Hypoism



Home Page of Hypoism, The Disease of Addictions


Web site advertising


The Overriding Principle


The reason for this web site


IMAGINE


send me a message


Discussion Page

Buy the book



Buy the Book

Hypoism Issues



Role of Dopamine in Addiction Causation


Theory of Addiction - Hypoism Hypothesis


Why drug use is unconscious and against one's willfulness - not volitional


Misuse of the word choice in addictions


THE INESCAPABLE LOGIC OF ANY VALID ADDICTION ETIOLOGICAL PARADIGM


WHAT OTHER DISEASE....?


What Am I Angry About? - Don't Ask Me This Again


Disease Concept - A Perspective


HYPOISM IN A NUT SHELL


Page Directory of this Site with Explanations and Links


The History of the Proof of Hypoism in the Wake of the P/R Paradigm page 1.


History page 2


Why Addiction Experts and Other People Are Ignoring Hypoism


Strange Brew


AIMING AT AN UNDERSTANDING OF ADDICTIONS


The Paradigm Vacuum in Addictions Today


THE ADDICTION PROBLEM AND THE SOLUTION


What Does An Addiction Expert Know?


The Hypoism Addiction Hypothesis - An Evolutionary Psychology Perspective


Addiction Questionnaire


Misconceptions of addictions and addicts


What's Hypoism? What's an Addiction?


WHY WE DON'T NEED HYPOISM.


Why We Need Hypoism: A Comparison of the Principles and Consequences between the two Paradigms


Entitled to Your Opinion? Not Anymore.


HYPOICMAN: A non-recovering, unimpressed Hypoic


The Field of Addictionology: A Golfing Analogy


NEW YEAR PREDICTIONS


Contact Information

Hypoism Treatment Research



The Addiction Treatment Fraud Finally Exposed


Hypoism Treatment Research Proposal

N4A



I KEPT QUIET


The National Association for the Advancement and Advocacy of Addicts


Make A Contribution To The N4A


Addict Discrimination Documentation


Social Innovations Award 2000 for The N4A


Third Millennium N4A Conference Keynote Address on Hypoism - Pathophysiology in Addictions vs. Superstition


N4A Goes on the Offensive - Suggesting Real Action


The Verdict


Blind Faith?

Learn More About the Book



Letters from book readers


Title Page of Book


Book Blurb


Book Cover


Back Cover


Table of Contents


Foreword


Preface


Opening Statement


Chapter 1


Vision For The Future


Outcomes of Hypoic's Handbook


Bibliography


Book Corrections


Harm reduction prototype: Swiss PROVE program

Book Reviews



The Phoenix Magazine

Hypoics Not-Anonymous



Hypoics Not-Anonymous

Things You Can Do



What you can do---


My Kids

Special Links



Special Links to important web sites


Addiction Links on the Web

Addiction Genetics



Recent Genetic Studies on Various Addictions from a Large Twin Registry


Genetic Studies page 2.


Gateway theory finally disproven


Celera Discovers Millions of Tiny Genetic Differences in People

Interesting Addiction Science



Clinically Important Neurotransmitter Deficiencies

Hypoism Magazine-Articles by and for Hypoics



EMBRYONIC HYPOISM CIRCA 1968


#1 Hatred, #2 The Words: Opinion, Belief, and Knowledge, #3 Hate Addiction


#4 The Drug War War, #5 Evolution vs. Creationism Revisited for Addictions


#6 American Society for Addiction Medicine Statement for Recovering Physicians


#7 Issues Peculiar to the Disease of Addictions


#8 Critique of Alan Lechner's (NIH), "The Hijacked Brain Hypothesis."


#8a. Update!! Dr. Leshner recently makes a change


#9 MY STORY - The Doctor Drug War - Wrong and Wasteful p.1, 1/6/00


The Doctor Drug War p.2


Doctor Drug War p.3


Doctor Drug War p.4


Doctor Drug War p.5


Affidavit for judicial review of NYS Dept. of Ed.


#10 The Superstition Instinct 3/1/00


#11-Conflict of Interest in Addiction Research


#12 - Controlled Drinking Lands On Its Ass


#13 - The Kennedy Curse or Kennedy Hypoism?


#14 - The Lord's Prayer for Hypoics


#15 - Replacing Alan Leshner is the only way to end the Drug War


#16 - The Brain Addiction Mechanism and the COGA Study


#17 - Letter to the director of the National Academy of Medicine's Board on Neurobiology and Behavior Health on Addictions


#18 - Is Addiction Voluntary, A Choice, as Leshner and NIDA Insist?


#19 - Bush's Alcoholism and Lies


#20 - A P/R Paradigm Addict - "Cured?"


#21 - Congress Misled and Lied to by NIAAA


#22 - Special Letter to the Times on Addiction Genetics


#23 - JAMA Editor Publishes According to His Beliefs, Not Science


#24 - Smoking as Gateway Drug. I Don't Think So!


#24B - IS COCAINE ADDICTION CAUSED BY COCAINE?


#25 - One Less Heroin Addict. But At What Cost?


#26 - An Open Letter to the Judge who Sentences Robert Downey, Jr.


#27 - Letter To Schools About The Pride Program Against Drugs


#28 - A Letter To Bill Moyers, Close To Home, and PBS


#29 - HYPOISM IS ACTUALLY A DISEASE OF THE "WILL"


#30 - Brookhaven Labs Provide More Evidence For Hypoism


#31 - Addiction Prevention Revisited


#32 - DRUG WAR EVALUATION BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE


#33 - NIDA Is Close But No Cigar


#34 - Bush's Addict Discrimination and Hypocricy Begins


#35 - Maya Angelou's, "Still I Rise."


#36 - Leshner Lies To Congress


#37 - Addiction Combos


#38 Brain tumor proves Hypoism hypothesis


#39: So-called Availability Debunked as Contributor of Addictions


#40 - Hypoism Reproduced By A Pill


PIMMPAL Complex


Cartoons

The Hypoism Blog - The Addiction Blog



The Addiction Blog 4/17/11 -


The Addiction Blog 9/14/10 - 4/16/11


The Addiction Blog 11/12/09 - 9/14/10


The Addiction Blog 7/23/09 - 11/09/09


The Addiction Blog 5/16/09 - 7/22/09


The Addiction Blog 3/3/09 - 5/13/09


The Addiction Blog 8/3/08 - 3/3/09


The Addiction Blog 4/1/07 - 8/3/08

old letters



My NY Times Letters to the Editor page 1.


My NY Times Letters to the Editor page 2.


My NY Times Letters to the Editor page 3.


My NY Times Letters to the Editor page 4.


My NY Times Letters to the Editor page 5.


My New York Times Letters to the Editor page 6.


My Letters to the editor of the NY Times page 7.


My Letters to the Editor of the NY Times page 8.


NY Times Letters Page 9.


New York Times Letters Page 10


My NYT Letters page 11


NY Times Letters page 12.


NY Times letters p. 13


Letters to the NY Times page 14.


Letters to Newsday


Letters To The Los Angeles Times


Creationism/Evolution Letter to BAM 11-25-05

Speeches



Committee for Physician Health Speech
goldbutton.jpg

The Future of Addictions

Addict Discrimination in the News



Mandated Treatment for Welfare Recipients


Anorectic Murdered by Doctors out of Ignorance and "Desperation"(10/20/99)


Six Dead Heroin Addicts-Enough? 10/31/99


American Society of Addiction Medicine Discrimination


Darryl Strawberry Punished Again


South Carolina Forces Pregnant Women to Take Drug Tests


When it comes to drugs, the constitution doesn't apply


Parents of Overweight Girl Will Sue New Mexico


Scrapbook

Downloads



Download Files


huffington post


Custom HTML


Sitemap




Hypoics are born, not made.

Hypoism  
Dan F. Umanoff, M.D.  
941-926-5209  
8779 Misty Creek Dr.  
Sarasota, Florida 34241  

dan.umanoff.md@gmail.com  




6/30/00

6/30/00

Compare these two quotes from Dr. Leshner. The first is from an article he published in the JAMA, Oct. 13, 1999 (an equivalent statement is in his Science article, Addiction is a Brain Disease, and it Matters, Science, vol. 278, pages 45-70, 10/3/97), and the second from his current web page at NIDA (http://www.nida.nih.gov/NIDA_Notes/NNVol14N1/DirRepVol14N1.html). These are from his discussion of his Hijacked Brain Hypothesis of addictions, his theory of addictions.

"Although the onset of addiction begins with the voluntary act of taking drugs, the continued repetition of voluntary drug taking begins to change into involuntary drug taking, ultimately to the point that the behavior is driven by a compulsive craving for the drug,"

and,

"We now know that while initial experimentation with drugs may be voluntary, continuing drug abuse changes the brain in fundamental and long-lasting ways. These brain changes trigger the compulsive drug-seeking and drug-taking behaviors that are the hallmarks of drug addiction."

You'll notice the change from "begins with the voluntary act," to "may be voluntary." This change seems small but is actually galactic. It is the first recognition that even the first use of a drug, leading to addiction, is (may be) involuntary. On the other hand, the change to "may be voluntary" may just be a figure of speech and not signify any change in his concept of the volitional nature of the first drug use. Being an optimist, that there is intelligent life in the universe, I will assume the former explanation and move on while waiting for a response from my e-mail to him (below).

What does this differentiation mean? It means that there are people whose drug use is inexorable and involuntary from the start. The implication of this is staggering and is actually one of the tenets of the Hypoism paradigm, although Leshner doesn't know about Hypoism because he has ignored all my attempts to inform him about it. The distinction between is and may be voluntary is a recognition that choice and control are impossible, just as Hypoism states. The whole issue of free will, for that matter, is up in the air when it comes to addictions and use of addictors for hypoics. I think there is no free will in addiction etiology. Hypoics are born, not made. The new take on the involuntary nature of the first use makes it clear that the drug war, prevention efforts, and criminalization and punishment of addicts is not only useless but inappropriate. It changes the emphasis onto the addict's brain before the first use rather than on his brain after the first use, an enormous change of emphasis. It also de-emphasizes the importance of the drugs and other addictors (prohibition and drug war) as is demanded in the Hypoism paradigm and places the emphasis correctly on early diagnosis of Hypoism followed by early recovery, as in any genetic and involuntary disease, the only effective means of prevention of a disease's symptoms, in this case, addictions.

Moreover, and equally as important, this distinction means there is something behind addictions, even the first use of the addictor: a mechanism in the brain that makes certain people, use addictors against their will and get addicted. This idea, of course, changes responsibility for having the disease of addiction and getting addicted from personal to neurobiological. Not only is this change important for relief of guilt and remorse from the victim, but also is helpful to destigmatize, remove denial, and to allow the person to get into recovery at the earliest possible time.

Something behind addictions? Yes, a neurobiological mechanism that drives people with the correct pathophysiology to seek out addictors unconsciously, use them to change how they feel, and get addicted per force.

This discussion continues in the article on this web site called The Third Millennium N4A Conference Keynote Address on Hypoism. A similar discussion of the Hijacked Brain Hypothesis is in the Hypoism Magazine section of this page called #8 Critique of Alan Leshner's (NIH) Hijacked Brain Hypothesis. Please read them if you haven't yet. Both were written before he made the above change in his statement on the voluntary nature of the first use of the drug. I have e-mailed him today about my congratulations on his change of orientation:

Dr. Leshner:

I was heartened and excited to see that you changed the statement of initial drug use by addicts from "is" to "may be" voluntary in your home page discussion of addiction. Could you please tell me how and why you made that change? It may be the beginning of the most important realization about the role of free will (or lack thereof) and volition in the field of addictions. As you will learn, if you choose to read about my Hypoism addiction paradigm, inexorability from the getgo is a key and essential element in the genesis of addiction in those who are the real addicts. My neurobiological paradigm categorically clarifies the essentially unconscious nature and brain location of the mechanism that is etiologically responsible for all addictions: to substances, behaviors, and beliefs. One of the basic reasons why addiction is so confusing is due to this unconscious as opposed to conscious mechanism. The implications of this differentiation are clearly discussed in my book, Hypoic's Handbook, that discusses all aspects of the Hypoism paradigm from the neurobiology, physiology, genetics, animal addictions, etiology, natural history, course, recovery, to policy for addictions. I have attempted to inform the addictionology community for many years about Hypoism, but have been ignored. My paradigm is, I believe, as close to the neurobiological reality of addictions as is possible today. Until the paradigm is changed to one that comprehends the "involuntary" nature of addictions based on the physical location of the brain mechanism responsible for both the initiation and maintenance of addiction, we will make no headway into improving recovery and policy, and even more so for prevention. I would ask you to read three articles on my web page whose url's I include. If these interest you, maybe you'll read the book. I hope so. I'd be happy to discuss all this with you at any time. I believe there really is a solution to addictions, but one that is not based on the current paradigm. In fact, it's diametrically opposite to the current paradigm. Much of its difference is the realization of the difference between "is voluntary," and "may be voluntary." My paradigm, when accepted and taught to the country, will do for addictions what the discovery of microorganisms did for infectious diseases. I hope you have an open mind.

The URL's:

http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/whatsup/

http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/thehypoismaddictionhypothesis/

http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/thirdmilleniumn4aconferencekeynoteaddressonhypoism/

Well---You can ignore this article as evidence for Leshner changing his concept of the word VOLUNTARY. I just today heard him speak at the DEA conference on club drugs and he clearly and explicitly stated, "Initial drug use is voluntary." So, this article will stay on the web site just to clarify anyone's query concerning the above quote by him at the beginning of the article.










You can take the addiction out of the hypoic, but you can't take the Hypoism out of the addict.




Sign In