Surely there’s an even better descriptive name than “under-dosed”, I just meant it as an example of a more descriptive name.
Pseudo-addiction is a bad bad term. I get my brain into an inception-level loop if I try to contrast pseudo-addiction to addicting, even clearly knowing the definitions.
The problem for me with "under-dosed" is the assumption that any dosing level is correct. The post linked to by parent talks about a Xanax prescription for anxiety. Prescribing benzos for anxiety causes severe harm. (The linked post doesn't say "a small amount when needed", but talks about "three times a day".)
Note that medication is only advised after other treatment has failed, and that the recommendation in 1.2.25 says
"Do not offer a benzodiazepine for the treatment of GAD in primary or secondary care except as a short-term measure during crises. Follow the advice in the 'British national formulary' on the use of a benzodiazepine in this context. [new 2011]"
This also applies to many people being given opioids for pain. Obviously, some people really need opioids and we shouldn't restrict access for those people. But many people given opioids are suffering side effects from the opioids, and are still in pain.
Of course unethical drug companies want to sell more medications to this patient group, so they tell doctors that these patients are under-dosed. They're not under-dosed, they are simultaneously over-dosed and under-treated.
Pseudo-addiction is a bad bad term. I get my brain into an inception-level loop if I try to contrast pseudo-addiction to addicting, even clearly knowing the definitions.