lol like I'd forget to eat and pass up that stamina/spirit buff? Preposterous. /sleep is just for rp tho.

      --
      microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    2. Re:Maybe by psychodelicacy · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I have to admit that I'll go without food and sleep for ages when I'm interested in something on the computer, whether it's teh internets or doing some coding, or whatever.

      But, the thing is, I'm like that when I get hold of a good novel, too. I'll sometimes forget to eat for a day if I'm reading something great, and will even cancel social engagements if the book's really good. I don't think I'm alone in this.

      So, do we also need a category of book addiction? Or do we just need to get a reality check, and accept that people in a relatively affluent society are lucky to have the luxury to give up on sleep or food for a little while in order to pursue an interest? After all, we know that we're not going to starve, so what does it matter if we miss a meal in order to iron out a persistent bug or follow a fascinating click-trail through Wikipedia? I think there are too many people out there who want us all to follow norms and have a vested interest in making us feel weird and wrong when we don't.

      --
      A closed mouth gathers no foot.
    3. Re:Maybe by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Informative

      So, do we also need a category of book addiction? Or do we just need to get a reality check, and accept that people in a relatively affluent society are lucky to have the luxury to give up on sleep or food for a little while in order to pursue an interest?

      Nope, we've got enough generalized "addiction" categories already. And we treat them the same. Drugs and counseling - same old saw.

      But what you describe doesn't really fall into the "addiction" category if it's not materially interfering with the rest of your life. So what does that mean? Good question. In dealing with the spectrum of human mental illness you have to realize that it is spectrum. We all have personality "traits" and sometimes these traits can lead to problems. If they lead to serious and persistent problems, then it's a personality "disorder" and a problem. The dividing line can be pretty arbitrary. Just remember that some of the most influential people in history clearly meet current DSM criteria for one or another mental illness. As do nearly all of the people in an emergency room at 2:00 AM.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Editors addicted to stories about net addiction by trolltalk.com · · Score: 2, Funny

    I guess it's the "new pink".

  3. I do not agree... by scafuz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but I need a faster PC to read TFA

  4. Nonsense by kraemate · · Score: 2, Funny

    I do slashdot 23 hrs a day and i'm fin &^!##(*!& NO CARRIER

    1. Re:Nonsense by NewYorkCountryLawyer · · Score: 4, Funny

      I personally think anything over 22 hours a day is excessive.

      Fortunately I have things in perspective.

      --
      Ray Beckerman +5 Insightful
  5. What kind of drugs do they give out for this? by hilather · · Score: 5, Funny

    I display all the symptoms, but I'm cool with that, I just want to score some drugs.

    1. Re:What kind of drugs do they give out for this? by SQLGuru · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I have a mental illness.....please direct deposit my disability checks (I can't leave the Internet long enough to deposit a real check).....

      Layne

    2. Re:What kind of drugs do they give out for this? by cyphercell · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't really blame the companies for trying this.

      I'm sorry, but did you just say that in a multibillion dollar confidence scheme, you blame the hustled?

      --
      Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
    3. Re:What kind of drugs do they give out for this? by causality · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is what I said: "I don't really blame the companies for trying this. I blame the medical establishment and the general public for going along with it without some serious challenges to whether more medications are the best way to deal with our problems." Did you miss that "medical establishment" part? Reading comprehension is a useful thing!

      And yes, I do place some blame on the "hustled"... just from a "fool me once, shame on you - fool me twice, shame on me" standpoint. Their unrealistic, strong desire for magical instant solutions to deep and significant personal problems (which are often self-inflicted) is a big part of this; whether you or I enjoy hearing that is irrelevant.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  6. Nonsense by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

    C'mon, put me in a mental institution and you'll notice that I'm allright.

    They do have internet connection there now, right? Right???

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. I'll step away from the computer by sleeponthemic · · Score: 5, Funny

    When Dr. Jerald Block prescribes me some pussy.

    --
    I record my sleeptalking
    1. Re:I'll step away from the computer by gnick · · Score: 4, Funny

      When Dr. Jerald Block prescribes me some pussy. Actually, gender reassignment may work. From what I hear, there are no girls on the internet.
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  8. I can quit anytime, really by johnny+cashed · · Score: 2, Funny

    But after a couple of days disconnected, everything is ok again.

  9. I can stop whenever I want by Ngarrang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...just as soon as this next web page is done loading.

    Oooh, where does THAT link go?

    When I was a kid, I want crazy over Transformers (1st gen). Before that, it was Hot Wheels. The Internet strikes me as one of these shiny new toys, but infinitely greater in its possibilities. But, compulsive-impulsive behavior? Why do I get the feeling that someone is looking for an excuse to live off my tax money? I am guilty for having shown addict-like behavior with it years ago. In college, if I wasn't in class, I was at a terminal run on the DEC VAX running TinyFugue and exploring every MUD and MOO out there.

    There will be those who take the Internet to its extreme, sure. You will get that with any activity. But, 86% of addicts have some form mental illness? Me thinks "mental illness" has gained an overly-broad definition in the last 10 years. But, I am just an arm chair psychologist.

    Gotta go, my email notify chime just went off.

    --
    Bearded Dragon
    1. Re:I can stop whenever I want by cthulu_mt · · Score: 2, Funny

      The strippers will give you the time of day if you stop trying to insert quarters in the "slot".

      --
      Virginia is for lovers. EVE is for griefers.
  10. In summary... by IBBoard · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but in summary have the American Journal of Psychiatry released a report that an addiction to an entity resulting from a compulsion to use/have it should be added to a list of mental ilnesses/addictions that includes compulsions to use/have things?

    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):

    Compulsive e-mailing and text messaging could soon become classified as an official brain illness.
    1. Re:In summary... by gnick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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? If a significant number of people were doing the same thing to a degree that it was screwing up their lives? Probably. But, probably just a a strange subset of CDO*. They're treating this as special because there are a lot of people developing real problems (work/personal/etc) because they refuse to get off the damned computer.

      Disclaimer: I'm certainly no psychiatrist and have no idea if you need to treat people with this particular problem any different than your standard obsessive.

      *CDO = Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Don't you hate it when people fail to properly alphabetize their acronyms?
      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    2. Re:In summary... by R2.0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is the medical equivalent of bogus patents - take an old, well established idea, add "on the internet" at the end, and all of the sudden it's new?

      Addiction to Internet pornography? No, it's addiction to pornography.

      Addiction to Internet gaming? No, it's addiction to gaming.

      Addiction to Internet gambling? No, it's addiction to gambling.

      Addiction to Internet communication? That's a little tougher, but I'd view that more as low self esteem/insecurity - i.e. constantly needing to feel "connected". I'd bet these folks are the same ones used to who spend hours on the phone with their friends. Addiction? Hardly

      This is psychiatrists trying to drum up more work for themselves.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    3. Re:In summary... by Iron+Condor · · Score: 2, Funny

      I doubt that it's ever about the medium itself (addicted to TCP/IP, UDP, and so on).

      I admit that I'm addicted to inserting ethernet plugs into RJ45 jacks. I just love the satisfying little 'click' they make. I'm going through a pack (of patch cables) a day now and it's starting to interfere with my work and my social life. The chicks really get freaked out when they see me lovingly insert one of these plugs a couple hundred times.

      (Did you ever notice that it's called a "Jack" even though it's the female side of the connector? Shouldn't it be called "Jill"? Is there something homosexual going one here somewhere? Ah, who cares as long as I can insert these little buggers. 'click'. Ohhh - that was a good one.)

      addictedly yours

      IC

      --
      Repeal 802.11! Throw off the shackles of oppressive wifi!

      --
      We're all born with nothing.
      If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  11. Re:Who defines "excessive?" by pandrijeczko · · Score: 5, Funny
    I seem to recall the late and great American comedian Bill Hicks defining "excessive masturbation" as being the point when only "air comes out".

    I don't know if that helps with your definition.

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
  12. Double-you tea eff?! by geminidomino · · Score: 4, Insightful

    FTFA: "three-dimensional, multiplayer games users have described as "heroinware."

    Who the fuck has ever used the word "Heroinware?"

    WarCrack/EverCrack, sure. I've heard those. But "heroinware"? That doesn't even roll off the tongue.

    Someone used the word to describe Doom shareware back in 94, but it doesn't seem to have caught on (802 hits in google vs 460,000 for 'warcrack').

    That's the equivalent of a /.er pulling shit from the jargon file to make himself sound like a "real hacker". Gimme a break.

    1. Re:Double-you tea eff?! by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's the equivalent of a /.er pulling shit from the jargon file to make himself sound like a "real hacker". Gimme a break. Foo! Take your eighty-column mind down El Camino Bignum to Berzerkley and watch the blinkenlights.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  13. Where's Jerry Springer? by StCredZero · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's not a disorder until someone's been on Jerry Springer and gotten into a fight over it!

  14. I need medication because I'm different by natex84 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Everything is a disorder. We need medicine for everything. People cannot make changes in their life without medication.

    Everyone must be exactly the same!

    Some areas of medicine/psychology are getting ridiculous.

    1. Re:I need medication because I'm different by mpapet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm just using your ridiculous post to make the following points:

      From a social health perspective, the social costs of addicts using the internet as their drug of choice are unknown. This topic along with most addiction research deserve way more research dollars. For example, we know our social costs went down when alcohol addiction was identified and promoted as an illness. (more workers, more productivity)

      If you knew anything about addiction therapy you would know that the therapy for a sex addict is much different than that of a bulemic(sp!), which is much different then that of an alcoholic. It stands to reason then, that "internet addiction" will eventually have different therapeutic methods that are unique to this category of addiction.

      Not all of us live in our parent's basement any more. Take a shower. Get a girlfriend.

      --
      http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
    2. Re:I need medication because I'm different by misleb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Lets say you're a doctor and you start getting patients coming in complaining that they have what appears to be an addiction to the Internet. Or perhaps they are trying to get help for a family member who is showing signs of addiction. What do you do? Do you just laugh it off? Say something like "just stop using the computer so much." What can the patient do? I understand that medicating it seems unreasonable, but what else can you do as a doctor when you can only see the patient once a week or whatever?

      It isn't like doctors are going around to people's homes and declaring otherwise healthy people mentally ill. I'm sure this is mostly a reaction to people with serious problems looking for help.

      Also, keep in mind that an official diagnosis is important for insurance purposes. "Internet addiction" may sound silly, but doctors need to put down some diagnosis or insurance may not pay.

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
  15. Instant cure for internet addiction then. by moltenfury · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Getting a girlfriend or boyfriend. I've seen it work well over the years even with the most hardcore online users.

    1. Re:Instant cure for internet addiction then. by JCSoRocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Seriously. This isn't an addiction, it's people using up their free time. Give them something more interesting to do and they'll do that instead.

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    2. Re:Instant cure for internet addiction then. by PhoenixFlare · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Getting a girlfriend or boyfriend. I've seen it work well over the years even with the most hardcore online users.

      Thank goodness that my wife actually, y'know, shares my interests and loves internet/gaming activities as much as I do. We have pets, stable jobs, pay all the bills, etc.

      Seriously. This isn't an addiction, it's people using up their free time. Give them something more interesting to do and they'll do that instead.

      What you do with your free time should be based on what you find entertaining, not just because of the stupid notion that gaming and such are only for people who can't find anything better to do.

    3. Re:Instant cure for internet addiction then. by canajin56 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You seem to be taking this out of context, and taking it personally. They aren't saying "You play WoW for like 3-5 hours a night, and 8+ saturdays and sundays, you are an addict and need help." In that case, you clearly have lots of free time, and perhaps not a lot of a "real" social life to take up that free time. (Although I somewhat disagree with the notion that it isn't a social life. I chat and play games with friends in Texas, the UK, California, and Bermuda, how is that fundamentally less social that playing darts with them at the bar, other than the fact that its less physical?) I admit I play online games perhaps too much, and could be doing other things with my free time (like the dishes). The difference is, the addicts they are talking about, they don't just spend all their free time on it, they make more free time by calling in sick to work, skipping classes, skipping out on family functions. Playing during work. That's when you would call it an addiction. They aren't using up their free time, they are MAKING free time to do it more. If you have a pint with dinner every night, you probably wouldn't be called adicted, though you might not being doing your liver any favours. But if you have a flask at work, and are coming in to work hung over or drunk most days, then you have a problem. Given that there ARE people who fit into the latter category, you wouldn't expect a person in the former (a beer or a glass of wine with dinner most nights) to object to the notion that you can have an alcohol problem.

      It works the same way with games. In my group, there was somebody who dropped out of college to play full time, sold his car to upgrade his computer and pay his monthly fees. I'd say that is a big problem. In my group, there is also somebody who probably played just as much as this guy, more or less. They are a university student. They aren't on as much during the day, but often are evenings and all weekends. But when their courses and research get heavy, they vanish for a week or two. They only show up for important raids, so only a few hours a week, tops. That's the difference. It is all their free time, or at least most of it. But it doesn't interfere with the rest of their life. If your playing isn't messing with the rest of your life, you aren't the sort of person they are talking about, and shouldn't get defensive ;)

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  16. So how much is too much? by AlecC · · Score: 2, Insightful

    OK, if you are like the Korean who literally killed himself gaming, that is too much. But how many emails a day is "too much"? How many hours gaming are you allowed? I admit that most of my friends are online, though I occasionally meat some IRL. If I don't communicate with them, I get feeligns of loss (withdrawal) But before the Net, I didn't have friends. How is it worse to have net-friends instead of no-friends?

    --
    Consciousness is an illusion caused by an excess of self consciousness.
    1. Re:So how much is too much? by psydzl · · Score: 3, Informative

      It doesn't make sense to choose an arbitrary number, the central question is: Is it ruining my life? If some is on the Internet for every minute of their spare time, and the overall quality of their life is greater, or about the same as before the Internet, then no medical illness is present. However, if another person is failing to go to school or work, losing important relationships, and suffering other serious negative consequences, AND they cannot stop in spite of all the loss, that is probably an illness. Illness doesn't mean excessive use, it means very serious consequences, up to and including death. This is an uncommon illness, but probably not rare.

  17. Honestly Dr. Block... by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 3, Funny

    People with obsessive-compulsive disorders are the last people you want to make angry!

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
  18. What if your job requires it? by khasim · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Okay, so excessive emailing is a problem.

    But I'm the email admin for the company I work at. At what point do I qualify as "addicted" so I can get disability?

    Do real junkies ever get tired of heroin? Or annoyed at stupid people for giving them more heroin?

    1. Re:What if your job requires it? by Kandenshi · · Score: 3, Informative

      The DSM(the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders) typically uses when it causes clinically significant distress on the part of the person, or in their work, social, personal lives.

      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.

      You have a tendency to check twice if the door to your house is locked after leaving? That's not really going to cause you major problems, and odds are you're not freaking out about it. Not OCD.
      Have frequent compulsions to drive back home and check if your door is locked, occuring throughout the day, making you get fired from your job, ruining your social life and making you feel like crap? That might be more likely to get you that diagnosis.

      You doing lots of e-mail for work is not likely to interfere with your ability to work. :P So you're fine.

      Heroin junkies might not mind their heroin(though some do), but if it screws up their lives then it's something the DSM will look at.

    2. Re:What if your job requires it? by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "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.
    3. Re:What if your job requires it? by Kandenshi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      OK, read what I said. That the disorder has to interfere with the person in a clinically significant way. Then read your link.

      E. The avoidance, anxious anticipation, or distress in the feared social or performance situation(s) interferes significantly with the person's normal routine, occupational (academic) functioning, or social activities or relationships, or there is marked distress about having the phobia. Not sure that you really chose the right DSM diagnosis to use as a "counter-example" to what I said.
      Still, I don't pretend that the DSM IV-tr is flawless or perfect. I'd have to be CRAZY to think that(look for it in the DSM-V :P) There are a number of disorders that are badly described, or with what I feel to be insufficient evidence for them.

      The entire "personality disorders" area is riddled with issues. You can have two people get the same diagnosis who share NONE of the same symptoms. This "pick 4 of 10" thing is convenient, but I question whether they're really describing the same disorder, or if that disorder exists. Most of the reason for the DSM is so that I can say "Suffers from PTSD" and you can quickly make a variety of inferences as to what symptoms the person shows, how to treat it, etc... That's lacking in a number of places in the DSM.

      And yes, there are areas where the requirement for clinically significant distress or impairment is missing. That's why I qualified my earlier statemtents with "reluctant" etc...
  19. Compulsive? by areReady · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If "skipping basic needs" like eating, sleeping and other basic functions in favor of another activity means you're an addict, then I'm addicted to my job, my second job, reading books, watching movies, the internet, video games, cable TV, telephone conversations, cooking a good meal, writing, pooping, listening to music, naps and being lost in thought. Maybe I'm weird, but it's trivially easy for me to become absorbed in something and simply forget to eat or go to bed - for hours on end.

    And it's not the internet I'm addicted to. It is that gods-cursed Stumble Button.

  20. Call me a cook if you want ... by JeepFanatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... but to me this is just another way to prescribe more drugs to make more money for the health care/pharmacuetical industry.

    1. Re:Call me a cook if you want ... by Digi-John · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ok, you're a cook!
      I'd be more offended to be called a kook.

      --
      Klingon programs don't timeshare, they battle for supremacy.
    2. Re:Call me a cook if you want ... by Kamineko · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why bother calling a cook when GP has rejected eating?

    3. Re:Call me a cook if you want ... by RocketScientist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Obviously if you play online games instead of watching TV, you're not consuming enough. You're paying $10-$30 a month for your game, but you're not seeing enough television advertisements, not buying enough golf equipment, not buying as many movie tickets, expensive SUV's to haul your crotchfruit to soccer games, and so on. You might want to buy an upgrade for your computer now and then, but that's nothing compared to gearing out for an avid golfer, or an avid fisherman, or an avid television watcher.

      Basically you're not consuming enough of the crap they want to shove down your throat. So they call it an addiction so they can give you drugs so you'll behave like a nice little drone, and watch their advertisements and buy their tooth whiteners.

      I've watched more people wate more time on "an addiction" to collegiate sports, celebrity gossip, cricket, football, or just shopping than online anything. And yet these folks are considered normal for spending hours every night researching their fantasy sports teams (not just online, magazines, books, go to Amazon.com and look it up) and solid hours every weekend watching games. But that's normal. They're seeing their fair share of ads for Budweiser, so it's all good. But if you spend a few hours nights and weekends online playing games with friends, well, you're not seeing your share of advertisements, so that's obviously an addiction.

      I'll take these jackasses seriously when I start hearing about American Idol addicts, TV addicts, and Golf addicts, or even (timely enough) College Basketball addicts. Until then, they're all basically bought by the advertising and marking cabal.

    4. Re:Call me a cook if you want ... by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So they call it an addiction so they can give you drugs...

      Now there's a wonderful irony of modern society.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    5. Re:Call me a cook if you want ... by Iron+Condor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I've watched more people wate more time on "an addiction" to collegiate sports, celebrity gossip, cricket, football, or just shopping than online anything. And yet these folks are considered normal for spending hours every night researching their fantasy sports teams (not just online, magazines, books, go to Amazon.com and look it up) and solid hours every weekend watching games. But that's normal. They're seeing their fair share of ads for Budweiser, so it's all good. But if you spend a few hours nights and weekends online playing games with friends, well, you're not seeing your share of advertisements, so that's obviously an addiction.

      The distinction is fairly simple, really: is there someone who objectively admits that watching college football is bad for them? That it hurts them? That they're starting to lose sleep or jeopardizing their employment over it?

      And how many WOW players say just that?

      That's the very meaning of "addiction": that there's something that you'd judge objectively to be bad for you but that you do not want to stop or curtail even though you judge it as bad for you. All those smokers who say "yeah, it kills you" and in the same breath claim "I can stop any time I want"? Addicted. Because they do not want to stop an activity that they themselves judge as bad for them.

      Addiction does NOT mean "someone/something somehow forces me to do this". It means "I, myself, am continuing to choose to do this even though I, myself, understand this to be harmful for myself". Every addict is always in the drivers seat. They can always choose to stop whatever it is they're doing. For every addict it is true that "they can stop any time they want". But they don't want to. Which is exactly what addiction is all about.

      --
      We're all born with nothing.
      If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  21. Prevalence in society by esocid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Today it is actually fairly hard for people to get away from a computer. At work people need to have one to get emails from coworkers or clients and whatnot and to utilize whatever programs/databases they need to work. They are becoming more prevalent in schools, especially in colleges. Some people may take it to the extreme and spend every waking hour on or near a computer but who complains when someone reads books "too much?" It only becomes a problem is it is an obsessive behavior that interferes with important activities, and who's to say whether a person's addiction to the internet is due to them having an addictive personality in general? I actually love leaving my technology behind when I go on vacation because it completely is a ball and chain. I wonder how many "addictions" arise when something new comes out?

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
  22. Re:Who defines "excessive?" by sm62704 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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
  23. The Sickness Industry at "work". by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Exactly. The sickness industry wants everything to be a disease, because they charge for diseases.

    1. Re:The Sickness Industry at "work". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why should I listen to a compulsive air breather?

  24. It'a about time! by codesurfer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    For a while, I was worried that the medical establishment would NOT provide another excuse for people with poor impulse control who refuse to take responsibility for their lives.

    Whew!

  25. Bloody psychiatrists are ruining medicine! by swordgeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    OK, first of all let's be clear on something: Internet "addiction" isn't addiction. Neither is sex addiction, shopping addiction, and so forth.
    "Behavioral addictions" are mental in nature. True addiction is physiological.

    Secondly, it should be trivially obvious that ALL of these so-called behavioral addictions are SYMPTOMS of some other root cause, often some manifestation of OCD. You can treat heroin addiction by removing the substance and healing the body (i.e. go through withdrawal and detox--nasty business, but fairly effective). You don't treat internet addiction by taking away the internet, you find what is driving the person towards addict-like behaviour, and solve that. Voila--internet addiction is a symptom.

    I don't know why the psychiatry field is so determined to label all symptomatic behaviours as diseases, but they're not doing themselves any good.

    --

    "People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
  26. I quite agree with that. by khasim · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which is why we have "OCD" and NOT "obsessive door checking disorder".

    Being that the door checking is an manifestation of OCD, not a disorder in and of itself. If you removed the door, the OCD will still be there. It will just transfer itself to something else. Such as checking the stove to make sure it is off.

  27. it's true, you know by youthoftoday · · Score: 3, Funny

    I had to check my email, facebook and the slashdot front page three times whilst writing this comment.

    --
    -1 not first post
  28. Re:Who defines "excessive?" by Iron+Condor · · Score: 2, Informative

    The new definition for the word "addiction" is the same as the old word for "habituation".

    No. You can have a habit for something that does no objective harm to you. But when YOU yourself realize that something is bad for you (like, apparently, you noticed that smoking is bad for you) and yet you STILL choose to continue the practice -- then you're addicted.

    OK, what is the new word for physical addiction, like with heroin or alcohol, where you can die from not getting your drug?

    It's not a "new word" -- this effect has always been called "chemical dependence". I don't know what vocabulary the unwashed masses use, but in all the years of my medscape subscription (15 now? wow.) I've never heard chemical dependence referred to as "physical addiction".

    Of course every slashdotter knows that joe sixpack tends to mis-use jargon. Quite horribly, in fact. And when you correct him, he'll insist that "it was always called that way".

    --
    We're all born with nothing.
    If you die in debt, you're ahead.
  29. Ah, no need to assume a conspiracy by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, seriously, you don't need to assume a conspiracy here. (There might still be one, but it's not needed to explain it. Occam's Razor, if you will. Or Hanlon's Razor.)

    The way it works is sorta like this:

    1. Most humans are herd animals, and educated to be very "us vs them" at it. And have layers upon layers of mental tricks to rationalize anything they personally do as the Right Thing. See, cognitive dissonance, for example.

    So when Mr X goes to the pub and yakks about the latest football game, it not only gives him a much needed feeling of belonging to some group, it also provides a circle-jerk reinforcement of the idea that any sane male would naturally feel an urge to go to the pub and yakk about football. So if Mr Y wants to go play WoW instead, there must be something awfully wrong with him.

    (And just so I don't piss off only the football fans, the same happens in reverse too. If John goes to the pub instead of doing the latest raid with us, there must be something awfully wrong with him. And if Tom is running OpenBSD instead of coming to our LUG meetings, and quotes Theo de Raad all the time instead of worshipping Linus like the rest of us, well, I'd be careful around him, if you know what I mean. Etc.)

    At any rate, people can be very distrustful of anything that is not one of "us", and doubly so of anyone or anything that challenges the rationalizations and excuses that that "us" group is built on.

    That incidentally means that anything new will invariably be met with such distrust. Society has had generations of building up a status quo, and lots of unwritten rules and roles for its members. Real Men do this, Real Women do that, Real Old Geezers do that other thing, and everyone is happy that they don't have to think much about it. Everyone else is doing the same things, so it must be the right, God-given way. And then this new group comes by and goes and reads comics instead, or watches TV, or listens to this newfangled heavy metal, or whatever.

    I'm not kidding. Each of those has been the new thing at some point, and were demonized and presented as some dangerous influence on the youth at some point. Games are just the newest instance of some people who just don't want to fit their traditional roles in this big "us" group, and it makes everyone else uneasy. Why would they want to do that instead of watching the sacred football game on TV, like everyone else? How we forget that not so far in the past it was watching TV (instead of going and yakking outside) that was the newfangled TV addiction that was making everyone else uneasy.

    So, anyway, we have a bunch of gamers and a large majority which doesn't understand them, and (to various extents) is made uneasy by them. They don't care that you don't watch ads or don't buy enough golf clubs, but they do get worried that you chose to not be a part of their group.

    2. There's the kind of people who just want some publicity, or to sell you something. Whether it's a new drug, or their expensive psychotherapy fees, or the idea of electing them to Congress. Make no mistake, these don't care about what else you buy either. They just care about selling their own snake oil to enough people, and if you're not a buyer, well, then maybe you'd make a good bogeyman instead.

    And that uneasy majority from #1 is a perfectly willing buyer for that snake oil. Especially one packed as, basically, "yes, it's scientifically proven: it's perfectly normal to be part of _your_ group and do the things _you_ do. And as you were suspecting, it's everyone else that are fucked-up in the head." That's what that majority wanted to hear.

    3. It also doesn't help that we have a whole game industry trying hard to amplify the symptoms, if they can't actually make their games more "addictive".

    We have limited save points. (My personal record was having to grind 10 hours before I found the next save point in a game.) We have 40-man raids that take a whole night to finish, and where if you quit suddenly, you've just piss

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  30. BREAKING NEWS: Watching television is a disorder by oobi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    television has been around much longer, much more time to study it's effects. where is THAT disorder? Radio has been around MUCH longer than television or internet. People listen to the radio incessantly. where is THAT disorder? Disorders are one man's label for another man. And we know how infallible man is.

    --
    If Big Media is the Harvester of Eyes, does that make Apple an arms dealer?
  31. Re:BREAKING NEWS: Watching television is a disorde by colmore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know. I'll step up to the plate here and say that there's something about the botomlessness of the internet that can make it real hard to turn off even when you want to go to sleep.

    I guess I've just haven't liked TV since they took all the cool reruns off of cable and replaced them with reality.

    I've had far far far far FAR more "oh shit it's DAWN and I have to go to (class/work)" moments with wikipedia, WoW, forum arguments, Nethack, Civilization, etc. than I ever have with TV. The internet is basically a great big stack of awesome magazines. You can lose your attention but still immediately have something else to grab you. It works as both active and passive engagement. It's dangerous for people who are bad at saying "no."

    And as for drugs? I don't know. Maybe a bunch of upright savanna apes are actually medically ill-equipped to live in this world we've built for ourselves, and only a small percentage of the population IS healthy by the standards we've created. We can either change our surroundings or drug ourselves into being OK with the surroundings we've built. Few people seem to be working very hard beyond mere complaining (guilty!) at the first option.

    I don't know, though. I've struggled with very real been-in-the-hospital bipolar disorder with major depression and panic attacks. It's cost me jobs, education, and relationships. I resisted medication for a long time. While I don't doubt that psychoactives are way over perscribed (parents: hint: Adderol is meth. Don't be too shocked when your kids get hooked, and don't be too shocked at what happens when they lose their free pills at 22 or 23), my life is better since Lithium.

    --
    In Capitalist America, bank robs you!