The people who say they need 3 cups of black coffee to start their day are just addicts with a high tolerance that experience mild withdrawal symptoms each morning.
If you feel like that, it’s your body crying for you to take a break.
If you like an occasional cup of coffee or energy drink to get through something, then that’s fine. But if you ever feel like one isn’t working like it used to, you should take a break from caffeine to reset your tolerance, not up the dosage like an addict.
So by that interpretation, a high functioning alcoholic is not an addict?
“High functioning” is typically used to describe someone who is demonstrating competency at work. Academia, law, and medicine are full of these types. I’ve worked for/with a lot of them.
Home and social interactions definitely show the strain before professional life does. It’s possible for an alcoholic to function at very high levels professionally for years, but I can guarantee there are social impacts in their personal domain. Their old friendships erode, and change towards other heavy users. There are impacts in spouses and children. Their driving record may become affected, financial strains etc.
I’m confused. To me it sounds like social impacts are the results of an addiction, not part of the addiction itself. I would have thought it’s the addiction to a substance that drives changes in behaviour and results in the symptoms you describe - impacts to family, friendships, social standing. Whereas you’re saying that a body’s compulsive wanting for a specific substance is not an addiction if it doesn’t come with those social impacts. That just doesn’t sound logical to me, but hey, I’m not an expert.
Consider food. Most of eat several times a day. Every day. It’s not a problem because most people keep it under control and don’t overeat.
Some of us (me included) have a slightly disordered eating pattern. I binge eat occasionally followed by a period of restrictive eating punctuated by microbinges etc. Is it a problem? I’m 25 pounds overweight, but I hold a job, maintain an active social life, and even play a couple sports (badly) in rec leagues. My eating doesn’t affect my household finances so it’s all good.
If you watch one of those tv shows focused on very large people (and I don’t intend to body shame here) you will see something different. There are people who’s excessive eating negatively impacts their health and mobility. In many of the cases portrayed they are unable to hold a job, and much of a shows drama will focus on deteriorating personal relationships as people “choose” compulsive eating over the people in their life.
This range of behavior is true for all addictions. Many people can handle dabbling in the drug or activity. Many will occasionally wander over the line into problematic behavior but wander back. And some spiral in a pattern of misuse that is self destructive. It’s not the attraction of cocaine or Molly or Twinkies that’s the problem. It’s the continuation of use despite the negative impacts on the users life.
Policy makers struggle with this too. The basis of “harm reduction” as an approach is that we don’t judge the use, only the impact on the users life. If we give people access to safe regulated supplies, safe injection sites etc. many people can maintain jobs and keep their families together etc. Much of the negative impacts come not from use itself, but from the way we force people to behave in order to meet their needs.