By Adi Jaffe, Ph.D.
Dr. Dodes recent article, apparently trying to blow up the myth of addictionas a neurophysiological disorder, sounded persuasive, although its underpinning was oversimplified and its understanding of the brain-science involved in addiction, and other associated mental health disorders, was lacking. Hopefully, by presenting a more complete picture of the evidence for a brain-aspect to addiction, I can un-bias the discussion somewhat.I, for one, dont believe that neuroscience will ever be the only factor important in addiction an individuals environment, social influences, and other factors will always end up playing important parts as well still, I think that to dismiss all of the evidence for biological factors at play in the development of addiction is foolhardy. Especially when theres so much of it that was glossed over in Dr. Dodes introduction.
Pleasure center activation is only part of the picture in addiction
Firstly, supporters of the notion that addiction is, at least partly, an outcome of specific brain function point not only to pleasure center activation, but also to a whole host of findings showing genetic variability that is either protective from, or a risk factor for, dependence on drugs and likely also behavioral addiction like eating disorders, compulsive gambling, and maybe sex addiction as well (you can start out looking up ALDH2-2 variability and alcoholism and cocaine addiction, DRD4 and stimulant addiction, and many more).
While it is true that all those who consume addictive substance activate the brain similarly, there are considerable differences in the specific of that activation in reaction to drugs. Some release more dopamine while others have more active versions of specific important receptors; neurotransmitter recycling is quick in some, but not all, and drug metabolism is different in different individuals in ways that have been shown to be important not just for addiction risk, but also for the probability of treatment success. Just look at the nicotine and CPY26 literature for an example. Its right there.
Additionally an entire body of literature exists that shows differential activation, as well as structural differences, between addicts and non-addicts in regions as varied as the OFC, PFC, Insula, and more. This is not to mention a slew of evidence that shows different behavioral test performance on risk-taking, impulsivity, and delay-discounting, all personality variables highly associated with addiction. If one simply ignore all of this evidence, it may be easy to believe that there is no biological explanation for these phenomena, but thats just wrong.
To say that mesolimbic activation (what the good doctor called pleasure centers) is the only evidence for physiological factors in addiction is dismissive at best.
Drug addiction develops in only some drug users
The notion that not everyone who takes drugs becomes addicted is nothing close to evidence against a brain explanation for addiction. Everyones motorcortex, striatum, and substantia nigra (the areas of the brain responsible for movement) activate in the same way during movement, but only a small group ends up suffering from Parkinsons or Huntingtons disorders. One fact does not preclude the other but instead may specifically point to the fact the group which develops the disorder has somewhat different neurological functioning. Researchers arent concerned with explaining why all individuals can become addicted to drugs, but rather why that small subgroup develops compulsive behavior. A short reading of the literature makes that fact pretty clear. Additionally, while Dr. Dodes claims otherwise, imaging technology HAS produced evidence explaining this mystery, including differences in the ways addicted smokers respond to smoking-related triggers, and an increased dopamine response in cocaine addicts to cues, and well as to cocaine.
As mentioned in the motor disorder section above, ingestion of chemicals is not at all necessary for brain disorders to occur or indeed develop later in life. Dr. Dodes example of shifting addiction could be used as evidence for an underlying neurological difference just as well as it would serve to make his point Or even better. If theres a faulty basic mechanism attached to rewarding behaviors, it doesnt really matter what the behavior is, does it? Sex addiction, gambling, and more can all be explained using a similar mechanism, though drugs of abuse may just have a more direct impact. I know, Ive written about them all.
The Vietnam vet heroin story used by Dr. Dodes as evidence that emotional, rather than physiological, factors are responsible for addiction actually fits right in line with the notion of predisposition and underlying differences, and Im surprised to hear a physician point to group differences as an indicator of no neurobiological basis. Indeed, when it comes to the emotional reactivity associated with drug associated cues, normal learning literature, as well as drug-specific learning research, has revealed over and over that drug-related stimuli activate brain regions associated with drug reward in the same way that natural-reward predictors do for things like food and sex. Once again, these facts are part of the basic understanding of the neuroscience of learning, with or without drug abuse involvement.
My own dissertation work shows that it is very likely that only a subsection of those exposed to nicotine will develop abnormal learning patterns associated with that drug. However, among those, learning about drug-related stimuli (as in triggers) continues in an exaggerated manner long after the other normal animals have stopped learning. That sort of difference can lead to a seriously problematic behavioral-selection problem whereby drug-related stimuli are attended to, and pursued, more so than other, non-drug-related ones. If that sounds familiar, it should, since drug users continuously pursue drug-associated activities and exposures in a way that seems irrational to the rest of the world. It just might be due to such a mechanism and others like it.
Some important points about science in Dr. Dodes article
One very true fact about mental health pointed out by Dr. Dodes is that diseases like schizophrenia, which used to be explained simply as demon possession and evidence of witchcraft can now be, to a large extent, explained by the study of behavioral neuroscience and cognition. The same is true for bipolar disorder, depression, ADHD, and a host of other such conditions. In fact, the study of psychology has only been able to rely on technological advances that allow us to see brain function for a few short decades, leading to incredible advances in the field that I think will continue. The thinking that no such advances have, or will continue to be, made in the study of addiction is, in my opinion short sighted.
As I mentioned above, I dont for a second think that the entire explanation for drug abuse and addiction will come from neurophysiological evidence. The doctor points out that If we could take a more accurate image of addiction in the brain, it would encompass much of the history and many of the events that make us who we are. I agree that we need to advance our technology as well as expand our understanding, but I think that to discount neuroscientific explanations completely is a big mistake.
- Addiction As A Brain Disease
- New Definition of Addiction: Addiction Is a Chronic Brain Disease
- Training the brain to think ahead in addiction
- Transcript of 07/21/11 Addiction Talk Given By John Crum, Director, Addiction Treatment Strategies