opium-den2 Opium is highly addictive. Tolerance (the need for higher and higher doses to maintain the same effect) and physical and psychological dependence develop quickly. Withdrawal from opium causes nausea, tearing, yawning, chills, and sweating.

IF YOU BELIEVE SOMEONE CLOSE TO YOU IS ADDICTED TO OPIUM, PLEASECONTACT NATIONAL TREATMENT CENTERS FOR A FREE, CONFIDENTIAL, NO OBLIGATION CONSULTATION AND TREATMENT INFORMATION ON WHAT YOU CAN DO TO HELP YOUR LOVED ONE.

As long ago as 100 AD, opium had been used as a folk medicine, taken with a beverage or swallowed as a solid. Only toward the middle of the 17th century, when opium smoking was introduced into China, did any serious addiction problems arise. In the 18th century opium addiction was so serious there that the Chinese made many attempts to prohibit opium cultivation and opium trade with Western countries. At the same time opium made its way to Europe and North America, where addiction grew out of its prevalent use as a painkiller.

How Opium Addiction Happens:

Alkaloids found in Opium will build up in your system and stay there for 24 to 48 hours, so using every other day is going to get you into trouble real fast. If you have been using for awhile, try to taper off gradually to reduce the amount of alkaloids in your bloodstream, this will also lessen the withdrawal symptoms somewhat. It takes a strong willed person to be able to resist the temptations of Opium, but if you don’t, she will teach you a harsh lesson, one that you won’t soon forget.

Opium consists of many chemicals that affect the human body. The most notable of the opium alkaloids are morphine and codeine. Both are narcotic in their effects, but morphine is the more potent of the two. When morphine, codeine, or any other opiate is introduced into the body, a host of things begin to occur. The first time user of opiates usually will become nauseous and even vomit. The pupils constrict, pulse slows, blood pressure falls, and respiration slows. The user begins to feel warm, euphoric, and relaxed. As time progresses, feelings of fear, panic, and anxiety lessen. Depending on how much has been taken, this progresses into a drowsy, dreamy state leading to a deep sometimes-dreamless sleep. Repeated use leads to more appreciation of the narcotic effects of opiates. However, repeated use also leads to addiction.

Opiates are a very determinate bunch. Unlike some drugs, if you habitually use opiates, you will become physically and possibly psychologically dependent. There are three different sequences that occur with opiates. The first of these is physical dependence. Physical dependence occurs when the body has become used to the opiate being there, and has adapted to using it in order to function properly. If the opiate is suddenly stopped, withdrawal symptoms will occur. These include restlessness, anxiety, rapid pulse, increased blood pressure, crying, runny nose, yawning, muscle spasms, back pain, tremors, and many other symptoms. These will usually begin 8 – 24 hours after the last dose, peak within 48 – 72 hours, and subside in about 7 – 10 days. Their severity depends on the opiate used, how often, and how much.

The next sequence of events is tolerance. Tolerance occurs when the body gets used to a certain amount of the opiate being there, and it requires more and more to get the desired effect. Tolerance varies widely from person to person. The last of these is psychological dependence. Psychological dependence occurs when the person begins to ?crave? the opiate effects. This type of dependence is known as addiction, and is very powerful and hard to overcome. It occurs after using the opiate for a long period of time, and last for a long time after stopping the opiate. Sometimes, even a lifetime. It doesn?t occur in all opiate users, but can before you even know it. Addiction to opiates is a long hard battle to beat.

Opiate Addiction News:

Iowa U Students Busted for Opium Pods

Posted by ajones — April 6, 2003

Two ISU students were arrested Wednesday after members from the Central Iowa Drug Task Force discovered seven storage bins containing growing mushrooms and more than 100 opium poppy pods in their apartment, said ISU Police Capt. Gene Deisinger.

Ryan Paul Peterson, senior in environmental science, and Nicholas Andrew Jones, senior in computer engineering, were each charged with manufacture of psilocybin mushrooms, possession of raw opium poppy with intent to deliver and two tax stamp violations for the opium and mushrooms.

Task force members received a tip from an individual who believed someone was manufacturing drugs at 1221 Frederiksen Court.

The task force is made up of officers from ISU Police, Ames Police, the Story County Sheriff’s Office and the Boone County Sheriff’s office, Deisinger said.

Officers from the task force were invited into Peterson and Jones’ residence, 1221 Frederiksen Court, Wednesday during a follow-up interview.

At that time, officers observed drugs in the apartment in plain view, Deisinger said.

One officer stayed behind in the apartment, while other officers went to a judge to obtain a search warrant, he said.

Following a search of the apartment, officers discovered Peterson and Jones were both growing mushrooms in their bedrooms and had several opium poppy pods, he said.

Police also seized several dozen quart jars they believe possibly contain mushroom spores.

Deisinger said the reason Peterson and Jones were charged with intent to deliver is most likely because of the large quantity of drugs found at the residence. He said there is no evidence at this time either were successful in delivering the drugs to others.

Deisinger said a drug bust this large is not common at Iowa State. He said an ISU Police officer arrested a Towers Residence Association resident for growing mushroom spores in a glass jar in December.

However, he said that particular incident was “not nearly the magnitude” of these recent drug related arrests.

Dean of Students Pete Englin could not be reached for comment Thursday.

Peterson and Jones were transported to the Story County Jail Wednesday where they are being held on $175,000 bond.

If convicted on all felony charges, each could face up to 30 years in jail and fines ranging from $3,500 to $34,010, according to the Iowa Code.

History of Opium

Excavations of the remains of neolithic settlements in Switzerland (the Cortaillod culture, 32002600 B.C.), have shown that Papaver was already being cultivated then; perhaps for the food value in the seeds (45% oil), which we know as poppy seeds. The slightly narcotic property of this plant was undoubtedly already known then.

The milky fluid extracted from the plant’s ovary is highly narcotic after drying. This is then opium. The writings of Theophrastus (3rd century B.C.) are the first known written source mentioning opium. The word opium derives from the Greek word for juice of a plant, after all, opium is prepared from the juice of Papaver somniferum.

The Arabic doctors were well aware of the beneficial effects of opium and Arabic traders introduced it to the Far East. In Europe it was reintroduced by Paracelsus (14931541) and in 1680 the English doctor Sydenham could write:

‘Among the remedies which it has pleased Almighty God to give to man to relieve his sufferings, none is so universal and so efficacious as opium.’

In the eighteenth century opium smoking was popular in the Far East and the opium trade was a very important source of income for the colonial rulers the English, the Dutch, with even the Spanish getting their share in the Philippines. Although opium was readily available in Europe at that time, its use was not problematical.

Opium contains a considerable number of different substances, and in the nineteenth century these were isolated. In 1806 Friedrich Serturner was the first to extract one of these substances in its pure form. He called morphine after Morpheus, the Greek god of sleep. Codeine (Robiquet, 1832) and papaverine (Merck, 1848) followed. These pure substances supplanted the use of raw opium for medical purposes. Like opium they were frequently used as painkillers and against diarrhea. The invention of the hypodermic in the midnineteenth century lead to widespread use of morphine intravenously as a painkiller.

In the United States opiate use rose greatly in the last century, partly because of the opiumsmoking Chinese immigrants, and partly because many of those wounded in the Civil War were given it intravenously. In addition many ‘patent medicines’ contained opium extract: laudanum, paregoric, etc. It was partly due to this that morphine also became fashionable as a ‘remedy’ for opium addiction; for if the doctor gave an opium addict morphine, he was no longer interested in opium so he was cured.

This was also the case in Europe and although its use was at that time much more widespread than is now regarded as acceptable for medical purposes, it led to few problems.

At the end of the last century, the United States started to try to curb the nonmedical use of opium, especially in China, and later tried to prohibit it. American interest here was twofold: they wanted an economically strong China as a market for their own products, and the moral element played a major role. As a result of the SpanishAmerican War, the Philippines became American and the new rulers were confronted with a widespread problem.The American bishop of the Philippines, Charles Henry Brent, carried on a moral crusade in the US against the opium trade and opium addiction, and found widespread support. And not only because he was riding on the waves of Prohibition, for as we have already seen, unlike the European countries, the US also had a domestic opium problem.

China, with its economy weakening, also saw the rise of a strong antiopium movement. England and the Netherlands, however, looked upon this development with disfavor as the cultivation of the papaver was a very important source of income for Britain and Dutch East India.

In 1909, under American pressure, representatives from countries with colonial possessions in the Far East and Persia met at Shanghai to hold the International Opium Conference, chaired by Bishop Brent. This conference laid the foundation for the International Opium Conference in The Hague in 1911. The English proposed that for participation in this second conference and the treaty that would result from it the condition be set that the effects of the treaty should extend to the preparation and trade in cocaine and morphine. The Germans had considerable difficulty with this condition as their pharmaceutical industry substantial interests in this area.

The conference lead to the first international convention, the Opium Convention of 23 January 1912, although it went no further than obliging the affiliated countries to take measures to control the trade in opium within their own national legal systems. The Germans were eventually successful in having the wording changed in all articles to do with morphine and cocaine from ‘undertake to’ to ‘try to’. The ratification of the convention was ultimately made dependent on countries not present at the conference, in short it was as leaky as a sieve.

A second conference, held in The Hague in 1913, was equally unsuccessful in effectuating the convention and it was only at the third conference in The Hague in 1914 that a protocol was signed allowing the convention to take effect without the signatures of all the participating countries.

The United States immediately gave substance to this convention with the Harrison Narcotics Act of 17 December 1914 which not only controled the trade, but went much further by making illegal possession of substances named in the convention by unauthorised persons. A maximum fine of $2000 and/or five years imprisonment was the penalty set. The basis for the criminalization of the use of drugs had now been formalized!

World War I brought all efforts to a standstill, and the matter only came up again after the Treaty of Versailles was signed. In this convention the US introduced the provision that all countries which had not signed and/or ratified the convention of 1912 should still do this. The convention was handed over to the League of Nations in 1920 for enforcement.

In England the Dangerous Drugs Act came into force in 1920. Of interest here is that while the Americans also outlawed the use of heroin for medical purposes, the English upheld this usage and even found the provision of opiates, in this case heroin, to addicts to be acceptable medical practice.

As stated earlier, the treaty of 1912 was ‘as leaky as a sieve’ because it allowed the states to determine for themselves when and how they would fulfil their obligations with regard to opium, which of course kept the use of opium legal until that time. The chemical derivatives did, however, fall under this· commitment: their use was illegal, making these substances more than opium the object of the battle. To make this battle more effective the League of Nations held two conferences which led to two Geneva Conventions: one of 11 February and one on 19 February 1925.

The first convention concerned limiting the domestic production of and trade in opium in the colonies in the Far East. The second extended the number of substances covered under the Convention to include the coca leaf, raw cocaine, ecgonine and Indian hennep. Also, the states were to step up monitoring of the preparation, trade and possession of the ‘numbing’ substances involved.

Use as such was not made a punishable offence. After all, opium was still being legally cultivated and consumed in the East. An opium monopoly was seen as an effective way of combatting misuse.

In 1931 there was an international change of course and efforts were also made to forbid the legal production and consumption of opium for nonmedical purposes. New conventions were signed for this purpose: the conventions of Geneva (13 July 1931), of Bangkok (27 November 1931) and Geneva (26 June 1936) a more and more complicated network of conventions. The last convention especially for the suppression of the illicit traffic in narcotics went further towards criminalizing the use of drugs by requiring the convention partners to lay down harsher punishment, in this case with imprisonment for all offenders of the provision from the relevant conventions.

Ironically enough the Americans did not sign this one because it did not go far enough.

After World War II the United Nations took over the matter. The Economic and Social Council of this organization set up the U.N. Commission of Narcotic Drugs. This Commission, made up then of 40 member states, started preparations for a worldwide drugs policy.

This resulted in the Single Convention (New York, 30 March 1961) which replaced all previous conventions with one.

Under this convention all parties are required to take the necessary legal and administrative measures to restrict the trade, production and possession of narcotics to scientific and medical purposes. All activities which are not directed towards these scientific and medical purposes must be considered as punishable offenses.

The convention has four lists of substances with regard of which a different regime of supervision applies, and on recommendation of the World Health Organization (WHO) the UN can add certain new substances to these lists. However it must be shown that these substances present a serious threat for public health or are involved in illicit traffic. The first is a clear criterium, the second clearly not. As long as a substance is not forbidden, production, trade and use can, of course, not be illegal!

Depending on the degree of misuse, substances from one list can be put on another. National legislation would then have to be adapted to these changes.

It is of interest with this to note when the European ratified all these conventions drug abuse was not a social problem. Unlike all other laws, the opium laws in Europe were not introduced as a reaction to a social problem, but were more or less imposed by foreign countries, namely the United States, the ‘…barbarians of the West’ for their ‘extraordinary savage idea of stamping out all people who happen to disagree … with their social theories’ against narcotics, against alcohol and in ‘their recent treatment of Socialists’. NOTE 13

And, the world was a victim of American puritanism, for in Europe it was really only still in a few Chinese communities that nonmedical opium was used. It was no longer a problem in Asia either now that the aggressive sales tactics by the colonial rulers had ended. That is also disputed in most European countries, but in the Netherlands, in Amsterdam and in Rotterdam, it was tolerated as long as its use remained limited to the Chinese.

CONTACT US AND WE CAN HELP.

Call Anytime, Any Day (844) 523-2021
or

Click Here for intervention and an immediate call back

Testimonials

  • "I was out of control and headed for disaster. I needed help but was denying there was even a problem that I couldn't handle on my own. The counselor came to my home, worked with me and I was in treatment later that day. The intervention saved my life. It's over one year later and my life is better than ever, thank you!"
    - Liz – San Francisco, CA
  • "Addictive Behavior Management has helped me get through treatment and stay in recovery. Getting healthy can be more difficult than imagined after being addicted. The counselors worked with me and now I'm back in school and enjoying life. Thank you!"
    - Lisa – New York, NY
  • "Our son was agressive and manipulative, we couldn't even start to talk to him about his problem. He was in some legal trouble and we feared he would end up in jail or worse. The counselor came to our house after we set up a treatment plan and then drove him into the treatment center that night. We could not have helped our son without the intervention."
    - Phoenix, AZ
  • "My husband is the best thing that ever happened to me and is the loving father of our three daughters. I love him and knew something had to be done, our marriage and household was unraveling. I tried to get him help on my own, but he wouldn't get real treatment. The intervention helped me understand what it takes to get someone you love into treatment and save a marriage. Thank you for all your help."
    - Lori – Orange County, CA
View All Testimonials