[ChrisMarshallNY]

> I think downplaying non-chemical addictions as "bad habits" is an unfair characterization as well.

Fair enough. I didn't feel that was appropriate, either, as I am quite aware that these types of addictions can be very destructive.

I can assure you, though, that considering them to be in the same category as a chronic alcoholic or drug addict is just as inaccurate, with the added caveat that calling it by the same name, "cheapens" the more serious type of addiction. That's one of the reasons that some folks get upset over calling people "Nazis," for doing things like being anal about the rules. They feel that it waters down the true horror of what the Nazis were really all about.

Also, "Bad Habits" was a great album by The Monks (2.0 -UK- Version).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mBtGNHkLt4E

[_gshc]

Dare I say, it is IMO odd you will agree to include gambling addiction in your original comment, but won't do the same for other types of addiction which don't fit in the same league as chronic meth use. If someone comes to you saying they didn't save a dime over 20 years and live in shame because they're compulsively gambling every evening even when their brain screams them not to, will you tell them they are not addicted because it cheapens the trouble of those that lost their families, houses and lives over worse gambling addictions? Nicotine is clearly chemically addictive, but it is no where near as life-disruptive as chronic alcohol or meth abuse (even health-wise with some methods of administrations), are they not addicted because they have it better than the other group?

I get what you're saying, but I have a hard time agreeing we should be so stringent as to what we'll call addiction and not. If it's derailing your life, calling it a bad habit is reductive. I think addiction is a large enough spectrum that it can encompass both horrific and harsh addictions. It actually reminds me of all the stories I read about narcotics anonymous where people feel so unwelcome in those groups as their struggles get shrugged off by NA that they resort to going in AA groups pretending their coke addiction was booze as they are less judgemental groups.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

> I read about narcotics anonymous where people feel so unwelcome in those groups as their struggles get shrugged off by NA that they resort to going in AA groups pretending their coke addiction was booze as they are less judgemental groups.

I'd be extremely interested in learning a bit more about this, but I don't think that discussion of individual treatments is something I'll be pursuing in a public venue.

Feel free to reach out to me. I have my info in my HN profile.

[_gshc]

It was something I came across online and not personally, I was curious so I read about it on forums for drug addicts and it seemed somewhat prevalent, at least not unique to the first post I read about it.

I wanted to edit this in but since I'm late I'll do it here : I could very well be in the wrong with my stance on addiction as a term. Perhaps it is akin to me downplaying feminist or trans causes as a male (it's not something I do, just an example) to say we shouldn't reserve the term for worst cases. I say that from a stance where I think it is a prevalent problem in our society and we should be able to address it without tip-toeing around terminology. We should be able to talk about things like weed and obsessive phone-scrolling as potentially disruptive issues that can be proper psychological problems (and/or stemming from others like anxiety) which run deeper than mere bad habits.

And thanks for your kind offer.