I concur with Fin - if you broaden your hypothesis to being all oneitis is due to neurotransmitter addiction then it is something I feel anyone would have a hard time to dispute.

The point is though, knowing why you are addicted to one specific girl can't really help you get over it. Unlike a heroine addiction, you can't actually be kept away from your main source of the drug; your own mind. This is why, as I said earlier, distraction by always being busy is how most men tend to get over a bad break up - all while your mind is occupied you don't think about the girl and therefore you get less addicted to the neurotransmitter release (and also your ability to take it).

To be honest, I feel this is why the usual PUA idea of GFTOW is actually not about the women but instead is about simply causing your mind to focus on something else and get distracted enough to break out of a pattern of thinking about the oneitis. Obviously having sex helps you realise you can still get laid (which is a concern for men just out of a relationship) but referring back to the drug addiction example this would be similar to the addict thinking they can't have fun without the drug.

To make a long story short, your mixing up chemicals and drugs. I will first start off by saying I'm no expert but certainly know more than the average chump off the street. Heroin binds to the endogenous opioid receptors in our brains, which deal most commonly with pain and is also a reward system. (Such as for exercise and the such.) The natural chemical our body produces to stimulate these receptors is mainly endorphins, not dopamine, just wanted to clear that up. Alright so I know that's not the main point of this thread so here we go.

During love, sex, orgasm, and the whole banaza, our bodies release quite a bit of oxytocin, serotonin, and a few other not as well known chemicals. The two chemicals above (oxytocin and serotonin) don't have serious physical withdrawal symptoms hence not throwing up and becoming violent physically ill when you get dumped on your ass. As with heroin the physical withdrawal symptoms are well, lets just say go read a few stories on the internet and you'll never want to try opiates. So my point being heroin and one-itis are no where near related. Just to reiterate this is because not a whole lot of endorphins (or dopamine for the sake of your argument) gets released during love and infatuation hence the absence of severe physical withdrawal symptoms. But remember this is all coming from a nice logical standpoint, and like Madals said love is way deeper than the logic can comprehend. Thanks, Marky Mark

P.S. If some of this is unclear, let me know.

_________________
Make it Rain

Curious: What's your educational background on this or related subjects?
Notice: What exactly is the mechanism by which endorphins work and how do they relate to the dopamine pathway? Why would you say that you're familiar with the subject, and imply that there's not a connection between dopamine and opioids, practically in the same breath?

I think you're wrong-- I think that at least part of what's going on with oneitis is natural opioids.

_________________
When in Doubt, Freeze Her Out.

"Have you read these books?" "Do you know this area of academia?" "Do you know about (this) theory that agrees with me?" "What is the *insert jargon heavy term*?"

Seems like a common response from you!

Plenty of people on forums have discussions on sociology, politics, history without trying to size each other up, they let the referencing and rhetoric do the work. By comparison to real academics, this "what is your education?" approach to discussion, smacks of intellectual bluffing.


----
Remind us all, What is the point of this thread?

That dopamine is involved in attachment?.... ...well duh!

I'm just always interested in who I'm talking to. For all I know he's a cognitive scientist. If so, I'd have to defer to his expertise.

On highly technical subjects, education actually matters.
Except that I did so both in this case and in the discussion I had with you where you insinuated that you'd read three books on evolutionary biology and behavior. But then you backpedaled about that. You hadn't actually read them.

Intellectual bluffing indeed.

As for the rest of it, you sound rather miffed. I do understand-- it's difficult to argue with people who are informed on a given subject or even science in general. And very annoying when those people simply refuse to engage in "debates" with the uninformed. Usually we simply don't have time.

My main science education is in biology. My first college class in the subject was in 1982-- I got a C in it but I was twelve at the time. My main area of interest is evolutionary biology but I've also read rather extensively on other subjects including virology, evolution of antibiotic resistance, novel anti-cancer agents and antiviral drugs.

In the last, oh, 30 years.

_________________
When in Doubt, Freeze Her Out.

You're discussing neurology and attachment, cognitive scientists are interested in tottaly different questions than what you are describing. Good to see that your highly prized education is working out!

While we're at it.

Psychological enquiry =/= neurological enquiry.
On highly technical matters people lay out premises and infer or deduce a conclusion then discuss it with references to studies and good a priori logic. This thread on the other hand consists of.....

"OMG guys, this junkie I know describes what its like quitting heroin, and it sounds alot like one itis!"

How very techincal! LOL
I'm miffed becuase I help run first year tutorials and there is always a know it all like you, with horrible manners who thinks he's sigmund freud.

You're asking people on a pick up forum for credentials in the fields of neurology. What response do you actually expect? Most of these kids are barely 18!

---
You have a point in dopamines relation to attachment and it you may be right in its withdrawal effects being caused by the withdrawal of dopamine, I'm not going to fault you there.

The way you communicate it and discuss it with others in this thread is obnoxious and arrogant.

Well, to find out if they actually know what they're talking about. He insinuated that he had some qualification on the subject and I was simply asking him what his qualification was.
See above. Sorry you're miffed, bro.

_________________
When in Doubt, Freeze Her Out.

Here's the deal.

Why not just discuss it with him?

If someone knows the subject they will be able to make that clear to you through their obvious knowledge, there is no need at all for an academic dick swinging contest. Which often reveals nothing more except who sat in a class room and absorbed enough to pass the course.

I just cut to the chase and asked.
Anti-intellectualism is hilarious.

Let me know when you're no longer miffed.

That leads me around to the question I was wondering during our last discussion.

I'm contributing content here why?

You made a good point that this is a forum for PUA people and not for the kind of thing I'm interested in [that is to say... how can I put it... the stuff that you seem to be annoyed by]. The mistake was mine and you're right about that.

_________________
When in Doubt, Freeze Her Out.

You really think that will give you anything meaningful? I've met people who've done degrees in psychology who still cling to Freudian approaches of therapy! Leave asking about degrees until you've had the discussion, don't insult people by making them jump through hoops to validate their opinion!
You think I'm anti-intellectual...
Pay attention to the next bit spandrel.

There's nothing annoying with what you are interested in, psychology should be used in PU much more than it currently is, and I do see the applications of neurological research even within the inherintly behavioural-centric paradigm that exists in modern reductivist approaches to psychology. I can Jargon Jive with the best of them as you can see

What I am annoyed with is your un-relenting arrogance towards people in demanding that they qualify themselves before you respond to their thoughts.

Fin - we are talking about neurological factors in attachment here which is proper science, you sure your qualified with your "I keep telling people its a science but nobody believes me" background

On a serious note though - this is actually quite an interesting topic so don't start flaming in it or it will have to be locked

*takes a deep breathe*

1st read wilson/leary's 8-fold circuitry of the brain, remember the map is births territory n I will go on...

One, if you are looking at your brain based on that model, opiatez turn on your first 'circuit'. This is the bio-survival circuit and first gets programmed during breast feeding. It is primarily concerned with suckling n comfort. Different imprints happen and the results play out however...what should be remembered is what dope feels like! That warm happy content tired blanket of mmmm. It turns on your mind to feel comfortable n at easy. It is why it has been said that opiate addicts r attempting to realive their childhood...the want the infantile bliss. When you combine that with thefact the imprint takes place based on the attachment to the mother, it should be rather too easy to see the connection when you have an attachment to another female. It will produce thesame anxious scared feeling you get when the drugs r running low n u kno u need more. Are they acting upon the same neurotransmitters...of fuckin course :-p. Our happy juices are, dopamine, seritonine(sp) n neuroepharine (sp), so everything that changes your brain chemis always effect all of those, dopamine being the one most affected. In conclusion although there are similarities in your brain the addictions are completely different. The opiate addicts r longing for the bliss of infancy, while the one-itis addict is longing for the bliss of intimacy. Hope this helps...I can elaborate if needed.

Spandrel I didn't mean to sound arrogant or cocky or like I'm some professional, which I don't think I did any of those. Like Fin said trying to argue through an academic dick swinging contest gets nothing done and the way you were responding suggests to me your insecure and use your academia to fall back on to make up for your insecurities. As I said, I'M NOT AN EXPERT. And to make it a little more clear NOT A PROFESSIONAL IN THE FIELD OF NEUROLOGY or anything related to the brain or body for that matter. Hope I got my point across? I was simply giving what knowledge I had, some of which may be a little faulty, AS I'M NOT AN EXPERT. But one thing I'm sure of is one-itis is not identical to a heroin addiction, maybe related but not identical. Thanks, Marky Mark

_________________
Make it Rain

Alright I was pressed for time early and had less than 5 minutes to write that so I'm just going to add to the previous post. I'm not one to normally throw out insults as I'm an all around positive person but seems like you get a kick out of throwing around negative antagonistic remarks so here we go.

I like how your tossing around your BIG BAD DEGREE and your 12 year old accomplishments like it means anything to any of us. Oh wow I'm so impressed that you were in college at 12!!! All that's says to me is you were an anti-social loser who was forced to grow up too fast. Also, so much for a degree in BIOLOGY and whatever else you partake in, Since when does pure dopamine get supplemented to treat a heroin addiction? I'm pretty sure it's something similar to methadone, buprenorphine, etc.

Ok since when did I say there's not a connection between dopamine and opioids?? I said the MAIN receptors heroin targets are endogenous opioid receptors and the natural chemical that directly stimulates the same receptors are endorphins, not dopamine. Dopamine does get released and play a part with both a shot of heroin and also love. But IN MY OPINION, dopamine and ESPECIALLY endorphins don't play as much of a role in love as other chemicals. And a heroin addiction is mainly an enormous endorphin addiction. This is however just my hypothesis, so don't go asking me to cite all my work like you think you need to.

For all of you having to endure my above rant, I sincerely apologize and it won't happen often if even ever again in a different thread but I absolutely despise over zealous negative creeps like Spandel. And for Spandel, we'll just say all of this and my previous posts are purely hypothesis by me, myself, and I and have absolutely positively no educating backing or scientific experimentation or proof or backing of any kind whatsoever, just so you don't shit yourself sitting right there.

I think this thread was best summed up by the brilliant man who said, leave one-itis addiction at a general neurotransmitter addiction of the sorts as nobody can argue that, or something to that extent. Time to get back to the real world. Peace, Marky Mark

_________________
Make it Rain

Just for the record - marky Mark, dopamine cannot be directly given to people as it cannot cross the blood brain barrier. The only way I know of that people can be given it is via L-dopa which is made into dopamine within the brain (SPAM for Parkinson's).