What is your problem and why can you not use google?
Addiction is a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment, and an individual’s life experiences.
I use google. And nowhere can I find that any scientific conclusions you are talking about. There are some conclusions what can at most suggest some part of what you are talking about, but these are not isolated factors that confirm causality. Most addicts are poor, and contrary to popular opinion, they were poor before addiction too. Cases where middle and upper class people who become poor through drugs are rare. Drugs are very addictive, but not that addictive. Most of the causes of addiction are low living standards or other mental illnesses. That's why many studies when treating addiction say that the most important factor in reducing the chances of relapsing into addiction is their improved standard of living.
RFK is rich. Do I need to say more?
And my questions toward you, in fact, were not questions. They were baits to make you understand that your level of knowledge on the subject is minimal.
You are such a clown my guy, I know more about addiction than many people. Addicting is not curable. Every definition of Addiction describes it as treatable, not curable. This means once you are actually addicted, you are addicted for good. This is why you can relapse back into it. And just because you can relapse does not mean you will. Which was never up for discussion.
"Hah I was merely pretending to be stupid" meme - that's you. You think you so smart and are the stupidest one in this thread, comical.
You interpret things into my posts that I have not talked about, and were not mentioned in the original comment. We were not talking about the cause of addiction. Why are you tallking to yourself about an etirely different topic?
Asking questions is not stupidity. I wrote about the causes of addiction, because the causes of addiction and the return of addiction are very close to each other. I thought it was obvious, but I will try to be more specific next time about what I mean. And no scientific definition of addiction says that it is impossible to stop being addicted. Now you are just making stuff up.
So first they were (quite obviously) bait, and now they were legitimate questions? You need to step up your trolling game. So incorrect but so confident is wild. Look up what curable means and what treatable means. Have a great day.
You absolutely 100% CAN blackmail someone for something that's widely known. Just tell them you want them to do X, or you'll claim you will post online you saw a needle in their suitcase. It's an incredible liability and even if you're innocent, after you're addicted, people will be much less inclined to trust your innocence
Even when only looking at people being clean for a staggering 15 years, a quarter will still relapse. 15 years is an extremely long time.
Also from the article, an important part in the conclusion:
These results suggest that drug abuse treatment programs should focus more on incremental improvements in the lives of heroin addicts, a more realistic goal than lifelong abstinence.
You absolutely 100% CAN blackmail someone for something that's widely known. Just tell them you want them to do X, or you'll claim you will post online you saw a needle in their suitcase.
It only works if the RFK continues to use drugs. Because a simple test can show that the person there is lying.
focus more on incremental improvements in the lives of heroin addicts
Yes, because most addicts are poor, usually extremely poor. RFK is not.
You could 100% blackmail him. By, I don't know, catching him doing the widely known bad thing he says he doesn't do anymore and threatening to tell everyone.
619
u/a-pilot Jan 31 '25
He was a heroin addict for 17 years and had a brain worm! This is the best we’ve got?!?!?