[basisword]

If my life were ruined and I was dying from alcoholism or drug addiction I get the feeling I probably wouldn't be thinking about this in a philosophical way. Societal impacts or potential abuses would be the least of my concerns.

[mateo1]

How about this scenario: In 20 years, this treatment is standard, but there's a catch: it's bundled with a wider behavioral modification treatment protocol, whereby they first reduce the cravings for drugs and alcohol, then they start showing you anti-establishment imagery, and zap the parts of your brain that respond to it.

In fact the second treatment is also standard issue for all those who are diagnosed with oppositionism, a growing mental health disorder characterized by symptoms such as distrusting government authorities and forbes 500 companies. Treatments show a 90% reduction of symptoms and improving quality of life, for example they no longer clash with authorities or make hate statements as defined by the patriot act II of 2028.

Obviously an exaggeration, but there is a real concern. The line is blurry and will be crossed if we let it happen. Taking intravenous drugs for 20 years does some serious damage. It's nice if we develop a treatment for it, but it also shifts the focus away from prevention. People shouldn't be reaching that point, and wouldn't if we were acting on it.

[stonogo]

It's not really a blurry line. "They" could require you to take antipsychotic pills when you renew your driver license. "They" could chemically castrate you when you register to vote and select the wrong party affiliation. But they can't, because in the US patients can refuse treatment.

Panicking about new treatments because "they" might someday bundle them with other treatments isn't particularly effective, because you can just decline the treatments you don't want. The days of no-oversight asshole doctors drilling holes in people for being weird are conscripted to the past. If patient rights to refuse treatment are destroyed, then sure, freak out all you want.

Meanwhile, research is not a zero-sum game. Treatments and prevention can be, and are, worked on in parallel, often by people with wildly different research backgrounds. Specifically, the resources and personnel involved are not fungible. Discouraging field A because you'd rather have someone work on field B doesn't necessarily mean anyone will work on field B, it just guarantees you don't make progress in field A.

[touisteur]

Especially if the alternative is cold turkey, or a good old DT... All my heartfelt deep thanks to everyone who keeps digging for solutions, workarounds... anything that might help there.

[BizarroLand]

No, that's fair, my stance very much was from the viewpoint of a generically healthy mind and not from the viewpoint of a damaged mind.

If I were in that position I might seriously consider the value of having 99% of me make it to the other side of this misery in exchange for the 1% of my brain that is ruining my life.