amsterdam or rotterdam
Chris Roberts
citys amsterdam and rotterdam. I assume that amsterdam would be the one to
visit but, just wanted to make sure I wasnt going to miss anything good in
rotterdam.
thanks for your input.
Chris Roberts
cjr71244...@ucf.edu
sjoerd
> Hi, when I visit the netherlands, I want to visit only one of these
> two
> citys amsterdam and rotterdam. I assume that amsterdam would be the
> one to
> visit but, just wanted to make sure I wasnt going to miss anything
> good in
> rotterdam.
> thanks for your input.
Amsterdam is full of history, full with tourists, and beautiful. Lots of
museums and facilities for tourists.
Rotterdam is a new city with few historical buildings left, almost no
tourists, but very good nightlife and friendly "real" people.
Interesting modern architecture and a few good museums. Largest port in
the world, which interesting boat trips available.
I like both. It is one hour by train from Amsterdam to Rotterdam.
Sjoerd
Chris Roberts
around it(no second hand smoke for me) is it more common in one or the
other city.
On Fri, 19 Jan 2001, sjoerd wrote:
> Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 17:37:40 +0100
> From: sjoerd <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl>
> Newsgroups: rec.travel.europe
> Subject: Re: amsterdam or rotterdam
Chris Roberts
cjr71244...@ucf.edu
Rolph
Amsterdam has the name for it, but it is more or less the same all over
the Netherlands, I guess. Rotterdam is Cultural Capital of Europe this
year, check out www.rotterdam01.nl. If you want some detailed info, I am
born (and live) in Rotterdam and am happy to give you answers via email.
Rolph
canth...@webtv.net
You can avoid pot smoke by staying out of coffee shops. As for
cigarette smoke, it's everywhere, all over Europe. No way to avoid it.
Nina
stephen
If you stay out of the coffeeshops you shouldn't have a problem
avoiding pot/hash smoke.
Stephen
In article <Pine.SOL.4.31.01011...@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu>,
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
akia
then stay out of "coffee shops"
and yea...they are more common in amsterdam... but nobody is going to go out
onto the street and drag you into one.
bear
its the pot that I dont like. am I in the minority here?
-----------Gratuitous Quote Begins here ------------:(
"He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man."
-Dr. Johnson
akia
> cigs no big deal
> its the pot that I dont like. am I in the minority here?
Hi,
let's compare them...
tobacco is (actually contains) an addictive drug, causes cancer, emphesema,
etc. killing thousands every year.
cannabis is NON-addictive and has never caused a death in all of recorded
history (these were both admitted to by the Drug Enforcement Administration
in a rescheduling suit a few years ago).
so yea, a lot of folks do find tobacco smoke more offensive....not to
mention that tobacco smokers smoke more. often smoking several in a row with
the saltpeter in cigarettes keeping them burning even in the ashtray when
they're not being actively smoked.
Bob Vandiver
>
> cannabis is NON-addictive and has never caused a death in all of recorded
> history (these were both admitted to by the Drug Enforcement
> Administration
> in a rescheduling suit a few years ago).
>
> so yea, a lot of folks do find tobacco smoke more offensive....not to
> mention that tobacco smokers smoke more. often smoking several in a row
> with
> the saltpeter in cigarettes keeping them burning even in the ashtray when
> they're not being actively smoked.
>
>
Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
Bob
--
"Come the millennium, month 12, In the home of greatest power, the
village idiot will come forth to be acclaimed the leader."
- Nostradamus, 1555
inge
>
>
> Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
>
> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
Plus, many people who start out smoking cannabis sooner or later end up
smoking tobacco...
inge
Jack H.
>
> Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
>
> Bob
>
> --
> "Come the millennium, month 12, In the home of greatest power, the
> village idiot will come forth to be acclaimed the leader."
>
> - Nostradamus, 1555
Dear Bob,
Weed MAY be emotionally addictive but not physically addictive. I know I
just stopped and I have NO symptoms after smoking for 16 years. No problems
getting to sleep or concentrating on my duties at hand. Where do you get
your information from. Pamphlets mailed from Pueblo Colorado?/
Cigarettes are physically addictive, the nicotine releasing endorphins into
the blood just like crack and coke( if there even IS a difference betwixt
the two) there for reinforcing the habit.
Just thought you should have some straight information that doesn't come
from the Government.
Howm Grone J
Dave Smith
> Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
I know far too many people who smoked pot for years and stopped for a variety
of reasons. None were addicted. I might add that those people tend to be in far
better shape, in many ways, that those who consumed the legal social substance,
alcohol.
Rod
but it's not actually physically addictive like nicotine..
Rene R.F. Wildeman
I thought this discussion was about the choice between Rotterdam and
Amsterdam but it seems to navigate in a different direction. If you
have to make a choice there is no discussion : Go to Amsterdam. It is
a historical city with beautiful old houses and canals and a large
variety of small shops in the streets between the canals. Furthermore
if you are interested in art there a some fine museums like the
Rijksmuseum and the Van Gogh Museum. Everything in this town is within
walking distance. Rotterdam is a modern city but has much less to
offer.
Enjoy your journey
Rolph
You don't know your own country, I am afraid...But I don't care, enjoy
Amsterdam ;-)
Rolph
Slatts
"Bob Vandiver" <boban...@imagina.com> wrote in message
news:bobandmaria-C1A1...@news.imagina.com...
<SNIP>
> Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
Yes, but less addictive than coffee according to the US governments NIDA see
their chart of relative addictiveness at
National Institute for Drug Addiction http://www.nida.nih.gov/
Slatts
Dasheka
be habit-forming. The two should not be confused. "Pot addiction" is
akin to being a chocaholic, not an alcoholic.
bear
rotterdam anyways so now I am planning to go to amsterdam not
rotterdam and to hauge if I have time
a attraction there called TV tower
-----------Gratuitous Quote Begins here ------------:(
akia
and of course "psychologically addictive" is a contradiction in terms. addiction
is PHYSICAL.
Evelyn Vogt Gamble (Divamanque)
akia wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> and of course "psychologically addictive" is a contradiction in terms. addiction
> is PHYSICAL.
I think many psychotherapists would disagree with you.
(Insofar as one can be "addicted" to certain forms of
behaviour - usually destructive or self-destructive.)
sjoerd
> I talked to a friend and she said the hauge or hague
The Hague in English, Den Haag or 's-Gravenhage in Dutch.
> is better than
> rotterdam anyways so now I am planning to go to amsterdam not
> rotterdam and to hauge if I have time
> a attraction there called TV tower
>
TV tower in Den Haag? Never heard of it. Don't miss the Panorama Mesdag
in Den Haag (circular painting)
Sjoerd
Yves Bellefeuille
> TV tower in Den Haag? Never heard of it. Don't miss the Panorama Mesdag
> in Den Haag (circular painting)
I saw the Panorama Mesdag and was quite disappointed; is it really
considered a major attraction?
--
Yves Bellefeuille <y...@storm.ca>, Ottawa, Canada
Francais / English / Esperanto
Fight Spam! Join CAUCE cost-free: http://www.cauce.org/
Arclight
<evg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>akia wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> and of course "psychologically addictive" is a contradiction in terms. addiction
>> is PHYSICAL.
>
>I think many psychotherapists would disagree with you.
>(Insofar as one can be "addicted" to certain forms of
>behaviour - usually destructive or self-destructive.)
That's called a dependency
>> Rod wrote:
>>
>> > Of course it could be argued that it is psychologically addictive...
>> > but it's not actually physically addictive like nicotine..
>> >
>> > On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 12:11:06 -0800, Bob Vandiver
>> > <boban...@imagina.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >
>> > >>
>> > >> cannabis is NON-addictive and has never caused a death in all of recorded
>> > >> history (these were both admitted to by the Drug Enforcement
>> > >> Administration
>> > >> in a rescheduling suit a few years ago).
>> > >>
>> > >> so yea, a lot of folks do find tobacco smoke more offensive....not to
>> > >> mention that tobacco smokers smoke more. often smoking several in a row
>> > >> with
>> > >> the saltpeter in cigarettes keeping them burning even in the ashtray when
>> > >> they're not being actively smoked.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
>> > >it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
>> > >
>> > >Bob
>> > >
>> > >--
>> > >"Come the millennium, month 12, In the home of greatest power, the
>> > >village idiot will come forth to be acclaimed the leader."
>> > >
>> > >- Nostradamus, 1555
TTFN
Arclight
Web Site:
http://www.daniel-davies.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Maths and Alcohol don't mix, Don't drink and Derive
Gerrit
sjoerd <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
snip
> Don't miss the Panorama Mesdag
> in Den Haag (circular painting)
>
> Sjoerd
>
>
description from the official website ( http://www.panorama-mesdag.com/
)
"A sweeping view of the sea, a wide beach, the dunes of Holland, and the
picturesque fishing village of Scheveningen. Visiting the Panorama
Mesdag painted by Hendrik Willem Mesdag, the renowned marine painter,
and his team of artists, is like taking a nostalgic trip through time
and space. Your reach 1880 Scheveningen through a narrow, dark passage
and up a spiral staircase. Suddenly, you are surrounded by the huge
painting. The circular canvas covers 1680 m2 it is 14 m high and the
circumference is 120 m It was painted by Hendrik WIllem Mesdag, his
wife Sientje Mesdag-van Houten, G.H. Breitner, Th. de Bock and B.J.
Blommers. It is one of the world's finest, and largest, surviving
panoramas. This mass medium of the past century still creates an amazing
impression of being there. The visitors' platform is a dune, creating
the illusion that you are really back in 1880. The Panorama Mesdag is a
grand work of art in the style of The Hague School and an important art
treasure. The rooms leading to the Panorama house a fine collection of
oil paintings and water colours by Mesdag and his wife, as well as
temporary exhibitions."
The location of Panorama Mesdag is Zeestraat 65, Den Haag.
In my opinion it is well worth a visit.{Maybe I say that because I was
born in Holland and not French Canada :-)}
Gerrit
Yves Bellefeuille
> It is one of the world's finest, and largest, surviving panoramas... The
> Panorama Mesdag is a grand work of art in the style of The Hague School
> and an important art treasure.
I'll acknowledge the historical importance of the Panorama Mesdag, but I
think it has little interest for the layman.
I have to admit that I had visited the Gemeentemuseum earlier that day,
and anything's bound to be disappointing after that. ;-) If you like
modern art, I think the Gemeentemuseum is worth a visit to Den Haag for
that reason alone.
And sjoerd <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> Den Haag or 's-Gravenhage in Dutch.
Is this the same thing as "Den Bosch / 's-Hertogenbosch"?
Yves
(posting from Ottawa, Den Haag's twin city)
Gerrit
Yves Bellefeuille <y...@storm.ca> wrote:
>
> I'll acknowledge the historical importance of the Panorama Mesdag, but
I
> think it has little interest for the layman.
>
> I have to admit that I had visited the Gemeentemuseum earlier that
day,
> and anything's bound to be disappointing after that. ;-) If you like
> modern art, I think the Gemeentemuseum is worth a visit to Den Haag
for
> that reason alone.
>
Do I read between the lines that you are an admirer of modern art and
that this has coloured your perception of Mesdag?
I think you'll find that a "layman" will generally like a landscape,
seascape and/or townscape more than any portrait or "modern" art piece.
This is because they can relate to reality rather than to the abstract.
Did you go to the Mauritshuis museum (art gallery) in the Binnenhof? {or
are those paintings too "old" :-)}
Yves Bellefeuille
> Do I read between the lines that you are an admirer of modern art and
> that this has coloured your perception of Mesdag?
I do like modern art, and I don't think that this coloured my perception
of the Panorama Mesdag. Anyway, I'd be interested to know what other
"foreigners" have to say about it.
> Did you go to the Mauritshuis museum (art gallery) in the Binnenhof? {or
> are those paintings too "old" :-)}
Sorry, no; I didn't have time to go to the Binnenhof. I did go to the
Rijksmuseum, several times.
For the record, I like the Netherlands quite a lot. It's the foreign
country in which I've been most often (much more often than in the USA,
even), and people are often quite surprised when I tell them that I feel
more "at home" in the Netherlands than in France.
Barbara Vaughan
Yves Bellefeuille wrote:
>
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Gerrit <gth...@mailcity.com> wrote:
>
> > It is one of the world's finest, and largest, surviving panoramas... The
> > Panorama Mesdag is a grand work of art in the style of The Hague School
> > and an important art treasure.
>
> I'll acknowledge the historical importance of the Panorama Mesdag, but I
> think it has little interest for the layman.
>
> I have to admit that I had visited the Gemeentemuseum earlier that day,
> and anything's bound to be disappointing after that. ;-) If you like
> modern art, I think the Gemeentemuseum is worth a visit to Den Haag for
> that reason alone.
Another museum gem in the Hague is the Maruitshaus. It's a small museum
full of great paintings, although no modern art if I remember
correctly.
Barbara
Barbara Vaughan
Gerrit wrote:
>
> In article <3a6d1664...@news.storm.ca>,
> Yves Bellefeuille <y...@storm.ca> wrote:
> >
> > I'll acknowledge the historical importance of the Panorama Mesdag, but
> I
> > think it has little interest for the layman.
> >
> > I have to admit that I had visited the Gemeentemuseum earlier that
> day,
> > and anything's bound to be disappointing after that. ;-) If you like
> > modern art, I think the Gemeentemuseum is worth a visit to Den Haag
> for
> > that reason alone.
> >
> Yves
> Do I read between the lines that you are an admirer of modern art and
> that this has coloured your perception of Mesdag?
> I think you'll find that a "layman" will generally like a landscape,
> seascape and/or townscape more than any portrait or "modern" art piece.
> This is because they can relate to reality rather than to the abstract.
I don't think that most lovers of art are drawn by the reality aspects
of it; the same is just as true of older paintings as of modern ones. I
can't remember ever having admired a work of art because of its realism.
I'm certainly a "layman" when it comes to art; I don't even consider
myself a highly informed layman.
I lived in the Netherlands at one time, working in the Hague, and for a
month also living there. However, I never saw the Panorama Mesdag
because the description of it didn't appeal enough to cause me to make
the effort to see it. If I had been there another six months and needed
to kill a few boring Sunday afternoons, maybe ... but there were always
lots of things I wanted to see and not enough time to see all of them.
Barbara
Maarten van Wijk
<bvau...@opr.princeton.edu> wrote:
> > Do I read between the lines that you are an admirer of modern art and
> > that this has coloured your perception of Mesdag?
> > I think you'll find that a "layman" will generally like a landscape,
> > seascape and/or townscape more than any portrait or "modern" art piece.
> > This is because they can relate to reality rather than to the abstract.
>
> I don't think that most lovers of art are drawn by the reality aspects
> of it; the same is just as true of older paintings as of modern ones. I
> can't remember ever having admired a work of art because of its realism.
Try the exposition of Gerrit Dou at the Mauritshuis. You'll be amazed at
the painstakingly realistic manner in which this pupil of Rembrandt has
crafted his genre paintings.
Me, I prefer nice and colourful fauvist en Die Brucke paintings to most
Dutch 17 century masters. But the detail in Gerrit Dou's painting is
just incredible. And don't forget to see the regulat exhibition on the
second floor of course, when you visit the Mauritshuis. Rembrandt's
Anatomical Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, and his self portraits which
you'll find there are truely breathtaking.
Maarten
******* een der Wijkelsnuitjes the of one *******
Maarten van Wijk
> I'll acknowledge the historical importance of the Panorama Mesdag, but I
> think it has little interest for the layman.
>
> I have to admit that I had visited the Gemeentemuseum earlier that day,
> and anything's bound to be disappointing after that. ;-) If you like
> modern art, I think the Gemeentemuseum is worth a visit to Den Haag for
> that reason alone.
I think that depends entirely on the layman's specific interests. I do
admist though, that the The Hague school of art with its sombre brown
and grey landscapes and 'seascapes' appeals to few people. But I still
think that the Panorama is 'spectecualr' enough to warrant a visit. And
at least its less out of the way than the Gemeentemuseum.
> And sjoerd <sjoerd...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> > Den Haag or 's-Gravenhage in Dutch.
>
> Is this the same thing as "Den Bosch / 's-Hertogenbosch"?
Almost. Den Bosch (think 'The woods') is a common short name for the
town which is officially named 's-Hertogenbosch. (The duke's woods)
's-Gravenhage ('The count's hedge') is a common long and pompous name
for the city which is officially called Den Haag. (The hedge) I'm not
sure about the etymology of Den Haag or foreign equivalents. I do know
for sure, though, that "Den Haag" is actually the oldest name for the
place. The name 's-Gravenhage was invented in the 16th century to make
the city's name sound more 'upper class'.
akia
> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
Hi,
must make the Drug Enforcement Administration lie to itself when it admitted in
Olsen vs. DEA that it wasn't addictive.
of course there are PEOPLE who can be habituated to almost anything... and
they'll crave it... regardless of what it is... some people claim to be
"addicted" to sex... but it fails the withdrawl test that defines addiction.
Greg Shenaut
>> Sorry but cannabis is most definitely addictive. If it makes you high,
>> it makes you crave. And lie to yourself about it.
> must make the Drug Enforcement Administration lie to itself when it admitted in
> Olsen vs. DEA that it wasn't addictive.
> of course there are PEOPLE who can be habituated to almost anything... and
> they'll crave it... regardless of what it is... some people claim to be
> "addicted" to sex... but it fails the withdrawl test that defines addiction.
It was once generally taught that "marijuana is not 'physically
addictive'", meaning that it doesn't produce the severe dependencies
that opiates do. This caused people to get two wrong ideas: that
marijuana is "not addictive", and that it is harmless. However,
in the past couple of decades, people have found out quite a lot
more about the brain, and, in particular, about how various chemical
substances affect it. This has caused a shift toward greater
precision in how the term 'addiction' is used today.
I'm not interested in debating the question of whether it is good
or bad for society for citizens to become addicted to substances,
or whether they should be legal, tolerated, or illegal. It is
quite evident that there are legal substances that are addictive,
and that there are large differences in how harmful addiction is
to different substances. I just wanted to make a point about
advances in our knowledge about addiction and the brain, specifically
the fact that it is generally accepted by most people studying the
brain that cannabis is addictive.
Here are a few journal abstracts that illustrate my point; there
are many others. These were chosen because they talk specifically,
in the abstract itself, about mechanisms of cannabis addiction in
the brain:
Wise RA.
Neurobiology of addiction.
Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 1996 Apr, 6(2):243-51.
Pub type: JOURNAL ARTICLE; REVIEW; REVIEW, TUTORIAL.
Abstract: Addictive drugs have habit-forming actions that can be localized to a
variety of brain regions. Recent advances in our understanding of the
chemical 'trigger zones' in which individual drugs of abuse initiate their
habit-forming actions have revealed that such disparate drugs as heroin,
cocaine, nicotine, alcohol, phencyclidine, and cannabis activate common
reward circuitry in the brain. Although these drugs have many actions that
are distinct, their habit-forming actions (and perhaps the relevant
elements of their disparate withdrawal symptoms) appear to have a common
denominator, namely, similar effects in the brain mechanisms of reward.
Wise, R. A.
Addictive drugs and brain stimulation reward.
Annual Review of Neuroscience, 1996, v19:319-340.
Abstract: Direct electrical or chemical stimulation of specific brain regions
can establish response habits similar to those established by natural
rewards such as food or sexual contact. Cocaine, mu and delta opiates,
nicotine, phencyclidine, and cannabis each have actions that summate with
rewarding electrical stimulation of the medial forebrain bundle. The
reward-potentiating effects of amphetamine and opiates are associated with
central sites of action where these drugs also have their direct rewarding
effects, suggesting common mechanisms for drug reward per se and for drug
potentiation of brain stimulation reward. The central sites at which these
and perhaps other drugs of abuse potentiate brain stimulation reward and
are rewarding are consistent with the hypothesis that the laboratory
reward of brain stimulation and the pharmacological rewards of addictive
drugs are habit forming because they act in the brain circuits that
subserve more natural and biologically significant rewards. ((c) 1999
APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
Miller, Norman S.; Gold, Mark S.
The diagnosis of marijuana (Cannabis) dependence.
Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1989, v6 (n3):183-192.
Abstract: Defines marihuana (MAR) dependence as (1) preoccupation with its
acquisition, (2) compulsive use, and (3) relapse to or recurrent use.
Medical, psychiatric, neurological, traumatic, and sociological sequelae
occur commonly in acute and chronic MAR use. MAR dependence must be
diagnosed primarily as the etiological agent to adequately prevent and
treat these conditions. Consequences of the MAR addiction should be
separated from the addict's actual motivation or craving to use MAR. MAR
reinforces its own use; psychosocial stressors are not required to produce
a MAR addiction in biologically susceptible individuals. A definitive
diagnosis confirms the presence of addictive behavior by identifying a
preoccupation, compulsivity, and relapse relative to the drug. ((c) 1999
APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
(I included the following article just to illustrate that this
isn't an American idea--this study took place in Switzerland.)
Vadasz, F.
Differences in psychopathology between young persons dependent on legally
tolerated drugs, and those dependent on proscribed drugs. Unterschiede in
der Psychopathologie Jugendlicher, die von gesetzlich verbotenen und...
Nervenarzt, 1988 Jun, v59 (n6):360-364.
Language: German.
Abstract: Compared young psychiatric inpatients addicted to legal drugs and
those addicted to illegal drugs with regard to types of psychopathology
and treatment outcomes. The aim of the study was to gather data for use in
developing therapeutic interventions targeted to subgroups of patients
with drug dependencies. Human subjects: 40 male and female Swiss
adolescents and adults (18-25 yrs) (addicted to legal drugs, including
alcohol and prescription drugs). 137 male and female Swiss adolescents and
adults (18-25 yrs) (addicted to illegal drugs, including opiates,
amphetamines, cocaine, cannabis, and hallucinogens). In a 5-yr follow-up
study, the Subjects' psychopathology symptoms and treatment outcomes were
assessed via self-reports and/or reports by significant others. Intergroup
differences were analyzed. ((c) 1999 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
----
Greg Shenaut
David
never felt the urge to start smoking cigs. One thing I do to control
munchies is that I like to smoke after I eat. Seems to help in my case at
least.
"inge" <ly...@gmx.de> wrote in message news:3A6A16C4...@gmx.de...
akia
> addictive'", meaning that it doesn't produce the severe dependencies
> that opiates do. This caused people to get two wrong ideas: that
> marijuana is "not addictive", and that it is harmless.
it isn't "addictive"... there's no physical withdrawal that relieved by an
administration of the drug.
and it is harmless, though some of it's common methods of administration have their
problems... smoking -anything- can lead to bronchitis.
but even the DEA has admitted there's never been a marijuana caused death in all of
recorded history.
> It is quite evident that there are legal substances that are addictive,
so you concede that a drug's addictive nature has nothing to do with prohibition.
> and that there are large differences in how harmful addiction is
> to different substances.
coffee is linked to cancer, as is tobacco.
> it is generally accepted by most people studying the
> brain that cannabis is addictive.
even the Merck manual notes the term addiction is misapplied when used with cannabis.
> Here are a few journal abstracts that illustrate my point; there
> are many others. These were chosen because they talk specifically,
> in the abstract itself, about mechanisms of cannabis addiction in
> the brain:
>
> Wise RA.
> Neurobiology of addiction.
> Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 1996 Apr, 6(2):243-51.
> Pub type: JOURNAL ARTICLE; REVIEW; REVIEW, TUTORIAL.
> Abstract: Addictive drugs have habit-forming actions that can be localized to a
> variety of brain regions. Recent advances in our understanding of the
> chemical 'trigger zones' in which individual drugs of abuse initiate their
> habit-forming actions have revealed that such disparate drugs as heroin,
> cocaine, nicotine, alcohol, phencyclidine, and cannabis activate common
> reward circuitry in the brain. Although these drugs have many actions that
> are distinct, their habit-forming actions (and perhaps the relevant
> elements of their disparate withdrawal symptoms) appear to have a common
> denominator, namely, similar effects in the brain mechanisms of reward.
yes it notes that some don't have withdrawal (a basic requirement for addiction) and
others don't, speaks not of addiction but "habit-forming actions"... well having ice
cream for desert can be a "habit-forming action" but it isn't addictive either.
> Wise, R. A.
> Addictive drugs and brain stimulation reward.
> Annual Review of Neuroscience, 1996, v19:319-340.
> Abstract: Direct electrical or chemical stimulation of specific brain regions
> can establish response habits similar to those established by natural
> rewards such as food or sexual contact. Cocaine, mu and delta opiates,
> nicotine, phencyclidine, and cannabis each have actions that summate with
> rewarding electrical stimulation of the medial forebrain bundle. The
> reward-potentiating effects of amphetamine and opiates are associated with
> central sites of action where these drugs also have their direct rewarding
> effects, suggesting common mechanisms for drug reward per se and for drug
> potentiation of brain stimulation reward. The central sites at which these
> and perhaps other drugs of abuse potentiate brain stimulation reward and
> are rewarding are consistent with the hypothesis that the laboratory
> reward of brain stimulation and the pharmacological rewards of addictive
> drugs are habit forming because they act in the brain circuits that
> subserve more natural and biologically significant rewards. ((c) 1999
> APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
same guy, interesting, also speaks not of addiction and withdrawal but of "brain
stimulation reward" and an unproved "hypothesis".
> Miller, Norman S.; Gold, Mark S.
> The diagnosis of marijuana (Cannabis) dependence.
> Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 1989, v6 (n3):183-192.
> Abstract: Defines marihuana (MAR) dependence as (1) preoccupation with its
> acquisition, (2) compulsive use, and (3) relapse to or recurrent use.
still not addiction since no withdrawal
> Medical, psychiatric, neurological, traumatic, and sociological sequelae
> occur commonly in acute and chronic MAR use. MAR dependence must be
> diagnosed primarily as the etiological agent to adequately prevent and
> treat these conditions. Consequences of the MAR addiction should be
> separated from the addict's actual motivation or craving to use MAR. MAR
> reinforces its own use; psychosocial stressors are not required to produce
> a MAR addiction in biologically susceptible individuals. A definitive
> diagnosis confirms the presence of addictive behavior by identifying a
> preoccupation, compulsivity, and relapse relative to the drug. ((c) 1999
> APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
still no MAR withdrawal... so still no MAR addiction.
> (I included the following article just to illustrate that this
> isn't an American idea--this study took place in Switzerland.)
>
> Vadasz, F.
> Differences in psychopathology between young persons dependent on legally
> tolerated drugs, and those dependent on proscribed drugs. Unterschiede in
> der Psychopathologie Jugendlicher, die von gesetzlich verbotenen und...
> Nervenarzt, 1988 Jun, v59 (n6):360-364.
> Language: German.
> Abstract: Compared young psychiatric inpatients addicted to legal drugs and
> those addicted to illegal drugs with regard to types of psychopathology
> and treatment outcomes. The aim of the study was to gather data for use in
> developing therapeutic interventions targeted to subgroups of patients
> with drug dependencies. Human subjects: 40 male and female Swiss
> adolescents and adults (18-25 yrs) (addicted to legal drugs, including
> alcohol and prescription drugs). 137 male and female Swiss adolescents and
> adults (18-25 yrs) (addicted to illegal drugs, including opiates,
> amphetamines, cocaine, cannabis, and hallucinogens). In a 5-yr follow-up
> study, the Subjects' psychopathology symptoms and treatment outcomes were
> assessed via self-reports and/or reports by significant others. Intergroup
> differences were analyzed. ((c) 1999 APA/PsycINFO, all rights reserved).
>
> ----
> Greg Shenaut
keep looking... you may find some discredited study someplace that found somebody
they could get to show some kind of withdrawal from cannabis use from that was
relieved by an administration of the drug.