[DrBill100]

As a bright-eyed intern I spent some 3500 clinic hours in various treatment programs.That was the mid-70s. Such programs were widely available, many government funded (which ended in 1985) or paid for by Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). I essentially left the treatment field about the same time as the NIH funding was shifted to research. I have been involved in research and evaluation of addictionology, though not full time, ever since. Kinda' my first love. My ears are ringing from a big "WHOOSH" as part of the world just passed me by.

Due to the many inquiries on this site I began checking on availability of detox and combined detox-treatment (30 day type programs) as well as the cost of same. The nearest major metro area to me is St. Louis MO. There are no per se detox units except for private and hospital based. At State Hospital there was at one time a strictly detox unit (7 days). No more. The cost is from $25-48,000.00 through private resources only.

I'm aware that several members of this site are open and frank about past drinking/drugging and recovery. Some of you recommend in-patient detox. I certainly agree that the palliative care provided and medical evaluation is sorely needed for the addict, regardless of substance. But is this beyond the reach of lower and middle income folks?

For anyone that has gone through detox and/or extended treatment in the past 10 years I'm very interested in how you accomplished it. The Salvation Army seems to be one of the few remaining resources for low cost (pay as you go) recovery.

Please share with me how you overcame the significant economic obstacle in the path of recovery from addiction of any type. Are there programs available that I have missed (outside of prison walls)?

[J_9]

Personally, I just quit my drug of choice on my own. No detox, no medicine, just pure willpower.

Actually there is another detox in Missouri near Hayti. I can't remember the name off the top of my head, but I did some clinicals there while in nursing school. It was a detox that was court ordered to attend and of no cost to the addict.

[DrBill100]

Have a good friend in Hayti. Thanks for the info.

Your method, by the way, is by far the most successful (4-1 over professional treatment) but the least publicized. Congratulations on your accomplishment.

But you and I are part of a "unit" the medicopsychiatric community that as policy consistently and invariantly recommends medical intervention.

Who are "we", in unison, talking to and where are "we" sending the addicts that respond to such authoritative rhetoric?

[KISS]

I wasn't "addicted per say", but managed to get myself into the "rebound headache mode". This, in my opinion, is where the body manufactures a headache because it wants more drug. The drug was Fiorinal - a mix of aspirin, caffeine and a barbituate sedative.

I'm still taking Fiorinal (25 yrs) and never had another rebound headache. I take oxycontin (10 mg x3) mg) PRN and Percoset 7.5-500 PRN. I, in esscence, have acute chronic pain.

Fiorinal seems different than it was. I had effectiveness problems with branding. The current stuff isn't as good as the stuff 25 years ago.

As it turned out, I had a sinus headache and not one that was normally triggered. The long-term solution is medicate when the appropriate trigger is present. If it's not, find out why.

The total time was about 6 weeks. Some amount of that time was fixing the sinus headache and going "cold turkey" until the mind quit manufacturing a migraine. Fortunately, the only side effect was migrane.

I'm not prone to addictive tendencies unless you count Pepsi and sugarless iced tea.

As a kid, I weened myself from sugar in the iced tea/hot tea and that was done gradually. It was still painfull. I then only had sugar in coffee. I also did the coffee/donut nearly every day for a while. That was easy to stop. The coffee got bad. My donut shop got bought out by Dunkin' Donuts. I still don't drink Dunkin' Donuts Coffee.

So, it gives me a live sense of addiction and detox. I know cold turkey can work if you can handle the side effects (my rebound experience) , but reduction(my sugar experience) probably has the least.

Coffee has to have some sugar
Tea must have none.
Salt is usually added to chicken (Improves texture).

So, I don't put sugar or salt in/on everything

[DrBill100]

I wasn't "addicted per say" .....

I'm not prone to addictive tendencies unless you count Pepsi and sugarless iced tea.

As a kid, I weened myself from sugar in the iced tea/hot tea and that was done gradually. It was still painfull.... I then only had sugar in coffee. I also did the coffee/donut nearly every day for a while. That was easy to stop. The coffee got bad.....

So, it gives me a live sense of addiction and detox. I know cold turkey can work if you can handle the side effects (my rebound experience) , but reduction(my sugar experience) probably has the least.

Coffee has to have some sugar
Tea must have none.
Salt is usually added to chicken (Improves texture).

I greatly appreciate your input. Probably the majority of addictionologists would immediately discount your experiences due to the supposed "low reinforcing characteristics" of sugar, caffeine or other "enjoyable" substances or behaviors. These are viewed as habits, sometimes bad habits, but nonetheless as within normal function of neuropathways (broadly-brain function) and within the province of choice and personal control of the individual.

So where is this line of demarcation that separates addiction from habit, pleasure seeking from uncontrollable desire, normal from pathological? "We" currently claim it is in the brain and not in the substance although this is of recent vintage (1980), in direct contradiction of medical history, and highly flexible. Because, with equal facility we shift to the claim that the substance may alter the "normal" brain function and thereupon focus on finding a specific regional brain dysfunction. Of course, these are two very different phenomena, external element versus internal response, poison v. allergy, endogenous v. exogenous.

As a postulate, what if addiction is not an identifiable aberration traceable to a specific brain region as Blum (1998) theorizes (and which has controlled a decade of research) but rather a more expansive, additive, and cumulative effect of completely normal processes?

Then addiction as currently defined begins to make sense. We're no longer looking for a singular cause but for an interactivity of normal processes which in totality equal addiction. That seems more consistent with how the brain operates.

Love your question. Know I've told you more than you are interested in. In summary, I believe your observations are completely consistent with the discussion of addictions and natural remission versus professional treatment.

I'm still looking for information on how an individual with a substance abuse problem can access detoxification facilities. Thank you once again for your meaningful contribution.

[Alty]

I'm still looking for information on how an individual with a substance abuse problem can access detoxification facilities.

Unlike the majority of the people on this site, I'm not in the US, I'm in Canada. Free health care, which includes doctors visits, operations, hospital stays, you name it. I'm now wondering if detox clinics are also covered. I would imagine that they are as it is a medical service. I'll do some research and let you know what I find.

There are no per se detox units except for private and hospital based. At State Hospital there was at one time a strictly detox unit (7 days). No more. The cost is from $25-48,000.00 through private resources only.

This part is just shocking! Absolutely shocking! I don't know what minimum wage is in the US, but here in Canada it's a little under $10/hr. How can anyone afford this? Are only the rich allowed good health?

[KISS]

a more expansive, additive, and cumulative effect of completely normal processes?

Then addiction as currently defined begins to make sense. We're no longer looking for a singular cause but for an interactivity of normal processes which in totality equal addiction. That seems more consistent with how the brain operates.

Love your question. Know I've told you more than you are interested in. In summary, I believe your observations are completely consistent with the discussion of addictions and natural remission versus professional treatment.

It actually might make sense if you put addiction on a scale, say 1-10 for now. And Maybe define a letter for the mechanism.
So, I'll list a few things to think about.

Chocolate/sweats/sugar
Rebound headache
Guys seeking hookers
Marajuana
Heroin
Cocaine
Alcohol
Cigarettes

Note a couple of things:
1. There would be an intensity associated with these
2. Intensity could be how easy it is to stop and at thefar end of the scale one would steal to continue the addiction. So maybe a habbit is an addition on a smaller scale.

True "addiction" is when you cannot stop on your own. You might define "painful addiction" is you can stop, but you will endure side effects. You might have something called "perpetual addiction" where you will steal to continue the habit.

Nonetheless, it's still an extension of seeking pleasure.

[J_9]

I respectfully unsubscribe from this thread.

[Fr_Chuck]

I know Teen Challenge used to have a drug rehab center in that general area of MO

But yes, most state detox and even state mental health centers have been closed over the last 5 to 6 years.

In most cases it is the persons insurance that would have to pay,

[DrBill100]

I know Teen Challenge used to have a drug rehab center in that general area of MO

But yes, most state detox and even state mental health centers have been closed over the last 5 to 6 years.

In most cases it is the persons insurnace that would have to pay,

That is exactly what I'm finding. In St. Louis the last community mental health site was just closed. That didn't have a detox anyway.

I'm also finding adolescent and teen treatment. Believe this may be related to Medicaid rules or allowances.

However, I am not finding any detox for average income, uninsured.

[KBC]

As a bright-eyed intern I spent some 3500 clinic hours in various treatment programs.That was the mid-70s. Such programs were widely available, many government funded (which ended in 1985) or paid for by Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs). I essentially left the treatment field about the same time as the NIH funding was shifted to research. I have been involved in research and evaluation of addictionology, though not full time, ever since. Kinda' my first love. My ears are ringing from a big "WHOOSH" as part of the world just passed me by.

Due to the many inquiries on this site I began checking on availability of detox and combined detox-treatment (30 day type programs) as well as the cost of same. The nearest major metro area to me is St. Louis MO. There are no per se detox units except for private and hospital based. At State Hospital there was at one time a strictly detox unit (7 days). No more. The cost is from $25-48,000.00 through private resources only.

I'm aware that several members of this site are open and frank about past drinking/drugging and recovery. Some of you recommend in-patient detox. I certainly agree that the palliative care provided and medical evaluation is sorely needed for the addict, regardless of substance. But is this beyond the reach of lower and middle income folks?

For anyone that has gone through detox and/or extended treatment in the past 10 years I'm very interested in how you accomplished it. The Salvation Army seems to be one of the few remaining resources for low cost (pay as you go) recovery.

Please share with me how you overcame the significant economic obstacle in the path of recovery from addiction of any type. Are there programs available that I have missed (outside of prison walls)?

In the different states I have lived in,been around the programs of treatment and recovery from drugs/alcohol,I KNOW there are private and (available to) public treatment centers which don't require a 6 figure income to be able to afford.

These are not advertised,not spoken of outside certain 'circles'.Not to be a secret from any who need to know,but to protect the ones who:

1)actually supply the care, free or at a very low cost to the patient(through private grants,donations,etc)

2)are going to be treated for 'free' or limited cost to protect their names from those who have the means(although it is quite obvious while IN treatment who have and those who don't,the guise is still there for some privacy)

3)This information is withheld for a big reason, to find weather the patient is really WILLING to get help, or just skirting some legal problem,marriage situation,etc,etc.

4)the donating bodies have strict don't ask,don't tell,policies.

5)to advertise a free treatment(or limited cost) was a prescription for abuse, that is why the funding ended as it did in the past.. you know addicts are more than able to manipulate most any situation,and a recovered addict, willing to enable another,can wreck havoc on a liberal system.Been there,seen that... even in the judicial system.

In the late 90's I began to see the 'free treatment' get less and less prevalent,the restrictions were beginning to arise,stipulations and requirements were becoming commonplace.Principals were being compromised by personalities.In a word,corruption (years after)after all the freedoms of the late 70's and early 80's.

Yes,there are still treatments available to those who meet certain criteria,not just the ones on paper.But you won't find this on the net,nor in the paper/phone books or medical journals.

[DrBill100]

In the different states I have lived in,been around the programs of treatment and recovery from drugs/alcohol,I KNOW there are private and (available to) public treatment centers which don't require a 6 figure income to be able to afford.


1)actually supply the care,,free or at a very low cost to the patient(through private grants,donations,etc)

2)are going to be treated for 'free' or limited cost to protect their names from those who have the means(although it is quite obvious while IN treatment who have and those who don't,the guise is still there for some privacy)

3)This information is withheld for a big reason,,to find weather the patient is really WILLING to get help,,or just skirting some legal problem,marriage situation,etc,etc.

4)the donating bodies have strict don't ask,don't tell,policies.

5)to advertise a free treatment(or limited cost) was a prescription for abuse,,that is why the funding ended as it did in the past..you know addicts are more than able to manipulate most any situation,and a recovered addict,,willing to enable another,can wreck havoc on a liberal system.Been there,seen that...even in the judicial system.

In the late 90's I began to see the 'free treatment' get less and less prevalent,the restrictions were beginning to arise,stipulations and requirements were becoming commonplace.Principals were being compromised by personalities.In a word,corruption (years after)after all the freedoms of the late 70's and early 80's.

Yes,there are still treatments available to those who meet certain criteria,not just the ones on paper.But you won't find this on the net,nor in the paper/phone books or medical journals.

Having been away from the treatment field for a number of years I have lost my knowledge of "back door" availability. As you note, it was part of our system to know which social agency picked up and for what income group, men, women, etc. But then, that was extended care, i.e. after-care. There must be available detox programs (I hope). But I see rapid changes in the field. Employment based treatment seems to be significantly diminished (except federal employment). Easily accessible public resources have dried up.

As you note about addicts manipulating a system, we called this the "revolving door" alcoholic in the early 80s. They played the system like a fiddle. Check-in (detox) a week before welfare checks. Knew how much to drink in order to obtain admission, etc. Every month same turn around, like clockwork. Many depended upon the alcoholic classification for their income and standard of living.

Early 90s is pretty close for the diminution of public treatment. The funding was dropped in 85 but previous commitments fed into the field for another 3 years and then you began seeing closures. I think what we are seeing now is private insurance eliminating treatment (except where required under federal workplace standards).

[KBC]

I wasn't exactly referring to the patients and the revolving door(which,as you hinted at,was prevalent) but to the defense attorneys and their use of treatment as an outlet for the offenders.Saw that a lot here in the last 5 years.

We also see that with the rich and famous,it's just more publicized with them.

In the late 90's there were a few treatment centers in the deep south where I lived,funding was sparse and infrequent,I can only imagine what it would be like today.

We have many people here that are between the income guidelines of too much and too little,that gap has increased greatly since the 80's.

Make this much and you have to pay full for a treatment you simply can't afford,make that much and you can afford an attorney to fight the system and you walk.

There are always more on the side of too little(as typically associated with alcoholism/drug addiction)plus those who aren't willing to pay their way unless court ordered,they tend to be victims to a system that 'doesn't work'... for them.(and subsequently balk at the treatment and simply are a burden on the centers time and funding,much less the other patients who are struggling with doing the right thing and falling back on the old ways,etc)

The show Dr. Drew Pinsky had going was a great show,but not a reality for those without funds.

We have a defense counsel here who advocates treatment,some of them get a free ride,others go to jail, not much of a solution in jail besides dry time.

No,I don't have the answer to this,I can only add to someone's questions with my experiences and hope.