Nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong. Do you remember that song from the late sixties? By Buffalo Springfield? Anyone else that old? Here, have a listen.
I’ve been in Australia for about three days. I say “about” because I truly can’t keep track anymore, though I could look it up. I dreamed that I was in Arabia for a while on the way here, but there must be a logical explanation, like I was having an astral projection or something. And yet…look what I found on my camera:
I actually woke up the other day, looked around at the standard hotel-room features and had no idea where I was. The feeling lasted about 20 seconds and I just let it be, enjoying the novelty of it. Australia evokes that readily because it seems like such an arbitrary continent. Aussies, please forgive me, and I’m sure many people feel this way about Canada, but the sense is: What’s this place doing here? Who put it here?
The Aussies are good to me. After my talk at the Melbourne Writers Festival, I was told that my book was the best 
seller of the whole Festival — except for a children’s book that apparently didn’t count. That’s a beautiful thing. And there was a supportive Q&A just published in the Australian version of The Guardian, and other positive reviews online and in the press. All in the Mind, a radio show on ABC (A is for Australian) just aired this nice podcast connecting my views with those of Gabor Mate, whom I respect, not to mention Tom Waits.
And I’m still getting some great publicity from other lands. Jane McGonigal (@avantgame) has 130,000 Twitter followers and here’s a recent tweet from her. She’s a trend setter when it comes to the impact of IT on people’s thinking and behaviour, including the influence of video games on…just about everything. And look what she says…
But all this praise is only half the story. The forces of darkness have been gathering. I’ve gotten some of the nastiest reviews I’ve ever seen, ever even imagined. I’ve been called quite a few names, the mildest of which was “zealot” in the Washington Post. That review was moving along nicely until the writer, , got in touch with her reserves of….I guess contempt:
But despite the legitimizing heft of brain science, romanticizing the addict and turning recovery into a heroic narrative seems one of the central and unsettling aspects of Lewis’s perspective. When he writes that addiction is a “vivid instance of the role of suffering in individual growth,” he seems to imply that addiction is not just not a disease but noble. Addicts become heroes and addiction their heroic vehicle. It is difficult not to see this as a way of inserting himself, as an addict, into the story, while playing down the staggering social costs of addiction.
At least that’s marginally rational. Do I really think addiction exemplifies nobility or heroism? Well, no, actually. But I do see people’s determination to quit, and their sometimes long drawn-out battles to do so successfully, as worthy of real admiration. I see those efforts as courageous and maybe even heroic. But that’s an entirely different point.
And this business about “inserting myself, as an addict” into my writing… Sure I do, but how is that wrong? A few have argued that Lewis just claims addiction is not a disease because he got over his. So, let’s see, that was sure easy. What’ll I do for excitement next weekend? Maybe that’s what Ms
But some of the nastiest criticisms come from the pages of Customer Reviews on Amazon.com. One had this to say:
I will not buy another piece of garbage from this author after having wasted time and money on his last self-aggrandizing, narcissistic, egotistical piece of trash… This guy is a snake-oil salesman, a charlatan, a quack, sham and fraud masquerading as a neuroscientist interested in advancing the field of Addiction Recovery. He may have conquered his addictions, though he admits he still drinks alcohol, but he hasn’t given up the behaviors that he learned as an addict…
At least he or she isn’t pulling any punches. Other negative reviews are just as silly or rude, or too dumb to be upsetting. But there are a couple that get to me. Like the guy (I assume it’s a guy) who said…
He reminds me of a nurse I worked with on a hospital inpatient detox unit. He felt that when he was addicted to drugs, he stopped on his own without treatment, so he spent his time abusing the patients on the unit for not helping themselves. He was ultimately fired for his involvement in a patient suicide on the unit. Lewis needs to read a good work on Phenomenology to learn to bracket his experience when studying another’s addiction.
The problem is that it almost sounds rational, and it’s just so damn ugly. Although I’ve been told repeatedly — especially by Isabel — never to respond to negative reviews, I just had to reply to this one. I was almost civil. Now that’s heroic.
So here’s the net result — so far. Quite a few people really like the book. And a pretty large proportion — at least of those moved to write customer reviews on Amazon — hate it with a passion. Yet it seems to me they hate it for different reasons. Some oppose it because they think it’s so obviously wrong and others because they think it’s so obviously right that anyone could have written it. Go figure.
I’m not deeply upset by the criticism — either the stupid attacks or the cleverly devised barbs. It’s part of the game, I know, and controversy — even animosity — helps publicize ideas and sell books. I just thought I’d let you know how it’s going out here.
And by the way, if any of you folks feel like writing a flattering customer review on Amazon, nobody’s stopping you. But if you say anything even slightly negative, I know where to find you.
“Mostly say hooray for our side”
Informed by unparalleled neuroscientific insight and written with his usual flare, Marc Lewis’s The Biology of Desire effectively refutes the medical view of addiction as a brain disease. A bracing and informative corrective to the muddle that now characterizes public and professional discourse on this topic.” —Gabor Maté, M.D., author of In The Realm of Hungry Ghosts: Close Encounters With Addiction
A disease, a condition, a behavior, a moral weakness, a genetic predisposition, an addiction, a maladaptive behavior, … , …. , WTF
Some recover on their own, some recover with any form of the treatments, some with specific treatments, some do not recover, some age out, some mature out, some do not. Oh well.
This all suggests that there is not a single cause, nor single treatment. Modern life or situations overpowers some individuals, and they do something that provides relief or change. It seems unlikely that any of you “scientists” will understand the “real problems” because of confirmation bias and tunnel vision. It is not singular problem but a multitude of issues that resolve the same way with an escape approach. To solve it, each and all issues must be addressed individually. This will require understanding of the problems that lead to the problem in the first place and alternative beliefs, behaviors, motivations. That is where solving the problem lies, not in debating what to call it. But then what do I know?
Some of us scientists do recognize that the problem is complex and multifaceted. My approach is to join the biological understanding with our knowledge of social and societal causes. Definitional debates aren’t the last step in figuring out how to help — Probably they’re the first step.
I have to admit I read all the “one star” comments , the most of them ( reviewers) had not even read you’re book . So , What the hell is that ? The good part is that for every bad review you got , more than one person came to your defence in the comment section .I’m thinking thats a good thing . Add up all your “5 star” reviewers and the folks coming to your defence in the comments and it’s far more folks that like your work than don’t . Maybe you have more supporters of your book than you think .
If it was me ? I would just respond to the bad one’s with ” I’m rubber , you’re glue ” over and over again .
Donnie, My wife, Isabel, says pretty much the same thing: pay them no heed, and let my supporters carry the load. Indeed, there are plenty of people who have good things to say. And — I hope this isn’t just bias talking — they’re the ones who actually sound like thoughtful rational human beings. indeed, starting a book review with a stark admission that you haven’t read the book can’t be a very solid soapbox from which to expound. So I’m keeping all that in mind.
Hi Marc
I have nt read the new book but read your first and found the science very interesting. A question I have is “what is dis-ease’ Is it all about bacteria/viruses or is it the body /brain out of balance ? The chemicals and hormones all array? I had breast cancer. Isn’t that a dis -ease of imbalanced hormones that causes the body to go a little haywire. Is it curable with medical intervention ? Sometimes…..that works and sometimes it doesn’t . Can I help myself ? I believe so.
I am the mother of a long term heavy drug abuser -who has also done jail time . I love him -but the cost to his family and himself has been huge. You appear not to have worked much in order to support your habits ? How did you survive ? Via your Mum and Dad?
My son is something of a narcissist and I do think it is a trait of many addicts. I still saw that trait when he was sober . i suspect that like most other experiences in life -You will not know the pain of loving a child who is a drug addict until you have walked in these particular shoes.
I wish it on no one -but I have learned a lot about compassion and non judgement walking alongside an addicted child /adult .
When you are in your addiction -I think you are dis-eased….in the most profound sense of the word. The ripple of this -then dis-eases those around you etc etc . The ignorance and arrogance of addiction has no bounds and thats what makes living around/seeing it so heart breaking
Maybe thats why many are reacting to your book so strongly.
Chrs
sue
I’ve had lots of conversations with Marc and others about dis-ease Sue and I must admit it is a very descriptive metaphor for the deeply spiritual discomfort that often comes with addiction. It’s a kind of existential angst that is very difficult to articulate becaus most people tend to judge it, want to diagnose it and often want to medicate it. I did a talk along these lines to the United Kingdom Recovery Federation yesterday. I feel much of this comes out of a general intolerance of uncertainty. Although addiction can be very predictable much of it is also very uncertain. Uncertainty brings a level of discomfort that we find very difficult to tolerate. We develop an almost all consuming need to do something, anything and often these decisions aren’t in the addicts best interest. Perhaps the starting point is for all of us to learn to tolerate uncertainty a bit more? Maybe this will help us to meet the person where they are, without wanting to change them? Perhaps this is where we find a mutual compassion within which everything becomes possible and somethings probable?
Peter,
Really great point about our discomfort with uncertainty. As you say, it can lead to sabotaging the addict. If someone in the position to help the addict is, however unknowingly, motivated by finding relief from his own discomfort, then what’s best for the addict is no longer the objective.
Hi Sue. You disagree with my argument, but you’re not being nasty about it. Why is that necessary? We all know that addiction has devastating consequences for addicts and their families — and most of us are looking for ways to help alleviate the problem. I feel that medicalizing addiction doesn’t lead to the most effective policies for treatment, but if you want to know more about my position, please read the book.
If you read my first book, you know that I stole drugs rather than bought them. That’s how I supported my habit. Narcissism, sure, that’s one word for it. I fancied myself as a sort of Robin Hood figure. But another word is loneliness — being trapped in a cycle of behaviour you’ve forgotten how to climb out of.
Hi Marc hope you’re well. This pretty much reflects the stuff I’m hearing on my travels. The people who have actually read the book, in the main, feel it’s a great piece of work and has helped them to further their understanding of the very complex and often multidimensional thing that is addiction. On the other hand most of the critics, in the main, haven’t read the book and are forming opinions based on reviews. I heard a very experienced doctor in a meeting a couple of weeks ago saying, “what the hell is he talking about? Of course it’s a disease, lots of very experienced and qualified people say it’s so. He needs to be very careful because he’s in serious danger of upsetting some very high level people.”
I see it as a kind of Plato’s cave thing, there are some great animations on YouTube, where if all you’ve ever seen are shadows dancing across a cave wall it’s very difficult to accept the reality of someone’s researched evidence and lived experience. It looks like your far from alone Maia Szalovicz is bringing a book out in March in a very similar vein. It won’t be long my friend before we’re looking back in amusement at the disease model much in the same way as we look at blood letting, lobotomy and miasma.
Ah Peter, you may well be right. The forces of truth are gathering outside the castle gates. I just met Johann Hari today, actually. Between him and Maia and Stanton Peele and Sally Satel..we’ve got quite a head of steam. People at least won’t be able to say this is an absurd argument. It will be an argument they’ll at least need to think about…which is a big step in the right direction.
YOU READ THE COMMENT SECTIONS?! Have I taught you nothing in our 20 years of cohabitation?! Yes, of course, read official reviews (of course it’s critical to understand the varied reactions to your meticulously-researched, but also highly personal, approach). Your writing, thinking and connection with others has been hugely influenced by understanding “the other side(s),” as numerous and varied as they are.
But reading comment sections?! ON THE INTERNET?! Ok, Ok, Amazon reviews aren’t quite comment sections, but they’re damn close because they’re not moderated (relatively speaking).
RESPONDING to these comments (i.e., feeding the ugliness)?! As far as I can see, (almost) nothing ever good comes from responding to the hate and vitriol. And to tell you the truth, those comments aren’t as bad as I suspect they can become if the book starts being read more widely. I think your Amazon review bi-modal distribution is delightful, actually. It shows that people care about the issues you raise (even if they haven’t read your actual material) and no one is just “meh” about your approach. Isn’t it so much worse to be boring? Irrelevant? Ignored?
You know the not-so-secret thing? Most of us don’t heed the very oft-repeated wisdom and DO read the comment section. Probably because we care what people think (otherwise you’d have written the book in yet another diary and stored it in our attic), and we want to be liked, and we hate being misunderstood. And instead of indulging our old addictions, we write books and blogs and read the damn comment sections, to satisfy our deep, ever-resurfacing thirst for connection and belongingness.
You know what you should do instead of reading comments sections (or at least responding)? Read these.
For some sober perspective:
http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/sep/12/comment-sections-toxic-moderation
For a hysterical perspective:
http://the-toast.net/2014/09/04/eighteen-kinds-people-comment-recipe-blog/
And if you don’t listen to me, I’ll sneak in on your computer and put this extension on Chrome to automatically hide the comments (there’s one for Firefox too):
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/dont-read-the-comments/nlhmhpppjnlbdfgebinkgjiljipnejbe?hl=en
And it can be much MUCH worse:
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/25/im_never_reading_the_comments_again/
One last thought: I think the sensitive way you moderate your comment section without censoring dissent is one of the things that makes your blog so great to return to. But mark my words, if your book DOES get the recognition it deserves, this comment section will explode with the most frenzied hurricane of hate; you will be stunned. Of course you will also have positive comments, but they’ll pale, at least at first, in comparison. And then, perhaps you’ll put up a “comments policy”, banish the truly abusive, hateful people, and protect your growing community in the process. But in the end, I think your ideas, and the ideas of this community, can most dramatically influence those who disagree wildly, through the sensitive, intelligent and open-hearted discussions that have become the norm here.
Speaking of cognitive biases, humans on the whole don’t like change, don’t like difference, and we really don’t like to be wrong.
I say listen to Isabel…and Sue. Unless all the ostensibly countervailing brouhaha is that disturbing or important to you. Otherwise, you should have written the children’s book.
…for what it’s worth.
Ummmm. Yeah, what Isabel said……
Isabel, you are not so dumb. Maybe we should meet for a coffee next week. That app for hiding comments is marvelous, and the Salon piece is great. And other readers have mirrored what you said about the advantage of having strong opinions in both corners…over a lukewarm response in the middle.
Speaking of not reading the comment sections, I wouldn’t bother looking at the other comments here, especially all those that say “listen to Isabel” “Isabel” is brilliant” “yeah, what Isabel said”..
How true that we want to know how others receive us. It’s so damned basic. The most disturbing thing to me, though, is that the negatives take up much more space in my brain than the positives. It’s the “how dare you” response. That Salon author really got it. And for me, being bad-mouthed was a gateway to depression…but that’s when I was young and naive.
Well thanks to you and everyone else: I get it: vitriol is to be expected, and the more impact something has, the more likely it is to scrape up the muck. As Orwell said, Love is Hate. Or no…it’s more like “I will work harder”.
Marc, listen to Isabel.
When I look at how extraordinarily difficult it is just to MONITOR my own thoughts, let alone channel them in a positive direction, how can I hope to be able to affect what others think and feel for very long?
Reading comment sections can often unnecessarily dysregulate your HPA axis. Crosby, Stills, Young and Furay stopped reading them decades ago!
Furay?
Richie Furay rounded out Buffalo Springfield with those other three.
Aaahhh, of course. You know what they say: Anyone who remembers the sixties wasn’t actually there.
All these people telling me to listen to Isabel. I do! I do!
So why are you responding to someone comparing you to a detox nurse that was substance free, but clearly not in “recovery” from their primary mental health issue…?? The emotionality of reviews that sound like confused, angry children might cause me to question their objectivity.
True, Matt. Especially when the guy says I need to learn to “bracket” my experience. Seriously, said I should read some Phenomenology with a capital P. And then goes on to say how much I remind him of someone he used to know.
And by the way, Mark, you’re totally right: the effect is that it dysregulates me. See above.
Marc,
I COMPLETELY understand! For seven years, I wrote a blog that got moderately famous about Calorie Restriction for longevity. My then partner and I did quite a bit of media, New York Magazine and CNN and such, and so the comment section of my blog got pretty crazy. No one cared about the science, they just wanted to pick at us personally. A writer for Salon.com wrote a very nasty article the day before Thanksgiving! I spent much of Thanksgiving which I was trying to enjoy at my family’s house reading… you guessed it… the comment section. I got called anorexic and too fat in the same morning, and even got death threats! For eating kale??? Seriously.
You’re writing about a subject as evocative of irrational feelings as food. It’s going to get worse. My advice is a) listen to Isabel b) find a way to shut down the conversations with these people that you have in your head. Have them for maybe ten minutes, then cut it off. Otherwise it starts to eat you up.
Your books and the community on this blog have been very important to my recovery. I may have stayed sober, but I don’t think I’d be nearly as peaceful if it weren’t for your work. I have the strength to take what I want and leave the rest from AA because I know I’m not crazy… I’m actually well-informed, and not alone. And I just signed up to become a SMART Recovery facilitator and hopefully start the first free SMART meeting in Philadelphia!
Keep up the awesome work. And always listen to Isabel!
In solidarity,
April
April, what a great reply! You make comment sections worth every ache and pain. Your story (e.g., being called anorexic and too fat the same day, death threats for eating kale — maybe they had started a save-the-kale movement) had me laughing out loud. And of course what you say about what my work and this blog mean to you…that is just so good to hear.
And you’re one of ten readers who say I should listen to my wife. Like she needs that kind of ammunition?
Well, you made my day. Now I shut down and fly to Brisbane. Thanks!
What do you care what they write if the book is selling.. Take all that lovely money and flip em the bird !!
Seriously, you have written a wonderful treatise on an important subject and its getting peoples attention and getting them to ask important questions
We arent going to solve this huge social problem the way we are going . . so change is needed and your book hopefully will add some oomph to that
Thanks, Bill. Seriously. You’ve got it just right.
Dear Marc,
You’re in Australia! (I am up in Newcastle, NSW). Your book is amazing. Full stop. I could not put it down. I will write a positive review to go with my already 5-Star rating. Your books and blog has influenced my recovery immeasurably. Definitely listen to your wife, Isabel. So much wisdom there. Have a great visit to this country that I now call home.
Cheers mate,
Jocelyn
Cheers, Jocelyn! It’s hard to figure out which way is up down here, but I’m giving you a wave. How good to hear that the books and blogs are working for you, especially the new book. That is a treasure that weighs so much more than all the little barbs.
Hey Marc, don’t let the turkeys bring you down. If you weren’t really onto something, they wouldn’t be so vicious. I found your recent quote about the correspondence you were getting particularly revealing. People are scared to give up their “diagnosis”.
You must have also spurred a great number of folks to go to brain science school, as I have never seen so many neuroscientists on the interwebs!
Marc…remember! the song”Nobody is right” and “Nobody is wrong”…all of us are products of the greater whole and may get caught up from time to time “Thinking” that we know… I love the song and the era because of what it stood for…music is a language of its own…just listen to the music!~
Peace!~
Hi Marc, I have to admit I have not yet read the book but after reading this blog I am going straight to Amazon and ordering. Also, I am going to keep a copy of this blog and its comments just in case any of my work is ever published and reaches this stage… Hang in there and enjoy the ride!
Thanks!
Why is it that when I do a course or a workshop and 49 out of 50 evals are positive, I focus on the negative one? And the more unjust and irrational that one is the more it bugs me. Answer: It’s because I’m committed to my work, emotionally as well as intellectually, and when my emotions get attacked I react out of the SNS with fight or flight.
So anyhow, you know that I disagree with you wholeheartedly about addiction not being a disease, but you are interesting and thought-provoking. So, vive la difference.
And yes, I’m plenty old enough to remember Buffalo Springfield.
Marc,
First off – I feel your pain, brutha! Having said that, it occurred to me while reading this that even though it may not feel like it all the time, you are handling this like a trooper. Just by – dare I say, listening to Isabel – by not joining in and defending yourself against those who lash out at you. Instead of jumping into a heated debate or writing some scathing tweet as a response, you share it and bring your frustration, humor, insights, and updates here – to YOUR community. That’s such a healthy, liberating way to honor yourself – to invite support from those who understand you – and your solid intent – while simultaneously supporting others.
Under different circumstances – and admittedly not as intensely as you, a published Author of a highly charged subject matter – I too have questioned myself, doubted myself, compared myself, felt compelled to defend myself, aligned myself to harsh judgment of others, held myself accountable for other people’s un-reconciled conflicts, etc., To some extent, I still do that today. The difference is – now I understand myself better and I don’t allow myself (or my brain – Mr. Neurologist) to take me down that road. I just don’t. It is feeding a beast that contradicts my very nature and pretty much sabotages everything in my life.
I used to feel so tormented by drawing insane, harsh conclusions about myself that were 100% untrue. In certain instances,I used to accuse myself of being needy for attention, approval, ego-soothing applause, etc.. I often felt misunderstood, unappreciated, and generally at conflict. At some point I spoke to some very close friends about my dilemma and they helped me realize that I misinterpreted my inward responses to other people’s opinions about my work. I was none of those things I wasn’t needy, or desperate for approval or seeking some sort of ego-validation. I genuinely care about people – even those same people who “lash out” at me. The disappointment, frustration,or “hurt” I felt – which was transformed into self-doubt, etc., – was for the most part because I truly want to contribute to people’s lives and I feel badly when in my eyes, I failed. I don’t like to see people suffer. I don’t like to see people in conflict. I don’t like for people to, for example, condemn themselves with a “disease” if by doing so it prompts further conflict and suffering. The disease concept, on its own, doesn’t bother me. It ONLY bothers me if individuals are being hurt by it. Those who are not hurt by it should keep it. My personal intent when I speak of addiction is not to campaign my own beliefs or discredit someone else’s belief. It is to help people, to prevent them from suffering to whatever extent I am able.
The only thing that “set me free” from this personal dilemma that you and I may (or may not) share, was for me to realize (and accept) that my intent is fairly pure – and the rest of the stuff is bogus. So when someone lashes out at me in the face of me doing (or writing) something that I feel is genuine, loving, or helpful – I have to remind myself that my intent is to help. If doing what I am doing is not interpreted as helpful by an individual – then that’s not a sign that my writing, for example, is wrong. It’s a sign to move on from that individual and instead, direct my efforts toward someone or something that interprets me (or my writing) as helpful so that my intent can be achieved. Your intent to help others can only be honored (and achieved) by focusing on those who interpret you as helpful. The best thing you can do for the rest of em (and yourself) is wish them the best on whatever path they see as helpful. Even if they are “wrong” – sometimes “wrong” is a necessary stepping stone that leads to “right” – so in the end, it’s all good.
So applying that more specifically to you – nourish the situations and relationships that you are being perceived (as an Author and otherwise) as being helpful and contributory – and leave the rest alone – specifically because that is the only way you can honor your intent – to help. I bet if you’re honest with yourself, your frustration isn’t so much with someone’s criticism of you or your book as much as it is that you feel disappointed that people’s criticism is an indication that your intent to help is being “sabotaged” – or somehow not being well received. It’s okay to feel disappointed by that for a split second – but move on.
Lastly, I laughed my butt off when I read your response to someone telling you to listen to Isabel – saying “I do, I do” – which is probably why I felt referred to Isabel myself in this post.
Anyway, my personal experience with reconciling this has led me to un-do that compulsion most of us men have to chronically feel misunderstood and unappreciated. It became super clear to me why I was constantly feeling those things. Who knew that it was me all along who sabotaged my ability to be understood and appreciated. It wasn’t my mother – my girlfriend – or my wife. It was silly old me – for not being aware of, and not remaining aligned with my intent.
I hope something I said here contributes. I really do understand. It is so easy to become consumed by inaccurate self-dialogue, etc. and that takes us down a tragically wasteful road. Unless I am entirely misreading you – and you are just another greedy Author who wants a zillion dollars from book sales – I feel like you really do have your own solutions, support, etc., and you are making good use of them.
On a not-so-separate-note, stay protective of your community here and do what you have to do to keep the “haters” out. You deserve to be able to check in with us, without the contaminants of trolls and hostile, counter-productive, on-line debates. And we deserve it too!!!
Richard
Just to clarify – I don’t have both a girlfriend AND a wife. I was trying to refer to all the women, throughout my life, but instead made it sound like I was referring to my “harem”. Amazing what one seemingly minor typo can imply. Ooops!
Hi Richard. There are a lot of good ideas and general principles in your comment. It’s true that the criticism of others often short-circuits to self-criticism, and in a nutshell that’s what makes it hard to hear.. And it’s true that recognizing the “goodness” in one’s intentions and the advantages they often confer is a direct antidote to ongoing self-doubt.
As in my response to Isabel, I would respond to you by saying “I do. I do.” I do try and navigate back to where I’M coming from, which means ignoring where some people THINK I’m coming from. It’s good advice and your words help it to sink in a little more.
As for this blog, it can be a balm for my soul — especially precious to me during periods of upheaval and struggle, like the present. So…thanks for that too.
Nick, if you didn’t remember Buffalo Springfield it would hurt more than any nasty comment. Thanks for your kind words. Yes, we have always managed to disagree in a gentlemanly way, and better yet our disagreement fuels each other’s thinking — or at least sharpens each other’s arguments!
One thing I love about neuroscience is … there are currently over 300,000 peer-reviewed studies published every year. And that number is growing for good reason: learning how the brain works helps make it work better. It can help reduce suffering in the world.
None of us knows everything. And one thing I’m reasonably sure of is that people busy attacking you are NOT busy reading more of those studies and trying to integrate them into a coherent, meaningful whole than you are.
Thanks for understanding. Yes, it takes a lot of conscientious effort to take those findings into account, and come out with a coherent story of addiction, AND show how that story clashes with the party line. Yes, we reduce suffering by understanding, not by labelling.
Hey Marc
I better not tell you some of the attacks I have had to endure on facebook regarding the book! My goodness….. But many people hold on the the brain disease model of addiction with religious zeal.
The important thing is that you are sparking debate. Unfortunately, most of it is not very reasoned. When things creep into accepted knowledge through repetition, and people build whole careers on that, it is very difficult to learn something new….. the concept carries meaning beyond its intrinsic worth – actually, isn’t that addiction?
I meant “much of it”, not “most of it”, because there is a lot of reasoned debate around your book out there!
HI Shaun. Yes, some of the debate is reasoned but a lot is not. The comment sections that run on and on below reviews of addiction books….they are mostly reiterating their favourite tirades…which usually have nothing to do with whatever the book is about. I’m getting used to that. There’ve been books written about Internet “trolls” — it’s a huge subculture in itself.
By the way, I’ve noticed your comments following various articles in the addiction field. Always a refreshing find: a jewel among the dung.
I read comments online to see which way the winds blow. The tone of comments sections are usually set by people venting their obsessions and grievances. They tend to post based on the title or first para, then they’re off into their own blue distance.
Given the title of your book, you must expect a lot of this kind of noise. Given the nature of your thesis the proportion of 1 to 5 star reviews is indicative that a lot of people are reading it. It may even change some minds.
Well done.
Right on, Jeff. You are such a seasoned commentator and I value your perspective on these things. And at least you didn’t say “listen to Isabel”.
I would personally enjoy being reminded that I am the hero of my own recovery epic.
A life infused with courage and integrity is something to aspire to.
How I choose to process criticism today can be extremely productive not only for the possibility of a teachable experience but It often reveals blind spots in my personal inventory.
Sure enough, I think the heroism accusation is something to relish. There is definitely heroism in overcoming addiction — our contemporary equivalent to climbing mountains…or at lease climbing out of crevices. This commentator makes her feelings for addicts pretty conspicuous from the first couple of paragraphs.
Blind spots? What blind spots?
Im refering to nonproductive destructive behaviors thoughts or feelings that are based in nothing more than a concocted interpretive narrative I somehow previously internalized to which I Blindly, automatically respond..If I can see the script, I can change the narrative and infuse a healthier perspective..negative thoughts beget negative emotions and negative actions… and the converse…Just trying to find a place of clarity and a healthier ” Reality”… or something like that.
So many good things have already been stated. I’m not sure that I can provide much more. One thought I had was how well you presented your book as a scientific theory, backed by solid research. Robbins, Everett, Berridge….HUGE players in the addiction field. I find that lacking in other accounts of addiction. You’re actually challenging the status-quo, and providing reasons for that challenge. I like a book that exercises me mentally, and very few books on addiction really do that for me. I don’t know what compelled the critics; perhaps a sense of threat to their own perceptions? When these dissenters develop an alternative theory that challenges me to rethink addiction, perhaps I’ll listen to what they have to say ;).
Hey thanks, Liz. I’m glad you are seeing the references for what they are. I was very concerned about remaining true to the latest findings and concepts in addiction neuroscience. Reviewers aren’t going there, partly because they often don’t care deeply about scientific evidence, and certainly they don’t care deeply about one little book. The status-quo remains all powerful until it’s literally toppled by an army of facts from an alternative perspective.
People who have never had to deal with an addiction, have a difficult time understanding the logic regarding the behavior. Furthermore, the more a person has to lose, the more people don’t understand why they simply don’t stop.
Logic than leads to the conclusion that any “healthy” person would stop the behavior, but because so many people can’t, it must be a disease. Add in the horrible “recovery” rates of many of the traditional programs in this country as well as many of the treatment centers and again the “logical” conclusion is that it simply must be a disease. The majority of the people simply CAN’T stop.
To be honest, when you battle a machine like the recovery industry in this country and the years of “science” supporting the disease model, there is far too much at stake for people to read a book like yours without putting up a major fight. I personally would ignore it as hard as that is because you have experience and serious science on your side.
I had as bad of a gambling addiction as you could possibly have. At the end, I was gambling 20 hours a day. I could relate to every story in your book. I knew first hand what each of those people were feeling as they were telling their stores. The science you added to it made so much sense to this lay person, I have no doubt that you are going down the right path.
The only thing that cured my “disease” was hundreds of hours of therapy. How is therapy going to cure a “disease”? It makes no sense to me at all. Nothing changed at all except my behavior. Hardest thing I have ever done, but the work was so worth it. I never thought I would be where I am today and I will never go back. Not because I was cured of anything, but because I got to the bottom of what was causing my behavior and I worked so hard to fix all of the pain and hurt I felt inside. I fixed the feelings that led to the behavior and the behavior stopped.
Keep fighting the good fight. It may be decades before the disease model dies, but it will be well worth the time and effort to make it happen.
Mark, thanks for such a thoughtful and thorough commentary on what’s going on here. I agree that all the factors you mention help to entrench the disease model. One of the ironies is, as you point out, that conventional treatment that relies on the disease model usually fails, yet that very failure rate is construed as evidence that this must be a really horrendous disease.
I appreciate your personal touch. I often address gambling when I give talks on addiction, not because I know it well personally but because of the neural data that shows its astonishing parallel with substance addiction. The brain literally treats these habits in identical ways.
And indeed effort and therapy are the most reliable ways to beat addiction. What sort of disease could be reversed by this combination? It’s got to be personal, and that’s the main reason it can’t be a disease.
…as one of my favorite drug counselors in detox used to say, “…Okay…enough already! It’s time to put your big boy pants on and go out and do the work!!”
Hi, Marc. Congratulations on the success of your book. Others may think it is better not to read the comments section. But I think it is necessary and I admire you for the courage for doing so. Sure there may be many senseless negative comments out there to ruin your day but I think it would only be natural as an author to see how one’s work is received. Thanks for sharing your joys and frustrations through this post and being so real and honest in them. That is what makes this blog so great. Anyway, it led me to think why the hostile reaction to your book. Addiction has devastated so many lives and the fact that so many had absolutely no control or little hope to overcome it on their own, to put forward that addiction is not a disease may provoke many as they may have thought that you are saying that the root cause is the lack of self-control. With so much suffering going on, it may seem more compassionate to say that it is a disease and get more intervention and help needed. I agree intervention and help are needed more than ever, but that doesn’t require addiction being seen as a disease. I think your book is very important. We need to understand addiction for what it is rather than we wish it to be. I fully support and appreciate your work, Marc!
Thanks for all your support and encouragement, Julie, and everyone else. It’s true: the strong negative reaction to my words is a direct result of the damage addiction causes to people’s lives. Almost no one who knows addiction personally can avoid having strong feelings about it, and almost no one who doesn’t know it personally can imagine what’s really going on. So misunderstanding and angry reactions are to be expected.
In radio interviews and such, I often highlight the fact that the destigmatization of addiction does NOT rely on calling it a disease. It’s just dumb logic. Are people less likely to stigmatize people with AIDS, knowing full well it’s a disease? Rather, the way to forgive addicts is to understand them, and that relies on digging down deep, past the medical metaphor, and figuring out how the brain responds to repeated helpings of something highly attractive. Addiction is “natural” — but so is racism, poverty, isolation, abuse….so many natural processes that can lead to terrible outcomes. So we don’t need to call addiction a disease in order to try our best to overcome it.
Really useful graphic summarizing neuroplasticity and addiction …
https://medium.com/365-books-in-a-year/049-rewire-your-brain-a5c922fb324d
Sorry, they included Nora and not you, Marc.
Yes, it’s a good one…..mostly accurate and some great ideas for using neuroplasticity ideas in approaches to recovery. I don’t mind that they didn’t mention me. I’m not that famous….yet.
“There’s something happening here,
What it is ain’t exactly clear.”
–Buffalo Springfield
Yeah, I’m that old, in my sixties. Speaking of the Sixties, despite my many indulgences back in those days, I remember the song very well. And the group. Were they great or what?
I’m new to your work so haven’t read your book, but today read two of your articles on PLOS, “Why Addiction is NOT a Brain Disease” and “A ‘Kindling’ Model of the Development of Addiction.”
Amazing. I feel like I just came out of a trance, having believed for its duration thus far of almost 5 years that my porn addiction is a brain disease. Yes, by overindulgence in porn, I’ve messed up the reward system in my brain, but it seems to me your argument that addiction isn’t a disease is air-tight. As you say, we can’t recover from diseases simply through hard work; and since we wouldn’t call learning a disease, addiction (a learned behavior) isn’t one. How can anyone refute such clear reasoning?
I’ve tried and failed many times to quit porn. Seeing my addiction as a problem and not a disease won’t make quitting easy, but I think seeing it as a disease made it harder, because a disease can be more intimidating than a problem. I have allergies, which can be treated but not cured. But my porn addiction can be overcome. Again, it won’t be easy, so I make no promises, but I like a challenge and I’m no stranger to work.
So thanks for the clarity and the glimmer of hope. And for taking me back to Buffalo Springfield. Time to listen to “Retrospective.”
Hey Marc,
Are you planning a trip to South Africa anytime soon ???
Would love to meet you dude.
You works are currently changing the way i view or viewed addiction for a long time.
We have a great treatment center in Plettenberg Bay and the CEO doesn’t buy the disease concept either. Not sure if its okay to post a URL here ??? Ill do it anyway and you could take a peek (http://valleyofaddiction.com/) at his website and see some of his talks and audio lectures. Brilliant stuff if you ask me. ive also got an article called diseased or deceived by him that id like to email you.
anyway thanks for your work Marc. Really enjoy reading your blog
Even negative reviews are publicity. My father read the Post review and thought your book sounded interesting. I think people who are open to a rational alternative to the Disease dead-end perspective aren’t too put off by reflexive opposition.
I read your Memoirs book while in a residential program. The program was a nightmare and failed to work. The book, on the other hand, clued me into the kind of messaging that stirs me to change. I was thrilled to see an explanation of the brain system paired to cognitive thought patterns as they occur.
It’s been a rough road, but I’m back in school studying psychology and I have a loose dream of working in the mental health field to assist addicts.
I was supremely impressed by the Biology of Desire. I read through the stories twice. Your arguments cleanly aligned with my past experience and my observation of what others go through. I think you hit the nail on the head that addicts need to fall in love with a new narrative, purpose, and identity. The choice/habit perspective when combined with radical acceptance and a warm humanity presents a life worth striving for.
I’m planning to soon hand your book off to someone else who I think is at that magic moment that the message will sink in.
So here is a positive review for you. Thanks for your work.
– John