Category: Addiction News

  • Young People With Opioid Addiction Face Barriers To Treatment

    Young People With Opioid Addiction Face Barriers To Treatment

    Access to medication-assisted treatment is a major issue for young adults with opioid addiction.

    Opioid use among minors has drastically increased since the 1990s—parallel to adult use—yet young people with opioid addiction are largely without access to proper treatment.

    Yale University published a study revealing that nearly 9,000 minors (20 years old and under) in the U.S. died from prescription and illicit opioid poisonings between 1999 and 2016. The related mortality rate increased almost 270% during that same time period, and were mostly unintentional overdoses of kids ages 15 to 19.

    The youth in the study were addicted to and dying from the same opioids as adults, including fentanyl, the deadly drug that is often mixed in with other opioids.

    The National Institute on Drug Abuse writes that research shows that when treating opioid addiction, medication should be the first line of treatment, in tandem with behavioral therapy or counseling. The accepted medications to treat opioid addiction are buprenorphine, naltrexone and methadone.

    Lindsey Vuolo, associate director of health law and policy at the Center on Addiction, assured US News & World Report that these medications work.

    “Overall, approximately 50% of patients who receive medications for opioid addiction are successfully treated, while less than 10% of patients are successfully treated without these medications,” she said. Yet many rehabs do not offer any medication-assisted treatment.

    Adolescents with opioid addiction have an even more difficult road than adults in becoming aware of and accessing medication-assisted treatment.

    Dr. Scott Hadland, a pediatrician, assistant professor at Boston University and researcher at Boston Medical Center’s Grayken Center for Addiction, spoke with US News about the results of his study on opioid treatment and youth.

    Hadland and others looked at close to 5,000 Medicaid-enrolled young people between the ages of 13 and 22 with a diagnosed opioid use disorder in 2014 and 2015. The results were clear: less than a quarter received medication for their treatment within three months of being diagnosed, with most of the youths receiving only behavioral health services. A mere 5% of those under age 18 received timely treatment with medication. 

    Dr. Sharon Levy, director of the Adolescent Substance Use and Addiction Program at Boston Children’s Hospital and an associate professor of pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, was the lead author of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ 2016 recommendations that called for “increasing resources to improve access to medication-assisted treatment of opioid-addicted adolescents and young adults.”

    The recommendations urged pediatricians to consider offering medication as treatment for young patients with severe opioid use disorders. Levy says that negative perceptions about medicated-assisted recovery (that the person is replacing one addiction with another) are outdated and the benefits of the medications outweigh any associated risks.

    “Policies, attitudes, and messages that serve to prevent patients from accessing a medication that can effectively treat a life-threatening condition may be harmful to adolescent health,” her AAP article states.

    Naltrexone is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for patients age 18 and older, and buprenorphine is approved for patients 16 and older.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • How I Came To "Believe” In Safe Injection Sites

    How I Came To "Believe” In Safe Injection Sites

    The part of me that understands service is the backbone of my recovery, demands something other than pretending that there aren’t options available to people still suffering.  

    So last night I’m at a town hall event on drug addiction and someone mentions safe injection sites in the audience. My heart begins to pound from having my hand up and hoping to get called on, so I can ask about this, among other topics.  

    The panel looks around at each other trying to see who will bite first, as it’s clearly a controversial topic. Finally, the one “token recovery guy” speaks up, “You know, studies are positive, but people are very opposed to the idea, and the last time we had a discussion about it a fight nearly broke out.”

    And so, I wanted to get up. And I wanted to have that fight.  

    But I was taught to cease fighting anything and anyone. What about fighting substance use disorder? I thought my disease was doing pushups? Certainly, this disease is wreaking havoc across our country, especially with the younger generations, and what are we, as a community, prepared to do about it?  

    Who is fighting on the front lines? While communities claim “not in my backyard” absolution, so do the “anonymous people” who are in recovery in this country. They are told to have no opinion on outside issues. But, to me, this isn’t an outside issue, because the part of me that understands service is the backbone of my recovery, demands something other than pretending that there aren’t options available to people still suffering.  

    Thankfully, I have met many who are rank and file generals in this fight, however compared to the #’s we could have, it is disappointing, and makes creating change in our communities even more difficult.  

    Clearly, safe injection options are not a solution, but saying “he or she must not have wanted it enough” when they drop out of the only pathway we are offering, which for mainstream recovery is a 12-step program, is an even less valid answer.  

    12-step can be successful, alongside other treatment modalities, but it is often seen as “the” solution and not “a” solution.

    And what about statistics? Research shows that overdose rates decrease around the area of the safe injection site. If this statistic alone isn’t a good enough reason to support them how about that the rate of people who were entering treatment in those areas increased? 

    Look, don’t get me wrong, I was once on the other side of this conversation. I had a lot of misguided beliefs before I entered recovery. I once thought when I was 16 and my drinking career had just begun, that if I could get my dad to give me driving lessons while I was drinking, I wouldn’t have a drinking and driving problem!

    Clearly being open-minded that my own thinking could be wrong is an important aspect of recovery, and so while I was made to think I should be open-minded about the program, I was indoctrinated to believe recovery was a static black-and-white thing, and that I was a miracle because I didn’t use, and while this may be true, it also underlined another assumption, that those who didn’t make it were not entitled to these miracles.  

    The idea that there is a level of participation required for someone to enter recovery is not lost on me, but the fact of the matter is, more and more people, especially those from the younger generations, are struggling to find their way in recovery and our answer to the staggering overdose and relapse rates is “they must not have been ready.”  

    So now what? What do we do with people who aren’t ready? Tell them to go out and give their substances another try? Drugs which could easily kill them in one shot? In my mind, if someone is not ready for abstinence-based recovery it isn’t that they have failed, it’s that they may not have reached that point yet, they may never reach that point, and who are we to say what that should look like.  

    There are many people who reach a significant “bottom,” only to find themselves using again. Can anyone say, who is honest with themselves, that a “bottom” is what creates recovery? Surely it can help, but there are many who hit that point and beyond, and for those people, while their lives continue to crumble around them, what is available?

    To me, this is why we need to offer as many solutions to this problem as we can. Not offering alternative methods like safe injection sites, or medically assisted treatment, is like saying to someone who has diabetes they can’t go to the hospital for support, or shouldn’t have to take insulin, they should just use their higher power, and if they can’t clearly, they don’t want to be healthy enough.

    Change is possible without necessarily being at a point of relying on grace only. While I believe in grace and have my own stance on faith, I believe this “coveted” winners circle of recovery is an issue and is not saving lives, especially amongst young people.

    Do I believe willingness is an important key to recovery? Certainly, yet how many of us become willing along our path of using? So why would we not want to create opportunities for the people who are using, to not only stay alive, but be near recovery support services?  

    When someone has a reoccurrence of use, do we no longer consider them in recovery? Therefore, by that logic, anyone who is in active use has the potential to effect this same change in their lives. Hospitals, fire houses, police stations, med express, anywhere, anytime someone wants out of the cycle, it should be as easy as getting a flu shot. It is that easy to get high or drunk.

    Finding drugs is way easier than finding recovery, unfortunately, we don’t seem to be making much headway on that stat. It shouldn’t be so difficult to get help, and yet it is. Clearly, we have quite a way to go, and so while we stand at the frontlines arguing for much-needed treatment options, housing options, peer support options for people in early recovery, we need to also keep our eye on how we can affect those who haven’t gotten to that point yet.    

    So, I didn’t get up and fight at the town hall meeting, because I know that the only way change will be affected is if compassion and reason win over misunderstanding and hatred. The only way we can win, and by we, I mean the parents who lost children to overdoses, and by we, I mean the advocates who mentor peers who end up overdosed in alley ways, and never make it home to their families, is if we can convince society that shaming people is not working and giving them opportunities for change are the best ideas we have currently.   

    I understand clearly that this option is seen as enabling to some. That we are encouraging people to use by providing needles and a safe place to go. The concept is not lost on me, but current models are not working. Prevention talks often fall on deaf ears, and while it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t continue to try to reach people, it does mean we need to get real about whether we are doing all we can do to help prevent overdose deaths in this country. 

    If someone who is opposed has a better idea of how we can get the people in our communities, who are using illicit substances, out of the shadows and into the light where we can see them and help them, please by all means share it.  

    To me the big bad wolf in this situation is that we would have to admit as a community, that people in our community, have heroin problems. We don’t like to admit that, and unfortunately it’s killing people.  

    I would argue that whatever motives you have for being opposed to this option, check them against the idea that centralizing use as best as possible helps to a.) measure your community and its needs, b.) provide safety and support to a vulnerable part of the population c.) encourage the next step for people to move on with their lives and d.) minimize the risk to police and health care workers responding to overdoses.  

    One of these reasons alone in my mind is enough to at least give it a try. Saving just one life means so much, especially if it is your child, your brother, your sister or your parent. Sharing this pain with too many people in too short of a time period is how I came to believe in safe Injection sites. 

    Erik Beresnoy is a father, advocate, and a writer on topics that range from recovery, and spirituality to music and philosophy.  Erik has been an active member of the recovery movement since 2008, when he himself entered recovery, and began to not only repair his life but to also seek help repair his community by working to implement new strategies. His current projects include Empowerment Coaching for the Ammon Foundation, and implementing a transformational program in NYC called Dare to Dream for Synergy Education. He is a certified recovery coach as well as a board member for Rockland Recovery Homes. His other works can be viewed at soberspiritmeditation.com.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Orchestra Aims To Help Musicians With Mental Health Struggles

    Orchestra Aims To Help Musicians With Mental Health Struggles

    “I cannot count the ways the orchestra helps me. It has allowed me to overcome the shame I felt about living with mental illness,” said one member.

    When he is conducting an orchestra, there’s nothing that alludes to Ronald Braunstein’s struggle with bipolar disorder.

    That’s because, according to The New York Times, Braunstein finds that music helps him cope with and manage his diagnosis. In fact, he believes this so much that he has founded the Me2/Orchestra for performers who are dealing with mental health struggles. 

    Braunstein graduated from the Juilliard School in his early 20s before traveling to Austria for a summer program at the Salzburg Mozarteum. In 1979, he won the Karajan International Conducting Competition and was the first American to do so. From there his career blossomed. 

    At the time, he did not know he had bipolar disorder. He was not diagnosed until age 35. But he says in looking back, he sees how it affected his career. 

    “The unbelievable mania I experienced helped me win the Karajan,” he told the Times. “I learned repertoire fast. I studied through the night and wouldn’t sleep. I didn’t eat because if I did, it would take away my edge.”

    “My bipolar disorder was just under the line of being under control,” he said. “It wasn’t easily detected. Most people thought I was weird.”

    In Vermont, after being dropped by his manager and terminated from a job, he met a woman named Caroline Whiddon, who he later married. Whiddon had been the chairwoman for the Youth Orchestra Division of the League of American Orchestras and had struggled with depression and anxiety.

    Braunstein contacted her in hopes of founding an orchestra for those who struggled with mental health issues. 

    In 2011, the Me2/Orchestra was born. Then in 2014, Me2/Boston was created. Both orchestras have about 50 members, ages 13 to 80, and perform six to eight times per year. 

    The orchestras are nonprofits and all musicians volunteer their times. Each year, Whiddon takes part in a letter-writing campaign to raise the money for expenses.

    “When we perform at a hospital, center for the homeless or correctional facility,” Whiddon said, “the cost of that performance is covered by corporate sponsorships, grants or donations from individuals, so the performance is free to those who attend.”

    Each time they perform, according to the Times, members of the orchestra discuss their mental health struggles and answer questions from the audience. 

    Jessica Stuart, 34, tells the Times that she had stopped playing violin in her 20s after her diagnosis of bipolar disorder. Now, as an orchestra member, she is back to playing.

    “Joining the Me2/Orchestra in Boston in 2014 was the first time I had played in years,” she told the Times. “I cannot count the ways the orchestra helps me. It has allowed me to overcome the shame I felt about living with mental illness. I no longer feel I have to hide an important part of my life from the rest of the world.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Doctor Loses License After Prescribing Pot Cookies To 4-Year-Old

    Doctor Loses License After Prescribing Pot Cookies To 4-Year-Old

    The case was brought to light when the boy’s father asked a school nurse to give his son a marijuana edible.

    A California doctor lost his medical license after recommending cannabis cookies for a four-year-old boy who the doctor diagnosed with ADHD and bipolar disorder after a half-hour meeting.

    However, the doctor continues to practice while awaiting an appeal. 

    William Eidelman, a natural medicine physician, met with the boy and his father in 2012, according to The Los Angeles Times. Eidelman, who estimates he had recommended more than 10,000 people for the medical marijuana program, had previously recommended that the father use cannabis to treat his son’s bipolar and ADHD.

    The father brought his son in when the child was having trouble behaving at school. After a brief meeting, Eidelman made a similar diagnosis and recommendation for the preschooler. 

    In the decision to repeal Eidelman’s medical license, the California Medical Board said that his actions were “grossly negligent.” 

    “Tantrums alone… do not support either diagnosis,” the board members wrote in a decision. “‘Being agitated’ and ‘having trouble sitting still’ hint at ADHD, but could simply hint at a preschooler not happy to have driven many miles to a doctor’s appointment.”

    The case came to light when the boy’s father asked a school nurse to give his son a marijuana edible. The nurse alerted child protective services, which ultimately led to an investigation into the doctor. The board found that he had acted irresponsibly.

    “Although he did not outright suggest a diagnosis… he all but made one up out of whole cloth,” the board wrote. “Labeling a child with a significant mental condition can be harmful… if those labels are incorrect, pernicious results may follow.”

    If the diagnoses were properly made, the recommendation of cannabis would have been acceptable, the board wrote, but because Eidelman did not consult with a psychiatrist the diagnosis was improper. 

    “It has not been established, by clear and convincing evidence, that the recommendation of medical marijuana to [the boy], with his father’s consent, violated the standard of care,” the board wrote.

    The board suspended Eidelman’s license in early January, but he is appealing that ruling, and says that he is practicing medicine currently while he waits for the March court date for the appeal. 

    “The judge ruled that the revocation is stayed, so yes, I’m still practicing,” he said. 

    However, the board insists that Eidelman should not be practicing, according to spokeswoman Susan Wolbarst.

    “The Medical Board of California has not received a court order, signed by a judge, indicating that the revocation was stayed. Accordingly, Eidelman’s license is currently revoked,” she said. 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Trump Donates $100,000 To Alcoholism Research

    Trump Donates $100,000 To Alcoholism Research

    The president committed to donating his annual $400,000 salary to worthy causes as part of his 2016 campaign.

    President Donald Trump has donated $100,000 to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA), a federal agency and branch of the National Institutes of Health.

    The $100,000 comes from his $400,000 yearly salary as president, which he promised to donate to worthy causes as part of his 2016 campaign. He has so far given away $100,00 each quarter to government departments including Veterans Affairs, the Small Business Administration, and the National Park Service.

    Alcoholism has touched the president personally. His brother, Fred Trump Jr., died from complications related to alcoholism in 1981 at the age of 43. According to Donald Trump, Fred advised him to never drink, and the president has repeatedly expressed his distaste for alcohol and drinking.

    Following the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings to examine the sexual assault accusation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, Trump expressed that he did not share Kavanaugh’s passion for beer.

    “I don’t drink beer,” Trump told reporters. “I’ve never had a beer. And I’m not saying good or bad, some people like it. I just choose not to do that for a lot of reasons.”

    An individual “close to the White House” also told The Washington Post that the president “doesn’t like drinkers.” Tony Schwartz, co-author of Trump’s memoir The Art of the Deal, has said that the main reason the president avoids alcohol is a fear of losing control.

    “One of the primary reasons I think Trump avoided alcohol was that he never wanted to be out of control,” said Schwartz. “It made him feel weak and vulnerable in any circumstance where he felt that was the risk.”

    Alcohol is known to lower inhibitions when consumed to intoxication.

    On the other hand, Tim O’Brien, author of TrumpNation, believed that Fred Trump’s alcoholism and early death had a significant effect on the president and his aversion to drinking.

    “I think he’s scared of the effects alcohol can have on people because he witnessed firsthand how it destroyed his brother’s life, and I think he’s a teetotaler because he’s scared of it in himself,” said O’Brien. 

    “I think Freddy’s journey sparks fear in the president, and it’s a tragedy in their family’s history, and both of those things make him very uncomfortable around people with a drinking problem.”

    According to the NIAAA, 15.1 million adults in the U.S. had alcohol use disorder in 2015, and there are 88,000 alcohol-related deaths yearly. Alcohol use and misuse is one of the leading causes of preventable death.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Addiction as a Metaphor for the Climate Crisis: An Interview with Charles Eisenstein

    Addiction as a Metaphor for the Climate Crisis: An Interview with Charles Eisenstein

    The conventional response to climate change is like the conventional response to addiction: “Well, you’re just going to have to try harder to stop.” I understand climate change as a symptom of a much deeper malady that is inherent to civilization as we know it.

    In the fall of 2011, a small protest began in New York City that would later become known as the “Occupy Wall Street” movement; it later emerged in major cities around the world. Among the many leading voices to provide an analysis of the economic crisis that preceded the movement was author Charles Eisenstein.

    Eisenstein had been writing about a variety of crises afflicting postmodern society for years, but his views on the perils of capitalism and the growing ecological and climate issues resonated strongly with the people involved with the Occupy movement.

    Perhaps to humanize, or just to make sense of many of the complex, broad, and intertwining topics he writes about, Eisenstein relies heavily on the power of storytelling, and often uses analogies. One analogy he regularly comes back to is the phenomenology of addiction. Though he does not personally identify as having an addiction (at least in the conventional, pathologized sense), his writing indicates his deep understanding of the myriad ways that addiction may be the best metaphor we have for understanding some of society’s greatest ills.

    Eisenstein recently published his sixth book, Climate: A New Story, and agreed to an interview with The Fix:

    The Fix: Your writing has often relied on the phenomenology of addiction as a metaphor for the harms of capitalism, and now in Climate: A New Story you rely on the metaphor again to help explain the global climate crisis. Why do you often come back to the metaphor of addiction?

    Charles Eisenstein: In the popular media, we hear things like “our addiction to fossil fuels,” and it’s usually used in disparaging terms, which taps into the general prejudice people often use against addicts, too. But I like to take the metaphor seriously – if we are addicted to fossil fuels, what is the underlying need that drives the addiction that the fossil fuels aren’t actually meeting? Fossil fuel consumption, of course, is a symptom of the addiction to economic growth. Or the addiction to consumption; accumulating more and more stuff – bigger and bigger houses, and so on.

    What is addiction, in your view?

    Addiction, in my view, is the result of an attempt to meet a genuine need with something that does not actually meet the need. You’re using a substitute for what you really want, so no amount of it will be enough to meet the real need.

    One should ask then, what drives such an addiction? Well, we have to look at the unmet needs of our society. One of those is certainly the need for community, which has broken down even in the course of my lifetime, but especially in the last century or two. When I was a kid growing up in a suburban neighborhood, we had community. Everybody on the street knew everybody else, and all the kids knew each other, and we all pretty much knew what was going on in everyone’s lives. All the families talked with each other, and we had neighborhood volleyball games, and all the kids were playing stickball in the church parking lot.

    Years later, when I resettled in suburbia for a brief time, after I started having kids, it was a totally different scene. You didn’t see packs of kids roaming around on bikes. The playground in the park, in the middle of the sub-development, was empty most of the time. The neighbors didn’t really know each other. I remember when one neighbor got a divorce and no one even knew about it until six months later. We had no community. We were simply living in proximity to each other.

    How did you first come to learn about addiction, and what perspective are you hoping to bring through your writing?

    I guess I just picked up little bits and pieces of it from the popular culture. I came of age in the mid-eighties/early-nineties, and at that time, there was certainly mention of addiction as a disease in the media. I read some books that had an impact, like Whiskey Children, which was a really beautiful book, but really, my understanding of addiction is part of a more comprehensive worldview.

    I’m looking at the ways in which we are at war with nature, and at war with each other, and at war with parts of ourselves, and how addiction fits into that pattern. I’ve never identified as an addict; I don’t have that kind of story. But, like most people, I saw people around me suffering from addiction and what it did to their lives. My views on addiction are part of a larger program of ending the war against the self, which is a reflection of the war on nature. And that’s why I’m attracted to using addiction as a metaphor.

    Our society likes to wage war on problematic areas – the “War on Drugs” is an obvious one, but we’ve also had the “War on Poverty,” the “War on Terror,” and so on.

    Dealing with an addiction is not about fighting yourself – [it’s] finding an enemy and overcoming that enemy. That is the near universal template of problem-solving in our culture. Find the disease. Find the germ. Find the weed. Find the bug. Find the criminal. Find the bad guy. Find the terrorist – kill him. Find a bad thing in yourself. Destroy it, overcome it. That’s a recipe for endless war. If the conditions that breed disease, weeds, terrorism, crime, and addiction remain present, then fighting the symptom while leaving the cause untouched is a recipe for endless war. I am a peace worker. I want the war to end.

    The first step in 12-step programs is to admit powerlessness over addiction. Another way of viewing this in terms of “internal warfare” is the paradox of “surrendering to win.”

    I have a soft spot in my heart for 12-step programs. My ex-wife had been an addict, and she got tremendous value from being a member. She had this book of daily meditations called Just for Today that she would read. For her it was a source of not only comfort, but also inspiration and strength.

    The principle of the first step is one that I find most aligned with my understanding of addiction. “We realized we were powerless over our addiction.” That’s a key insight. Because in the mindset of fighting the addiction, the implicit solution is, “My willpower will overcome my desire. My willpower will overcome my craving.” The problem with that is that willpower is finite, and the unmet need is an infinite generator of craving. You can resist it for a while, but then you’re going to have that moment of weakness and the willpower disintegrates. And you have a binge, because the unmet desire isn’t met.

    How does the climate crisis resemble this paradox of the failure of willpower to overcome addiction?

    This is obviously a society in pain. When looking at climate change, the conventional response to it looks a lot like the kind of ignorant conventional response to addiction, which essentially is, “Well, you’re just going to have to try harder to stop.” But it doesn’t look at the underlying causes. I understand climate change as a symptom of a much deeper malady that is inherent to civilization as we know it.

    What are the underlying causes?

    The idea that there is a linear direction of our ascent to dominance over nature. That is what needs to change. In my new book, I weave different threads of that narrative. One is our perspective of nature as an instrument for human utility, as a resource. This view might compel us to do something about climate change, because otherwise bad things will happen to us. But that separation from nature is part of the problem; that kind of relationship to nature, where it is an object for our use. That is part of what has distanced us, and isolated us, and cut off our intimate connections with the soil, and water, and plants and animals around us, that makes us feel so lonely and so in need of compensating for that lost connection with more and more stuff.

    And yet it is often said that in order to surrender, one must hit “rock bottom.”

    What “rock bottom” is varies from person to person, and the more love that someone has had in their life, the higher their bottom is going to be. One way to look at it is then, of course, how do we raise the bottom for the people and the planet that we love? Why is it that for one person, rock bottom is when their spouse walks out for a day, or they go to jail for a night? Yet, for another person it’s smoking their last cigarette through their tracheostomy hole after they’ve already gotten lung cancer and emphysema.

    That’s a really important question, which I look at in my Sacred Economics. I look at the question of how do we get out of our addiction to debt? How do we raise the bottom before everything is consumed in order to service the debt? Which is what’s happening. That’s what drives the entire world destroying machine – the debt-based financial system. So how do we raise bottom? In the economic context, the question becomes, “What functions can we reclaim that have been lost to the money economy?”

    What have we as a society lost because of our economic pursuits?

    We are not separate individuals that can thrive as long as our quantifiable needs are met. We are in relation to all beings. As our relationships to other people and to nature are truncated, we suffer a hunger, a loss of our “being-ness,” if you will. We then seek to compensate for that loss through many addictions, but especially through acquisition – adding more and more onto this narrow, cramped, separate self in futile compensation for the loss of connections to people and to nature.

    To make matters worse, the growth economy destroys community, because with economic growth we meet more and more of our needs through the money economy – we purchase more like that’s what economic growth is. It’s the expansion of the realm of monetized interests, and that expansion comes at the expense of the gift realm, the realm of reciprocity, of people helping each other, taking care of each other’s kids, sharing, sharing meals, creating our own fun instead of purchasing fun, creating our own entertainment, our own recreation. Helping each other out with projects, borrowing things from each other instead of renting them.

    When all of those communal functions are converted into owning, or renting it, or hiring someone to do it, the economy grows. But our connectedness withers and our felt connectedness to each other disappears, and we’re left even more lonely. So that’s maybe another hallmark of an addiction, is that the results of the addictive habit strengthen the wound from which the addiction is coming. They make your life worse so then you need even more of the things that fuel the addiction.

    How do we stop fueling the addiction then?

    Our story of the world that told us who we were – how to live life, how to be human, what was important, and what we served – is falling apart. And not only our story, but the systems that are built on that story are not working very well anymore, either. We have a crisis – not only is it a crisis of meaning, but it’s also a crisis of our being, because we are storytelling creatures, and our weave of stories is also a weave of our identity. Until we emerge with a new story, and regain our relational identification with all beings, we will remain stuck in the downward spiral of addiction.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Calls About Pets Ingesting Cannabis Up 700%

    Calls About Pets Ingesting Cannabis Up 700%

    As edibles become more popular, dogs in particular are likely to sniff them out as a tasty treat. 

    More pets than ever are accidentally overdosing on marijuana, with cannabis-related calls to the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center increasing 765% over the past 10 years. 

    That’s no surprise to Tom Shell, a California-based filmmaker who came home one day to find his 13-year-old Australian Shepard, Stella, acting strange and “looking kind of hazy-eyed,” according to Mashable

    Shell realized that Stella had sniffed out a pot brownie in his backpack and devoured the whole thing—complete with chocolate and cannabis, neither of which are good for dogs. Shell rushed Stella to the vet feeling like “the worst father in the world.” The vet was able to induce vomiting to get the chocolate out of Stella’s system, but the effects of THC lasted all day. 

    Shell said, “I brought Stella back home, and she was stoned as can be for the rest of the afternoon.”

    The incident made Shell realize that he needs to store his marijuana products—including edibles—more carefully. He was glad that Stella didn’t get into a stash of more potent cannabis gummy bears that he had in the house. 

    “If the dog got into those and ate the whole thing it would have been disastrous,” Shell said. “I’ve taken measures to make sure I’ve got triple protection [around weed] but it’s just one of those things where she’s got really good sniffers and I just wasn’t thinking about it.” 

    The ASPCA Animal Poison Control Center’s Medical Director, Dr. Tina Wismer, said this is a common mistake pet owners make. As edibles become more popular, dogs in particular are likely to sniff them out as a tasty treat. 

    “Dogs, oh my gosh, especially [with] the chocolate-based edibles, the number of those calls has skyrocketed,” Wismer said.

    Last year, the center had 1,800 marijuana-related calls, compared to just 208 in 2008. Whereas dogs tend to ingest edibles, cats are equally interested in marijuana, Wismer said. 

    As cannabis becomes more widely accepted, people are less likely to carefully hide their stash, she said. This means that pets may have easier access to cannabis. In addition, some of the increase in the number of calls is likely because pot use is less stigmatized, so people are more willing to call the center to ask about marijuana-related issues. 

    While cannabis isn’t toxic to dogs, canines are more sensitive to pot than people are. The drug can cause strange side effects, like those Stella experienced. In rare cases, ingesting marijuana can cause a fatal drop in heart rate and blood pressure in a pet. 

    Wismer says that people also call the hotline after giving their pets edibles intended for animals, which can be dangerous because these items are unregulated, she said. 

    “No one’s regulating these products—is there actually some amount of THC in them? Or is it that dogs make different metabolites than people do? Is it just dose related? Unfortunately, no one really knows what the answer is.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Dads' Post-Natal Depression May Affect Their Teenage Daughters

    Dads' Post-Natal Depression May Affect Their Teenage Daughters

    A new study found a connection between paternal depression and the later depression of their female offspring. 

    There’s been much more attention given to maternal mental health in recent years, but a new study suggests that paternal mental health is also important to the long-term health of children, particularly daughters. 

    The study, published in the journal JAMA Psychiatry, examined more than 3,000 pairs of parents and children to try to understand how depression in a parent can increase depression risk in their offspring. The authors found that when dads are depressed during the postnatal period (8 weeks after a baby’s birth), their daughters are more likely to have symptoms of depression when they turn 18. 

    Interestingly, the study found that when dad is depressed, the mother may be more likely to have depression as well. In turn, this can affect the child, even in the long-term. 

    “Depression in fathers in the postnatal period has potential implications for family and child functioning into late childhood and adolescence; it should be addressed in perinatal services, and both parents should be considered when 1 presents with depression,” study authors wrote.

    The connection between paternal depression and the depression of offspring was seen in girls, but not in boys. 

    “The association between paternal depression in the postnatal period and depression in girls at age 18 years is partially explained by maternal depression,” study authors wrote. 

    More research has been delving into how fatherhood affect men’s mental health. Last year, research suggested that fathers can experience hormonal changes after the birth of a baby, which can lead to depression and affect the function of the whole family.

    Darby Saxbe, an assistant professor of psychology at USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences and lead author of that study told Science Daily that we are still learning how fatherhood affects men. 

    “We often think of motherhood as biologically driven because many mothers have biological connections to their babies through breastfeeding and pregnancy. We don’t usually think of fatherhood in the same biological terms. We are still figuring out the biology of what makes dads tick,” Saxbe said. 

    Having a healthy father in the home can help improve outcomes for children. 

    “We know that fathers contribute a lot to child-rearing and that on the whole, kids do better if they are raised in households with a father present,” Saxbe said. “So, it is important to figure out how to support fathers and what factors explain why some fathers are very involved in raising their children while some are absent.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Legal Risks Prevent New Moms From Getting Reliable Info About Cannabis Use

    Legal Risks Prevent New Moms From Getting Reliable Info About Cannabis Use

    The possibility of legal repercussions stop women who are pregnant or breastfeeding from starting a dialogue about marijuana use with their health care providers. 

    Pregnant women are finding it hard to get reliable information about the safety of cannabis use during pregnancy, in part because of very limited research on the subject, and in part because bringing it up with health care providers could trigger legal interventions. 

    Speaking with Weedmaps, Dr. Thomas Hale, the acting executive director of the InfantRisk Center, said that he hears from thousands of women who want to better understand the risks of cannabis use while pregnant or breastfeeding.

    “None of us will admit that it’s safe because we just don’t know,” said Hale.

    Some studies have connected marijuana use with brain changes in infants, while others have indicated that some THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) passes to an infant through breast milk. However, the studies are not definitive, in part because it’s difficult to study marijuana due to its Schedule I status

    The same status makes it difficult for many women to discuss marijuana use candidly with their health care providers. That’s why many parents turn to InfantRisk, where they can call in anonymously to get information, Hale said.

    “A pharmacist like myself or my colleague obstetrician, if we know a mom is using or encounter a mom that’s using a drug in pregnancy or during breastfeeding, in most states it is what we call a reportable offense. You’re supposed to report it.”

    This could cause providers and patients to take a “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to cannabis use. However, this is dangerous in and of itself. A new study published in Preventive Medicine found that many women interpret their providers’ silence about marijuana as an indication that the drug isn’t dangerous during pregnancy. 

    “Some stated not receiving adequate information about the risk of cannabis use or how to quit from the providers, even when they actively sought support,” the study authors wrote. “Some women perceived that not communicating and addressing cannabis health risk during pregnancy by the maternity care providers or social workers, or not having specific counseling provided, might indicate that cannabis does not represent a significant concern for the outcome of their pregnancy.”

    This is particularly concerning because marijuana use during pregnancy is rising, and cannabis is the most frequently used drug among pregnant women. 

    Overall, it’s important for women to be able to safely discuss marijuana use with their doctors. 

    “A lack of communication with health care providers regarding the health aspects of cannabis was evident,” study authors wrote. “A discussion about health concerns surrounding cannabis use may influence women’s perceptions of risk and help them to make informed choices.” 

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Man's Emotional Support Alligator Raises Eyebrows

    Man's Emotional Support Alligator Raises Eyebrows

    The man said that staying close with the alligator has helped him stay off of prescriptions for his depression. 

    For most people, being in close company with a five-foot-long alligator would be the opposite of comforting. But when Joie Henney feels symptoms of depression coming on, he snuggles up with Wally, his emotional support alligator.

    “I had Wally, and when I came home and was around him, it was all OK,” Henney told Philly.com. “My doctor knew about Wally and figured it works, so why not?”

    The doctor certified Wally as an emotional support alligator, likely the first of his kind. 

    Henney, who hosted a wildlife show on ESPN from 1989 to 2000, says he is familiar with dealing with wild animals and is aware that the alligator could hurt him. He rescued Wally when the alligator was 14 months old, and the alligator now spends time in an indoor pool, snacking on chicken wings and comforting Henney when he’s feeling down.

    Henney said that staying close with Wally has helped him stay off of prescriptions for his depression. “He comforted me,” Henney said. “I got over my depression.”

    Henney first realized that Wally could help him feel better when he went through a series of sudden losses of friends and family. “I lost three in a week, two in less than 24 hours. I was laying down one day, he literally crawled up on the cot with me and laid his head on top of my face.”

    At just four years old, Wally is still growing. He’s could be 16-feet long one day, but Henney insists their relationship will endure. 

    “He likes to give hugs,” by resting his snout on Henney’s face, the owner explained. 

    Wally makes public appearances with Henney, and Henney insists that he’s not that unusual from more traditional pets. “He’s just like a dog,” Henney said at one event. “He wants to be loved and petted.”

    Henney said he isn’t the only one who has benefitted from Wally’s attention. “He is registered as my emotional support animal, but he has done a lot for others.”

    Henney has even used Wally to help raise money for a child with autism.

    But despite the feel-good aspects of Henney and Wally’s connection, many people question whether the use of emotional support animals has gone overboard.

    Getting an animal certified as an emotional support animals can allow the animal to come into public places, but some people say that the proliferation of emotional support animals is undermining the role of guide dogs and others trained to help people with medical conditions.  

    View the original article at thefix.com