FACTS, NOT OPINIONS

Last week's issue of The Echo had a story written by Joe Andreoni
titled, "The Last Straw?" This article had good intentions, but
unfortunately, Joe is very ill-informed on drug dependency (as an
illness) and drug policy in general. Although it is not his fault, his
information is one of a very closed-minded person.

Thus, his views seem more like he is ranting and raving because he
simply does not like some things, whether or not they are actually
true. No offense Joe, I'm just simply going to correct some of your
"dislikings" and somehow make a "believer" out of you.

Is drug dependency an illness? Yes, according to Johns Hopkins
researchers and other prominent doctors and psychologists across the
country. But according to Joe Andreoni, it isn't. Based on what you
may ask? An annotated bibliography? A citation? Anything? No. Here is
his proof. "Don't tell me Darryl Strawberry is suffering from some
illness. I've already heard it." Well, just because you've heard the
same old story, doesn't mean that it isn't true. He is right though,
Darryl can help himself.

Joe, I'll state some more of your quotes that I agree with. "If he
took better care of himself," "How many more chances can we give this
guy?" "How about saying enough is enough?" "...at some point he must
be held accountable for his actions," "He's solely to blame for his
situation. No one did this to him, he did this to himself." There, I
agreed with you. But, now it's time to disagree.

"Don't tell me Darryl Strawberry is suffering from some illness."
"Instead, Strawberry turned himself into some junkie," "He took his
ability for granted and will now have the rest of his life to wonder
why."

Let's analyze this. Darryl is suffering from an illness. Sure the MLB
keeps letting him back in, but come on, it's no longer a sport, it's
an industry; just buy yourself back in. Drug abuse/drug dependency is
an illness. Why wold people be going back to it if it weren't? It's
clinically proven to be a disease, with relapses.

How do you know he turned himself into a junkie? You don't. It's just
an over-opinionated hypothesis that has no basis in reason. And what's
your proof that he is a junkie? Is he a loser because he "uses" drugs?
No. One is not a loser. There are a variety of factors. One must draw
the line. Just because someone uses drugs does not mean that s/he
abuses drugs. Please draw the line and make the distinction.

Strawberry did not take his ability for granted; he simply has a
problem; can you say relapse? R-E-L-A-P-S-E. Relapse. But here is what
I really detest, or like; I can't tell the difference (insert
sarcastic comment here). "The more we say Strawberry's addiction is an
illness, the more relapses he seems to have." Not. We are not simply
saying it, because it IS an illness, or else why would he keep going
back? Maybe he likes it, okay; but relapse is a prevalent factor in
drug dependency.

You said, "I hate it when people say drug dependency is an illness,
and the abusers are the victims. Quit making excuses. It takes more
guts to say no than it does to give in to temptation anyway." I know
you meant well with this comment, however, I feel the need to offer
some criticism. Drug dependency IS an illness. It is a disease. There
is dependency, withdrawal, and relapse.

Just because you don't like when people say it, doesn't mean it isn't
a reality. That's just ignorance talking. Don't pass judgment on
something simply because you hate hearing it. That just makes you look
weak. Hating something because you hate it isn't a justification. Look
it up in the books, Joe. Then make a case for it. It does take more
guts to say no, but when addiction grabs a hold of you, a relapse of
any kind is likely to happen.

I'm not saying Strawberry deserves a reprieve. I'm sorry if anything I
have written seems too harsh. That's a first for me. It's just that
Joe Andreoni is talking just to be heard, and that's alright. Don't
get me wrong; all sides need to be heard. Just back up what you are
saying with factual information, and not dribble.

Dave Bonan

Note: This was a rebuttal to the March 7th issue