Marijuana continues to be in the headlines after legalization in Washington and Colorado, Obama’s references to whether or not his administration will pursue those who violate the federal laws against its use and the latest ruling by an appeals court to reject the change in classification for the drug are top news headlines.

Despite efforts by those who believe the drug is safe for medicinal and even recreational use, the DEA believes it still has a high potential for abuse and therefore the classification that it currently has no acceptable medical use stays in place. As a result, marijuana will continue to be treated by the federal government as a drug akin to LSD and heroin.

While those battling the drug war on the home front appear to be satisfied with the ruling, those who wish to conduct research believe their hands remain tied. According a recent ABC News report, the restrictions meant to protect the people are the very restrictions that make it difficult to perform the necessary studies to convince the DEA that the drug should be moved into a different category.

Essentially, the DEA wants FDA approval before removing marijuana from Schedule I classification. The research that the FDA needs completed to be able to provide approval cannot be conducted because of the current laws in place. The argument was made by the Drug Policy Alliance, suggesting that the federal government is responsible for blocking the research that needs to be completed.

While a number of studies have been completed or are underway, the biggest obstacle observed by opponents to the DEA classification is the fact that the studies must have FDA approval before they can begin. This is perceived by many to be a conflict of interest.

Read More About The Pros And Cons Of Legalizing Recreational Marijuana

Non-Christians think A.A. is a Christian organization and Christians question whether A.A. can be compatible with Christian theology. Is A.A. Christian, anti-Christian, or none of the above?

The answers to these questions come from A.A.’s early history. Several of the founders of A.A. would have labeled themselves Christians and as they developed the 12 Steps, they drew heavily on the teachings of the Oxford Group, a Christian organization that had developed practical steps for living. The founders saw that these principles were universal and that they could be applied to finding a solution for alcoholism. Before there was a Big Book, meetings and devotions were often based on Scripture from the New Testament. Does this mean A.A. is a Christian organization? Not exactly.

While A.A. has roots in the Christian tradition, it was decided by the group that A.A. would be of greatest benefit to the masses of suffering alcoholics if it did not establish a religious foundation or affiliation. Having seen the sectarianism that has the power to dismantle even the best intentioned of organizations and groups, the founders elected to develop a program that was based on universal principles without a specifically Christian bent. Though these principles are often detected within the pages of the Bible, they are also elements of many world religions.

While the development of faith in a Higher Power is a necessary element for the working of the 12 Steps, the A.A. literature does not define the identity of this God. Christians will naturally define their Higher Power as the Trinitarian God and they are free to do so. But adherents of other faiths are also welcome to define their Higher Power in accordance with their own doctrine. Those who come to the group as atheists or agnostics are encouraged, initially at least, to see the group as a power greater than themselves and to put their trust in that.

“Beyond a Higher Power, as each of us may envision Him, A.A. must never, as a society, enter the field of dogma or theology. We can never become a religion in that sense, lest we kill our usefulness by getting bogged down in theological contention.” (Bill W., Letter, 1954)

The purpose of this approach was not to diminish the Christian faith or to promote universalism or polytheism. The aim was to open the door wide to those who were dying in their alcoholism and desperately in need of a solution. Rightly, the founders understood that many of those sufferers were non-Christians and non-religious. They knew that placing a Christian label on the organization would shut the door on untold numbers of alcoholics who wanted help but didn’t want church.

The founders also realized the destructive power of sectarianism and denominationalism. Theological arguments and doctrinal differences would naturally arise and they believed that A.A. was not to be the forum for these debates. A.A. was a program with a spiritual foundation—there was no way around that. But how that spirituality was to be defined was up to the individual addict.

Today the 12-Step groups adhere to this principle of religious non-affiliation. The door is open to people of all faiths. Though many find God or become Christians through the program, they would likely never have gone so far as to enter a meeting if they thought this faith was a requirement for membership.

“While A.A. has restored thousands of poor Christians to their churches, and has made believers out of atheists and agnostics, it has also made good A.A.’s out of those belonging to the Buddhist, Islamic, and Jewish faiths. For example, we question very much whether our Buddhist members in Japan would have ever joined this Society had A.A. officially stamped itself a strictly Christian movement.

You can easily convince yourself of this by imagining that A.A. started among the Buddhists and that they then told you you couldn’t join them unless you became a Buddhist, too. If you were a Christian alcoholic under these circumstances, you might well turn your face to the wall and die.” (Bill W., Letter, 1954)

Peer groups for addiction and alcoholism are an integral part of the healing and recovery process. These assemblies of the hopeful can be extraordinarily effective at facilitating constructive interactions between people who are attempting to make a successful transition from sickness to health. Recovery from addiction is hard and challenging work, and the advice and support that substance abusers receive from their peers in support groups can be valuable beyond measure.

Or at least, this is how it should be. Unfortunately, peer groups are no different than any other type of self-organized entity in that they can be highly effective or completely dysfunctional depending on the quality of the input of the participants. Ultimately, those who attend peer support groups must put in a real effort to make sure these self-organized healing-centered associations deliver on their promise to assist, and without this type of care and concern a peer group may come nowhere close to living up to its potential as a force for good.

A lot of the responsibility for the quality of the peer group experience obviously falls on the shoulders of the group leader, who must use his education and experience to help steer discussions in a positive direction. But while a good leader has great influence, if the members of a peer group don’t hold up their end of the bargain, even the best leader will not be able to organize an assemblage that rises above the mediocre. The voluntary relationships that the members establish among themselves are the lifeblood of all peer support groups, and it is vital that recovering addicts and alcoholics who attend group meetings work hard to make these gatherings productive and enlightening for all.

To some extent this burden may seem a little unfair; after all, addicts in the early stages of recovery already have a lot on their plates, and asking them to take on the added responsibility of helping to ensure that peer support groups are run effectively may seem like a bit much. But passivity is not synonymous with recovery from chemical dependency, and anyone who is serious about overcoming a drug or alcohol problem should be ready to take an active role in his or her project of redemption at each step along the path. If a peer group is only as good as its members – and this truism is as rock-solid as they come – then each of those members must be prepared to expend effort and energy to facilitate the recovery process, for their own good as well as the good of their fellow addicts.

So what characteristics make a good peer support group member? There are many possible answers to this question, but the analysis of peer group dynamics that follows should provide some useful guidance for those seeking insight.

Recognizing and Respecting Boundaries and Communication Styles

Addicts and alcoholics in peer support groups share a common problem, but nevertheless each is a profoundly unique human being whose differences must be recognized and acknowledged. Human individuality is the main reason listening skills are just as important in communication as speaking skills, and peer group members should concentrate very closely on what their fellow group members are saying so that they can respond appropriately and constructively to what they are hearing—presume nothing but hear everything, this should be the credo of all peer support group members when dealing with their fellow recovering addicts.

But to gain real insight, it is also important to hear what people are not saying—while some people are comfortable speaking about their lives and their problems in public others are far more reserved and reticent, and everyone’s preferences and styles should be understood and respected. In ways that are sometimes subtle and sometimes obvious, each and every person in a peer support group will let the others know when they are ready to talk, how much information they are willing to disclose, and how much honest feedback they are comfortable receiving. Good peer group members realize this, they pay attention to the signs, and they adjust their interactions with their fellow recovering addicts and alcoholics accordingly.

The Power of the Practical

Recovering substance abusers attend group meetings hoping to find support and understanding, but they are also looking for practical advice to help them cope with the pitfalls and temptations they will inevitably face as they travel the path to sobriety. Whether their useful knowledge has been gained through wise analysis or trial-and-error, most recovering addicts have discovered strategies and techniques that have helped them make it through the rough times, and their “stories of the road” can be immensely helpful to others who will likely face, or are already facing, the same obstacles on their journey to good health. For the newly sober the possibility of relapse looms at every moment, and any ideas about how to handle cravings, overcome the depression that often accompanies withdrawal, or resist the triggers that can sabotage recovery in an instant can be extremely helpful.

In general, a positive attitude in the peer support group setting is highly recommended. But vague, pie-in-the-sky platitudes sound insincere and can actually interfere with the establishment of good relations between support group members. Hard-earned practical advice, on the other hand, will always be accepted with gratitude and appreciation.

The Grace of Acceptance

Giving good advice is wonderful, but accepting the suggestions and insights of others with good grace also helps to make the atmosphere in peer group sessions feel warm and inviting for all who come. When people feel free to share their thoughts about the situations others are experiencing, and when they know their efforts to help will be applauded, it enables them to connect more deeply with other recovering substance abusers and helps them open their hearts and minds to the guidance they will be offered by others in return. Regardless of whether the advice a particular person gives actually has the potential to help anyone else is irrelevant; just the fact that he or she feels comfortable speaking up and contributing is what matters the most.

Peer group members really do need each other, for validation as much as for anything else, and for this reason everyone who attends group meetings should give equal attention to all. Recovering addicts and alcoholics are searching desperately for a renewed sense of purpose, and having the chance to help others who are in a similar situation can help fill in the emotional and psychological gaps that will come to the forefront once drugs and alcohol are no longer around to provide their dubious compensations.

Following the Leader, and Letting the Leader Follow

As previously mentioned, group leaders play a vital role in managing and developing peer groups that actually work the way they are supposed to. But even though they are officially the ones in charge, group leaders still need all the help and support they can get. For example, peer group members who listen closely to what their leader says and ask questions or offer critiques can boost his or her efforts substantially, offering positive reinforcement to a message that may be of vital importance to everyone.

In peer groups, leaders are only as good as their followers. When recovering addicts and alcoholics are willing to support their leaders’ hard work by participating eagerly and attentively in the discussions they initiate, it sets a good precedent and encourages others to get more deeply involved as well.

New Diagnosis of Somatic Symptom Disorder Sparks Controversy

Somatic symptom disorder (SSD) is the name of a newly defined mental health condition that appears in the May 2013 fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, a standard guidebook used by mental health professionals throughout the United States. The new disorder fully or partially replaces several other conditions, known collectively as somatoform disorders, included in the previous version of the DSM. People with SSD have distressing or disruptive symptoms of somatic illness, a term that doctors generally use to describe physical ailments that have no explainable physical cause. However, controversially, the SSD definition lets doctors diagnose the disorder even when a plausible physical explanation for their patients’ symptoms exists.

Background Information

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is the creation of an organization called the American Psychiatric Association. Committees of mental health professionals within this organization meet periodically to discuss new developments in mental health research, compare those developments with the current accepted norms of the psychiatric community, and decide whether they need to update the accepted norms in order to incorporate relevant information from the new findings. The decisions made by these committees are included in fully or partially revised updates of the DSM and publicly released. In addition to doctors, public health officials and insurance companies typically closely follow the criteria established by the latest DSM version.

Somatoform Disorder Basics

According to the newly outdated version of the DSM, known as DSM IV or DSM 4, somatoform disorders exist as a group of related conditions, all of which revolve around the presence of physical symptoms with mental or psychiatric origins. The full list of these conditions includes somatization disorder, which centers on chronic physical symptoms appearing in multiple parts of the body; conversion disorder, which centers on symptoms affecting the nervous system; pain disorder, which centers on the presence of severe pain; hypochondriasis (known commonly as hypochondria), which centers on a fear of having or contracting a serious physical ailment; and body dysmorphic disorder, which centers on a fixation with the “disfiguring” effects of minor or entirely self-perceived physical flaws.

The new version of the DSM, called DSM 5, eliminates somatization disorder, pain disorder and hypochondriasis as diagnosable mental disorders. It also eliminates another related condition called undifferentiated somatoform disorder. The American Psychiatric Association committee that made these changes gave several reasons for their decision. First, they wanted to do away with the considerable overlap in symptoms between different somatoform disorders. They also wanted to make it easier for non-specialist doctors to make appropriate diagnoses in their patients. In addition, they wanted to curb a tendency among doctors to treat the mind and body aspects of somatic symptoms as separate medical issues.

Somatic Symptom Disorder Basics

The newly established definition for somatic symptom disorder resembles the definition for somatization disorder in certain respects. Like somatization disorder, SSD centers on the presence of somatic symptoms that disrupt a person’s normal lifestyle. However, a person with SSD also experiences extreme or excessive degrees of emotional distress and has a preoccupation with his or her physical symptoms that manifests as a significant change in his or her behaviors, feelings, or thought processes. These combined symptoms must recur consistently for about six months.

To receive a diagnosis for one of the eliminated somatoform disorders, an individual needed to have a certain number of symptoms that came from four different categories or groups. The definition for SSD does away this requirement. Critically, the definition for SSD also gives doctors the freedom to diagnose the presence of the disorder even if a patient has a medical condition that substantially accounts for his or her symptoms.

Concerns in the Medical Community

Some mental health experts disagree with the validity of the terms used to define somatic symptom disorder. This disagreement typically focuses on the freedom that doctors have to diagnose the condition in people who have reasonable medical explanations for their somatic symptoms. Many experts believe that this freedom will lead to over-diagnosis of SSD, and also unnecessarily stigmatize certain physical ailments as the products of mental health problems. A recent field trial of the new SSD definition highlights some of these issues. During this trial, 7 percent of physically healthy individuals were misdiagnosed with SSD; in addition, 15 percent of all trial participants with heart disease or cancer—and 26 percent of all participants with fibromyalgia or irritable bowel syndrome—qualified for an SSD diagnosis.

Prescription opioids are a group of medications commonly used to treat forms of pain that don’t respond to other types of medication-based treatment. Because of certain changes they make in normal brain function, these medications present a very real risk for both abusive patterns of use and drug addiction; in turn, both prescription opioid abuse and prescription opioid addiction create increased risks for suicidal thinking and active suicide attempts. According to research findings reported in 2012, elevated suicide-related risks commonly remain in long-term opioid abusers and addicts even when they discontinue drug use.

Prescription Opioid Basics

All prescription opioids are based on substances that occur naturally in Papaver somniferum, a plant species popularly known as the opium poppy. Two of these medications, morphine and codeine, come more or less directly from ingredients contained in the sap of P. somniferum. Two other common prescription opioids, hydrocodone (Vicodin, Lortab), and oxycodone (OxyContin), are created in pharmaceutical laboratories through chemical manipulation of naturally occurring opioid substances. Three additional common opioid medications—fentanyl (Fentora, Actiq), synthetic codeine, and meperidine (Demerol)—are manmade substances designed to chemically resemble the natural opioids.

Each prescription opioid medication has its specific typical role in medical treatment. For instance, doctors typically use codeine to relieve relatively moderate pain or ease the effects of medically serious coughing or diarrhea. Morphine is commonly used to relieve severe pain in surgical settings, while doctors use hydrocodone and oxycodone for a range of conditions involving moderate to severe pain. Regardless of their particular common use, all prescription opioids (and illegal opioid drugs) achieve their pain-relieving effects in a similar way by entering the body and attaching themselves to sites in the nervous system called opioid receptors. When activated by the presence of opioids, these receptors help override pain signals traveling through the nervous system to the brain.

When opioids attach themselves to opioid receptors located in the brain, they produce an additional effect by triggering a dramatic increase in the levels of a brain chemical called dopamine; in turn, this dopamine increase produces intense pleasure. In prescription users, opioid abuse and addiction typically become issues when a given individual seeks out this pleasure as a recreational activity and increases his or her level of intake above the level sanctioned by a doctor. This situation differs fundamentally from the situation of prescription users who follow their doctors’ orders and come to depend upon opioids’ legitimate pain-relieving effects.

Suicide-Related Risks

Unfortunately, suicidal thinking and active suicide attempts are found among prescription opioid abusers and addicts with some regularity. In 2012, researchers from the American Psychiatric Institute for Research and Education examined suicide-related factors in almost 38,000 participants in a study called the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, which was conducted by the U.S. government’s Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

These researchers found that about 15 percent of the survey respondents had misused a prescription opioid medication at least once. They also found that roughly 11 percent of all people who had misused prescription opioids for at least two years had considered suicide in the year before the survey. In addition, roughly 9 percent of all people who had misused these medications for less than a year had considered suicide during the same period of time. By comparison, only 3 percent of people who didn’t use prescription opioids considered suicide in the year before the survey.

The authors of the American Psychiatric Institute for Research and Education’s study noted several factors that help determine the risks for suicidal thinking in people who misuse prescription opioids. The most prominent factor is a level of misuse that qualifies for standard definitions of drug abuse or drug addiction; fully 23 percent of survey participants with suicidal thoughts self-reported this degree of medication misuse. Another important factor is the presence of symptoms consistent with a diagnosis of the psychiatric disorder known as major depression. In addition, the authors of the study concluded that the risks for suicidal thinking don’t end with the discontinuation of opioid use, and former long-term users continued to exhibit suicidal thought patterns significantly more frequently than people who have never used prescription opioids.

About 18 percent of all current prescription opioid users/abusers who considered suicide actually went on to make active suicide attempts, while 7 percent of former users/abusers with suicidal thoughts attempted suicide. By comparison, 11 percent of survey participants with suicidal thoughts who never used a prescription opioid attempted to kill themselves.

According to Consumer Watchdog, one in 10 physicians abuse prescription medicines at some point in their career, and still continue to practice medicine. The situation is reminiscent of the TV series “House M.D.,” which features a Vicodin-addict doctor continuing to practice medicine despite his friends and colleagues being well-aware of his problem. Unfortunately, unlike the fictional Dr. House, most real doctors have a more hands-on role and don’t have borderline superhuman intelligence to fall back on, and therefore put themselves and their patients at considerable risk. You might be more familiar with the issue through prime TV programming, but it’s a real issue that requires immediate management.

Are Doctors More Likely to Abuse Prescription Medicines?

Although the rates of illicit drug use among practicing physicians is lower than in the general population, research has shown that prescription medicine abuse is five times more likely in doctors. Prescription drug abuse is currently at epidemic levels in the U.S., causing more overdose deaths than heroin and cocaine combined, and doctors are overrepresented in the population of people abusing the drug. This is often allowed to continue without the doctors losing their medical licenses, in some cases even after multiple disciplinary hearings.

What are the Potential Causes?

It’s easy to see that a big part of this is likely to be related to doctors’ increased access to potentially addictive substances. This is shown by the fact that anesthesiologists (doctors who have wide access to substances such as opioids) are generally more likely to abuse prescription drugs than doctors in other specialties.  Simply, the fact that they are more closely connected with potentially dangerous substances makes them more likely to take them and become addicted. However, it’s clear that this isn’t the whole picture, because oncologists, for example, have low rates of substance abuse but high level of access to potentially addictive substances.

The other major component of the problem is that many doctors are able to continue practicing even if they have a recognized issue. In addition to the lack of preventive action being taken as part of disciplinary proceedings, most hospitals don’t routinely test doctors for drugs, which means that the problem is likely to continue unchecked for longer. There is also a suggestion that doctors would rather speak to their colleagues personally rather than taking the issue to the proper disciplinary channel, particularly if their punishment is likely to be severe.

Doctors’ lives are also inherently stressful, and since stress management issues are one of the most common reasons people take drugs, this evidently has some part to play in the issue. In combination with easy access to drugs and a supposed understanding of the risks, doctors under stress are believed to be more likely to turn to prescription medicines.

What Can Be Done?

Doctors appear to be at increased risk of developing a prescription medication addiction, but they respond to treatment like any other substance abusers. Of the approaches that have been shown to be effective are Physician Health Programs, with 78 percent of physicians enrolled in one over the course of a five-year period remaining drug-free at every scheduled test. Other studies have shown that 91 percent of physicians enrolled in the programs achieved a positive treatment outcome.

Education about the risks of substance abuse is also essential. While doctors know about the potential risks of medicines like OxyContin, they may incorrectly believe they can keep them under control and use the drug safely. Ensuring that doctors, patients and anybody with access to potentially harmful medicines understands the risks of addiction to prescription medicines is essential to resolving the issue.

It’s also possible that stricter regulations regarding physician substance abuse could be a valuable approach in reducing its prevalence. Such a low proportion of doctors are regularly tested for drugs that the problem is allowed to continue bubbling away beneath the surface. Other doctors who have colleagues abusing substances are often reluctant to report it and believe that the individual’s ability to do the job isn’t impaired. While it’s inevitably difficult to potentially damage a friend’s career, the harm that could be done to a patient as a result should be the main factor they consider.

Conclusion

Doctors do have higher rates of prescription medication abuse than the majority of the population, but it’s important to remember that it’s still an issue for the population as a whole. Being relaxed about a friend, colleague or loved one’s addiction because it happens to be to a legal substance is potentially dangerous, particularly if he or she could seriously harm someone else as a result. With proper treatment and education, however, addicted individuals can be rehabilitated and new cases of addiction can be prevented.

Narcissism is a term psychologists and psychiatrists use to describe the combined presence of personality traits such as self-absorption, grandiosity, and an unrealistic sense of personal importance. Some aspects of narcissism can play a healthy role in a person’s life, while other aspects tend to produce social and interpersonal problems. In their worst form, narcissistic traits can manifest as a diagnosable mental health condition called narcissistic personality disorder. According to the results of a multi-university study published in 2012 in the journal PLOS ONE, narcissism produces significantly more negative health effects in men than it produces it women.

Narcissism Basics

Most psychologists and psychiatrists agree that a limited amount of narcissism can play a positive role in a person’s everyday life, both during the developmental stages of childhood and later on during adulthood. Experts in the field sometimes refer to this positive influence as adaptive narcissism. People who engage in adaptive narcissism can receive such benefits as an increased tendency to exercise, improved academic performance, an improved rate of recovery in the aftermath of a traumatic injury, improved or broadened employment opportunities, self-sufficiency in intimate relationships and improved parenting skills.

While adaptive narcissism can be beneficial on both a personal and social level, unlimited or maladaptive narcissism can have the opposite effect. Tendencies associated with unhealthy narcissism include an inability to hear the concerns of others, lack of empathy for others, an inability or unwillingness to take responsibility for one’s actions, an inability or unwillingness to take responsibility for one’s emotional states, and an unusual sensitivity to real or perceived criticism. The authors of the study in PLOS ONE break narcissism down into five personality traits, three of which tend to produce healthy narcissism and two of which tend to produce unhealthy narcissism. The three traits associated with healthy narcissism are self-absorption/self-admiration, leadership/authority and superiority/arrogance. The three traits associated with unhealthy narcissism are entitlement and exploitativeness.

Narcissism in Men

After reviewing their results, the authors of the study concluded that men and women with high scores for healthy or adaptive narcissism don’t experience significant increases in their cortisol levels. This finding indicates that adaptive narcissism does not produce stress. However, men with high scores for unhealthy narcissism do experience significant cortisol increases, and therefore experience substantial increases in their stress levels. In line with this finding, the highest levels of cortisol elevation occur in men who have the highest level of involvement in unhealthy narcissism. Interestingly, women with high levels of unhealthy narcissism experience less than half of the cortisol elevation that occurs in their male counterparts.In the study published in PLOS ONE, researchers from the University of Michigan and the University of Virginia used a 40-question questionnaire to determine the narcissism levels in a group of 106 adult undergraduate students. They also used saliva tests to check these students’ levels of a substance called cortisol. Cortisol is the body’s most important stress hormone, and when its level in the body increases, affected individuals experience mental symptoms of stress such as fear and anxiety, as well as a variety of physical stress-related effects.

Significance

Chronic stress is associated with increased risks for such things as depression, memory problems, sleep disturbances, obesity and heart disease. The men and women who participated in the study published in PLOS ONE did not undergo any stress-increasing experiments before having their cortisol levels checked. Instead, their cortisol levels reflected the amounts of stress they experience during everyday life. The authors of the study believe that this fact indicates that men with unhealthy forms of narcissism are regularly exposed to unique risks to their mental and physical well-being.

Social stereotyping may help explain the negative impact of unhealthy narcissism in men, the authors of the study note. For example, many of the common social definitions for “manliness” coincide with the personality traits of narcissism. If any given man with generally healthy narcissistic traits tries to live out the social expectations for males, he will probably not suffer any major negative consequences. However, if a man with generally unhealthy narcissistic traits tries to live out the same set of expectations, he can reinforce his damaging narcissistic behaviors and end up dangerously boosting his stress levels. As plausible as this sounds, it’s currently just a theory. Researchers will need to make additional studies before they can truly explain why unhealthy narcissism has such a strong impact on men.

A groundbreaking study on rats from the National Institutes of Health may herald a revolutionary new treatment for cocaine addicts. By identifying a specific region of the brain that is diminished in rats susceptible to cocaine addiction, researchers were able to reduce their drug-seeking behavior by targeting the light from a laser onto the specific area. The effect is truly remarkable—by essentially reinvigorating the area in the brain, the drug-seeking behavior was notably reduced. If this is applied effectively to humans, it could provide a unique and effective approach to the treatment of numerous drug addictions.

Modeling Addiction in Rats

Research on rats might not seem like the best model for drug addiction in humans because of the obvious differences between us as species. However, it’s been found that the neural pathways in rats are nearly identical to those in humans, so rats are actually excellent models for addiction. Like humans, some rats display a tendency to become addicted to drugs while others don’t have the same problem. This is tested using a cocaine-dispensing lever, and it was found that some rats compulsively take cocaine while others weren’t particularly interested. The fact that the addicted rats continue to push the lever to get the drug even when it results in an electric shock to the foot further adds weight to the model. This research indicates that there is an underlying physiological reason that some humans become addicted and some do not.

Identifying the Region

The University of California researchers built on existing brain imaging research which identified that deficits in the pre-frontal cortex region were associated with drug addiction by looking at addicted rats. They compared the neuron firing patterns in addicted rats to those of non-addicted rats and confirmed that cocaine produces bigger defects in the addiction-prone animals. The precise targeting of the region enabled them to make specific alterations to see if it affected the animals’ behavior.

Treating the Condition

Making minute alterations to the functioning of specific areas in the brain is obviously challenging and potentially dangerous. By making genetic alterations and introducing light-sensitive compounds into the rats’ neurons, the researchers were able to make the biological equivalent of a switch. They did this in the brains of both the addicted and non-addicted rats so they were able to test the theory in two ways. Shining a laser light at the compound flicks the switch, activating or deactivating the specific region of the brain and therefore either creating or removing the defects seen in drug addicts.

The results confirmed the theory. When the “switch” was activated in the addicted rats—removing their inherent deficits—they didn’t press the lever as often for a dose of cocaine. Astoundingly, when the switch was deactivated in the non-addicted rats (mimicking the addicted brain) they actively used cocaine more. This is particularly important because it establishes a causal link between this defect and addictive behavior.

Applying it to Humans

Thanks to the similarity between human and rat brains, the research can be easily applied to humans, and clinical trials are already in the planning stages. However, lasers will probably not be used in the human version of the treatment, according to the researchers, with the preferred method being trans-cranial magnetic stimulation. This basically uses an electromagnet placed outside the scalp to achieve the same effect. The treatment is currently used for the treatment of depression, and could be easily adapted for the new purpose.

What Does It Mean for Treatment?

Cocaine addiction is one of the most challenging addictions to treat from a medical perspective, because there aren’t any FDA-approved medications which can be used for it. If this approach is shown to be successful in clinical trials, it could provide a valuable tool for rehabilitation centers all across the country. Medical treatments can’t fully address the multi-faceted issue of drug addiction, but by reducing cravings it allows counselors and other psychiatric professionals to deal with the underlying psychological issues that lead to addiction.

Although the initial research focused on cocaine addiction, the treatment could also be applied to other drugs. Different chemicals have different effects, but psychoactive drugs can be broadly classified as working through a similarity to natural compounds, often the “reward” chemical dopamine. This means that there is a great degree of similarity between different addictions (even when substances are not involved) and that making small modifications could allow the treatment approach to work with other drugs.

It is not a “magic bullet,” however. Drug addiction often results from things like poor methods of dealing with problems like stress or depression, and correcting the neurological differences doesn’t teach substance abusers better coping mechanisms. The non-invasive nature of the treatment is extremely promising, but it won’t “cure” the problem in the same way that drugs for opiate addictions haven’t stopped heroin abuse. However, the new research may provide a valuable component to a multi-faceted approach to treating drug addiction.