Prince Philip
Duke of Edinborogu
This post is inspired by a thread regarding using kava to ween oneself off of Xanax, and by Pep's wife giving him a hard time.
This idea may be the intellectual property of Jack Timprey and Rational Recovery. I propose we use it when having medical discussions regarding the use of kava or other mood-altering substances, for the sake of clarity.
Addiction can only occur in the presence of ambivalence. If a part of you wants to use kava, and a part of you wishes you could just quit, you're addicted. Only the addicted person can say, "I am addicted." It would be untrue to call me a kava addict. I have no desire to stop using kava.
Chemical dependance means you can't stop, regardless of if you want to or not. I sometimes think I can stop using kava, or use it much less often than I do, and the results are usually a Royal Pain in the Arse as PTSD and anxiety start ruling my life, and not in a nice constitutional monarchy way. I am chemically dependent on kava, and I'm OK with that. Some people are dependent on aspirin to avoid headaches.
Abuse is one of the hardest things to define. If it was simply a portmandu of "abnormal use," we could leave it at that, but "abuse" carries pejorative connotations. Essentially, abuse is "use I don't like." I try to stay away from this term, although I will say that manufacturing kava in a way that is totally contrary to Kastom, e.g. dried kava leaf tea, would be abuse of kava. You can call me a kava abuser because I drink so much of it, or because I drink it before 4:20pm at times, or because I sometimes use extracts or lollies, or because I sometimes drive under the calming influence of kava (making me a calmer, more stable driver, instead of a road-raging Duke of Hazard).
When people say "kava is not addictive," they mean that kava does not cause physical dependance. When I say "Kava is not addictive," I mean I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop using kava unless they have a serious allergy.
I hope these linguistic guidelines will help add clarity to conversations involving these somewhat uncomfortable topics.
This idea may be the intellectual property of Jack Timprey and Rational Recovery. I propose we use it when having medical discussions regarding the use of kava or other mood-altering substances, for the sake of clarity.
Addiction can only occur in the presence of ambivalence. If a part of you wants to use kava, and a part of you wishes you could just quit, you're addicted. Only the addicted person can say, "I am addicted." It would be untrue to call me a kava addict. I have no desire to stop using kava.
Chemical dependance means you can't stop, regardless of if you want to or not. I sometimes think I can stop using kava, or use it much less often than I do, and the results are usually a Royal Pain in the Arse as PTSD and anxiety start ruling my life, and not in a nice constitutional monarchy way. I am chemically dependent on kava, and I'm OK with that. Some people are dependent on aspirin to avoid headaches.
Abuse is one of the hardest things to define. If it was simply a portmandu of "abnormal use," we could leave it at that, but "abuse" carries pejorative connotations. Essentially, abuse is "use I don't like." I try to stay away from this term, although I will say that manufacturing kava in a way that is totally contrary to Kastom, e.g. dried kava leaf tea, would be abuse of kava. You can call me a kava abuser because I drink so much of it, or because I drink it before 4:20pm at times, or because I sometimes use extracts or lollies, or because I sometimes drive under the calming influence of kava (making me a calmer, more stable driver, instead of a road-raging Duke of Hazard).
When people say "kava is not addictive," they mean that kava does not cause physical dependance. When I say "Kava is not addictive," I mean I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would want to stop using kava unless they have a serious allergy.
I hope these linguistic guidelines will help add clarity to conversations involving these somewhat uncomfortable topics.