The article is saying what the person in question is saying: that b/c of the hurricane he is no longer hooked on drugs.
But in the article it states that even after the hurricane hit and when he fled to Wisconsin he continued to trade his possessions for drugs. Only after he was broke and without possessions that HE decided that he check into a facility.
He could say it was the hurricane if the hurricane destroyed the drug trade or destroyed all his drugs. But even after the hurricane for 4 months he continued his drug use. 4 months is an extended period. I don\’t really see a strong correlation between ending his drug use and the hurricane. But I do see a strong correlation to him having zero possessions to trade for drugs and the end of his drug use.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Or just that he ran out of possessions to trade for drugs?
No, it said in the article it was the hurricane. Pretty sure about that, but I could re-read it.
The article is saying what the person in question is saying: that b/c of the hurricane he is no longer hooked on drugs.
But in the article it states that even after the hurricane hit and when he fled to Wisconsin he continued to trade his possessions for drugs. Only after he was broke and without possessions that HE decided that he check into a facility.
He could say it was the hurricane if the hurricane destroyed the drug trade or destroyed all his drugs. But even after the hurricane for 4 months he continued his drug use. 4 months is an extended period. I don\’t really see a strong correlation between ending his drug use and the hurricane. But I do see a strong correlation to him having zero possessions to trade for drugs and the end of his drug use.
Yea, your right, what a stupid article.