. ADDITIONAL SUBSTANTIATIONS a a a
17.4.15. TRAGICAL PARADOXES
DISASTER
All prognostic explorations economic, cultural, political and other concerning both the nearest, and the long-term future of Russia are carried out on the basic assumption (allegedly axiomatic, accepted by default) that Russia remains to be Russia with its today's territory and today's population.
However this confidence is unfortunately unwarrantable. Russia experiences demographic disaster.
A high death rate and a low birth rate are not its main reasons. These factors are quantitative, they depend on economic and social circumstances, and consequently they are reversible. But during the last 10÷13 years a new qualitative factor has been arose which brings an imbalance in the population age structure. Narcotic dependences among teenagers has got scales of epidemic. This epidemic is mental, that excludes using of quarantines, effective at medical, infectious epidemics.
An addict lives after transition to a heavy drug not long time at all (if it is possible to name as a life his existence, full of tortures and aimed mainly to deaden these tortures for a short term by means of the next doze), on the average no more than 7 years by the most optimistic expert estimations. But even smaller period of time suffices for him in order to involve in consumption of the same, heavy drug not less than 10 persons. At that a young addict involves those who is not more upward/senior than he. Therefore narcotic dependences not only grows avalanchely, according to the laws of a chain reaction, but also becomes younger. It was young people's, has become adolescence's, becomes children's one. At that the younger an organism is, the more it is vulnerable, the less is its steadier, the more painfully it reacts to poisons, and in particular to drugs. Therefore more severe expert estimations of an average longevity of an addict life 5 and 3 years are more likely.
In these latest 10÷13 years there is observed a steady tendency of growing of the addicts SHARE among teenagers. It grows according to exponent function of time.
here:
Pt the current value;
Po the value t years ago.
Such an annual accretion (25% of already reached level) gives growth in 2 times for 3 years, for 5 years in 3 times, and for 10 years in 10 times. But while from 1989 to 1999 the epidemic was poorly appreciable creeping from 1% to 10%, so now it gallops. [It is characteristic not only for Russia. So, in Uzbekistan for last (2001) year the quantity of heroin addicts has increased in 4 times.] At preservation of this tendency, one ought to expect the full cover of youth by the epidemic by 2009. But the tendency will soon change, growth rate begins to decrease. However one will not have to be pleased of it. It will mean merely that there is already nobody to tempt, that everyone who could be involved in narcotic dependence is already involved. The process of extinction of youth will become irreversible, and after that in the nearest 3÷7 years the population of the country will lose ability of regeneration
The richest territory of Russia will not become depopulated, but it will be filled with immigrants (if not with conquerors). Russia will cease to be Russia in the sense, habitual for us. Objectively, it is a demographic calamity which has already begun. It is a today's reality, not a tomorrow's possibility. The first state structure which is already affected by this is army: there becomes no more those to be called in its ranks. The next will be school: there will becomes no more those to be learnt. And subjectively, it is a tragedy of multitude of families of Russians (if not overwhelming majority of them).
The main PARADOX is that it does not noticed, as by others, and by people of the science, by professional researchers possessing the deepest insight and an ability of severe, impartial analysis. A specialist, planning optimization of work of the Russian sector of his speciality branch for 10-20 and more years forward, reminds the designer decorating a hall for tomorrow's action, not paying attention to a fire storming in it just now.
As to epidemic itself, a number of other paradoxes promote its growth.
SCIENCE as EFFECACY
Today's official approaches to the problem of liberation from narcotic dependences are NOT scientific. Scientific character of work at any problem presupposes availability of several consecutive stages, and among them
a
accumulation of facts and strict description (both qualitative and quantitative) of a phenomenon, a problem;
b analysis of internal causes of the phenomenon, its mechanisms, its nature;
g revelation of a key external MRF Maximally Sensible Factor(-s) which determines the phenomenon state, dynamics of the process, through which one can most economically (or most efficiently) influence upon the state of the problem;
d production of recommendations (the point rather formalized, accomponied with scientific reports, publications, discussions etc).
Absence of any of the stages a÷g makes impossible to name a work the scientific one or scientifically substantiated, and, the main, to solve the problem efficiently.
Official approachs to the drug-problems break this chain of the a÷g stages already at its second ( b ) section. All of them are based upon medicine, upon its and only its resources. But medicine concerns itself only with patient's organism. Medicine works at the levels of physics, chemistry, biology, but NOT psyche. From this point of view today's academical medicine is identical with veterinary science, through which human medicine gets really most of its methods.
But narco-dependence is the pathology, disease just of psyche, is an inner, intra-personal conflict between man's thoughts (which are he himsef) and his emotions (which are he himsef too), between his intentions and his physical acting, his behaviour. But medicine (as also nowadays academic not fundamental psychology) doesn't know mechanisms of interactions between the person's levels.
And the second PARADOX is that it does not want them at all. At that narcotism continues to be considered officially as incurable. The basic Health-protection Ministry's document regulating work of narcologists (the Order No. 140 from 1998.04.28), does not anticipate even a possibility of patient's recover, his convalescence. These terms themselves are not mentioned in the document at all. Maximum to what HM orientates both doctors, and patients is to remission, i.e. long (more or less long) abstention from a drug in spite of drug dependence preservation. By official data, the efficacy of narcology does not exceed 5%. Hence, not less than 95% of state resources allocated to it are spent in vain; but requirements (for example, in mass-mediaๅ) to increase financing these programs are constantly discussed. Is it not the next PARADOX.
A separate PARADOX is that programs which are based upon more effective methods, for example on psychotherapy (its efficiency is about 60%), not only are not financed by the state, but are actively rejected (for example, by groundless suspicions of connection of a method with totalitarian ideology).
MAIN and MINOR
Today the main efforts and means in struggle against narco-business are directed to decision of tactical, particular, technical problems to suppression of manufacture, transport, spread of drugs, are spent for struggle against SATISFACTION of demand. But the OFFER will all the same exist, while a DEMAND exists. Especially SUCH the demand, which is provoked by not weaker emotions than those caused by hungry or thirst. There is a principle difference between disappointment because of absence of favourite, tasty meal and suffering of hunger. It is not casually and not surprisingly that (by Materials of the conference on the international antinarcotic cooperation, Saratov, 21÷23 June, 1999) only 6% of crimes connected with drugs are revealed (and, probably, are stopped), only one (!) from each 17. The others 16 remain not discovered. It's clear, that such activity does not influence essentially upon the situation, and, hence, is practically useless, and the PARADOX is that the tendency to expand these efforts is constant too.
If, instead, to eliminate the demand, so the offer will start to die by NATURAL death. But the decision of this strategic problem is impossible without overcoming of the indicated paradoxes.
The western narcology (as well as all medicine, as well as psychotherapy, as well as many other branches of sphere of services), in which steps goes our domestic narcology, is focused on the process of work with a patient (client) instead of its final result; that is reflected in a system of payment for specialist's work. His fee corresponds to duration of his work, instead of a degree of attained success. At that the important circumstance is ignored: this time is lost by his client too. It is one more PARADOX: the client pays to a specialist not for economy of his time, but for lost of it. Such a system becomes a powerful obstacle both for development highly effective, swift techniques and for application of them.
Efforts of the state to stop satisfaction of demand, attempts to make drugs inaccessible are equivalent to efforts to deprive a patient of his medicine, to deprive a hungry of a bread piece. Essentially this approach does not differ from medieval methods of struggle against mental diseases to chain a patient up and/or torture him in order to exorcize a devil from him. Such a methodological and Weltanschauung retreat is a PARADOX too.
The psychotherapy widely uses intimidations of an addict, type: "You'll die at once if you drink a swig". There are two PARADOXES here. One is that psychotherapists use it. In fact, it is a risk, a potential provocation of patient's suicide. For psychotherapists know, that the infringement of the interdiction is probable enough, and that the death, programmed by such a warning is not excluded.
Suggestion of fear does not liquidate obsession of an addict, his dependence on a drug. The fear becomes a new obsession competing with the first one. A patient becomes a carrier of two obsessions, each of which is fraught with its own troubles, and a combination of the two can be fraught besides with some new.
The second of the PARADOXes is that patients take such an offer. In fact they can put themselves in a situation of just the same danger without participation of a psychotherapist at all, for example: "I'll kill myself if I drink a swig".
Elimination of these paradoxes (as well as less obvious, and therefore not mentioned here, ones) is not only a way (a chance) of rescue of Russia, but also, moreover, one of possible ways to its international leadership on a background of globalization.
If to prevent the DISASTER is impossible, for it has already begun, so to soften its consequences is still possible.
A rescue means is PROPHYLAXIS
A struggle against a fire is begun not with extinguish of its center, but with its localization; suppression of epidemic ought to be begun not with treatment of patients, but with protection of healthy persons by quarantine. Similarly also a struggle against epidemic of psyche dependences on heavy drugs must be begun with prevention of falling into the dependences of those teenagers (children) who has not faced a drug yet.
An adolescent comes to a heavy drug or, rather, falls in a precipice of the dependence not suddenly and at once (b), but as if goes down in it gradually:
| tobacco ฎ alcohol ฎ easy drug ฎ heavy drug |
The closer a person is to the precipice, the more difficult is his returnin to dependence.
It is considered, that "easy" drugs, preparations of marihuana (the Indian hemp, Cannabis sativa) do not cause accustoming, dependence. Even if it is so really, nevertheless it is necessary to mean that only 20% (no more!) consumers of "easy" drugs does not then use "heavy" ones (according to information of the chief narcologist of St Petersburg).
Therefore: in order to prophylaxis would be effective (g), it must be early, must be directed against tobacco, against smoking against the very first step down.
We are not able to expect, whether a narcotic dependence will arise at any concrete person. At least today. But we precisely know (a), that it can arise after any next use of a drug, and even after the very first. This is actual for tobacco too. Therefore it is important (g) to exclude smoking initially, to exclude even the test, the first light up in a life. By the way: dependence on nicotine is the most persistent, obsessive.
The most powerful stimulus for a teenager to begin smoking is (b) his need for self-affirmation. As a rule, he aspires to be (or at least to seem; if not to others so at least to himself) adult, independent, to resemble those, whom he has high opinion about, who is authoritative for him. The problem of prophylaxis will be solved as a social problem all by itself (g), will disappear, if such, for example, opinions
smoking is non-prestige
to smoke is a childishness
serious, solidๅ ("cool") people don't smoke
a smoking person is a person of the second grade
|
become dominating in Russia, as it is just ought to be in a civilized, enlightened society.
Therefore prophylaxis of adolescent narcomania should be begun with adults under the motto of type: if you want your children not to use drugs, stop to smoke!
For those who would like to act so, but cannot . . . there is for them a powerful reserve:
y-(psi)-technique is so more effective than psychotherapy, as psychotherapy is more effective than medicine;
its productivity is not below 80% (by the most severe criteria of an estimation);
it takes on two-three orders (in hundred and more times) less time for getting results than psychotherapy which learns its patient how he can deal with his difficulties; a y-technique-operator solves patient's tasks by himself, and to learn another to make something is always more difficult, than to make it, and not everyone can be learned.
Antinarcotic programs based upon y-technique, cannot, as well as others, to be successful in thenselves, without constant and active administrative support, but they will not demand serious financing (at initial steps) and, on the contrary, will bring considerable incomes ("a saved penny is an earned penny"): only inefficient, methodically helpless programs are unprofitable.
The y-technique gives to mankind the methodical toolkit qualitatively, in principle surpassing those technologies which were possessed till now: y-technique surpasses
abilities of a rational science, as though breaking laws of physics and physiology, being beyond the restrictions, proclaimed by the academic science;
abilities of a traditional (esoteric) science, supplementing art of an operator-magician with scientifically proved technology.
More hundred years ago it has been told:
If abstention from wine is an insignificant price, rid it up for the sake of others,
if it is a greater price, rid it up for the sake of yourself.
Today, in circumstances of the epidemic, this appeal should be inverted:
If abstention from tobacco is a greater price for you, psi-technique will help you
to transform it in small, having liberated you from nicotinic slavery;
if it is an insignificant price, bring it for the sake of others,
for the sake of rescue of the children, another's children,
for the sake of rescue of Russia.
 |
