What are the public policy implications of a neurobiological view of addiction?

A survey of international addiction researchers' views on implications of brain-based explanations of addiction and the responsibility of affected persons

Aim: To complement existing stakeholder surveys by exploring addiction researchers' views on the implications of brain-based explanations of addiction and the responsibilities of addicted persons. Methods: A total of 190 researchers from 29 countries (13.2%) participated in a LimeSurvey. Their perspectives on implications of brain-based explanations of addiction were explored qualitatively using open-ended questions. In addition, respondents could indicate their views on the responsibility of addicted individuals for their condition and actions using a Likert scale and a free-text field ("mixed methods light"). Qualitative analyses inductively identified the most frequent themes and deductively assessed the overall impact (positive, negative or both/ambivalent). Quantitative analyses included frequencies and proportions. Results: The major themes mentioned were medicalisation and the neglect of other factors, better treatment options and access, (reduced) stigma and (impaired) agency of affected persons. The overall evaluation yielded 46% positive, 33% negative and 16% ambivalent views. Approximately 60% of the participants considered addicted persons to be responsible for their condition and 80% for their actions. Conclusions: According to researchers, a brain-based approach to addictions has positive and negative implications. In particular, the neglect of factors other than biomedical seems to be of concern. Thus, a re-consideration of research priorities as well as affected individuals' agency and role in treatment and care seems warranted.

Is a brain-based understanding of addiction predominant? An assessment of addiction researchers' conceptions of addiction and their evaluation of brain-based explanations

INTRODUCTION

Brain-based explanations of addiction have become a prominent explanatory model in recent decades. Although opposing views have been published, there is no large-scale study of researchers' opinions, unlike for treatment staff, the public and affected individuals. Therefore, this study aimed to examine international addiction researchers' perspectives on: (i) brain-based explanations of addiction; (ii) the perceived dominance of the concept in science, society, treatment and among those affected; and (iii) researchers' general conception of addiction in terms of ontologies and causes.

METHODS

A sample of 1440 international addiction researchers was compiled. Views were assessed online via LimeSurvey using a 'mixed methods light' approach (Likert-type scales, free-text fields). Qualitative content analyses of free-text comments complemented descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

One hundred and ninety researchers participated (13.19% response). The classification of substance use disorders as brain diseases/disorders was shared by about 60% of the respondents. Approximately 80% considered it the dominant view in science, but fewer in treatment, society and affected persons. Approximately 75% found it an oversimplification, but regarded it as helpful for understanding substance use disorders. Altogether, various biological, psychological and social factors were considered causal. Comments indicated that an over-simplistic nature of brain-based explanations of addiction was viewed as particularly problematic.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

A rejection of a simplistic view of addiction in favour of a multi-causal concept in which the brain plays a role seems to be the majority view of participating researchers. Therefore, the orientation of future research, treatment and support for addicted persons need to be reconsidered accordingly.

Addiction and Voluntariness: Five “Challenges” to Address in Moving the Discussion Forward

The question as to whether people with an addiction have control (and to what extent) over their addiction, and voluntarily decide to use substances is an ongoing source of controversy in the context of research on addiction, health policy and clinical practice. We describe and discuss a set of five challenges for further research into voluntariness (definition[s], measurement and study tools, first person perspectives, contextual understandings, and connections to broader frameworks) based on our own research experiences and those of others.

Exploration of Intervention Strategies to Reduce Public Stigma Associated with Gambling Disorder

Stigma associated with gambling disorder is complex, and is a key obstacle that prevents sufferers from seeking early help for their condition. However, little research has addressed how best to reduce gambling stigma. This study explored the effectiveness of video intervention styles, that have been used to reduce public stigma for conditions such as mental illness and substance use disorders. This was done to determine which would be most suitable, considering the unique characteristics of gambling disorder. An online survey of 164 people living in Australia was conducted which examined attitudes toward gamblers experiencing problems before and after an intervention. Participants were randomly allocated to one of three interventions (contact, education, advocacy) or a control video. The study found that each intervention was associated with changes to different components of stigma. Importantly, the education intervention increased labelling, but reduced stereotype endorsement and anger. Advocacy also reduced anger, attributions of character flaws, and anticipated discrimination and recoverability. While these interventions were generally effective at reducing stigma, the contact intervention was mixed, effectively intervening for some aspects of stigma, but increasing stigma on others. No single intervention reduced all aspects of stigma, suggesting that a complementary approach utilising specific elements of each intervention style could be used to deliver relevant information and effectively reduce stigma. Taken together, this suggests that research should be conducted into comprehensive, combined interventions, that include aspects of all three intervention styles, in an attempt to reduce more aspects of stigma simultaneously.

The continuing search for an addiction vaccine

Inspired by advances in immunology, in the 1970s scientists began to study the possibilities of mobilizing the human immune system against intruders other than pathogenic viruses and bacteria. In 1972 the suggestion was first made that it might be possible to provoke immunity to narcotic dependence. Because molecules of narcotics such as heroin and cocaine are too small to stimulate an immune response, researchers sought ways of coupling them to immunogenic proteins. The substances they developed soon became known as addiction vaccines. However, despite fifty years of research, and despite the growing problem of addiction, no vaccine against heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine or nicotine addiction has yet been licensed for clinical use. This paper reviews the history of addiction vaccinology, seeks to explain the unique appeal of a vaccinological approach to addiction, and argues for broad discussion of how such vaccines should ultimately be used.

Free Will and the Brain Disease Model of Addiction: The Not So Seductive Allure of Neuroscience and Its Modest Impact on the Attribution of Free Will to People with an Addiction

Free will has been the object of debate in the context of addiction given that addiction could compromise an individual's ability to choose freely between alternative courses of action. Proponents of the brain-disease model of addiction have argued that a neuroscience perspective on addiction reduces the attribution of free will because it relocates the cause of the disorder to the brain rather than to the person, thereby diminishing the blame attributed to the person with an addiction. Others have worried that such displacement of free will attribution would make the person with a drug addiction less responsible. Using the paradigmatic literature on the seductive allure of neuroscience explanations, we tested whether neuroscience information diminishes attributions of free will in the context of addiction and whether respondent characteristics influence these attributions and modulate the effect of neuroscience information. We performed a large-scale, web-based experiment with 2,378 German participants to explore how attributions of free will in the context of addiction to either alcohol or cocaine are affected by: (1) a text with a neurobiological explanation of addiction, (2) a neuroimage showing effects of addiction on the brain, and (3) a combination of a text and a neuroimage, in comparison to a control group that received no information. Belief in free will was measured using the FAD-Plus scale and was, subsequent to factor analysis, separated into two factors: responsibility and volition. The investigated respondent characteristics included gender, age, education, self-reported knowledge of neuroscience, substance-use disorder (SUD), and having a friend with SUD. We found that attributions of volition (in the cocaine-subsample) were reduced in the text and neuroimage-treatment compared to the control group. However, respondent characteristics such as education and self-reported knowledge of neuroscience were associated with lower attributions of responsibility for both substances, and education was associated with lower attribution of volition for the alcohol sub-sample. Interaction analyses showed that knowledge of neuroscience was found to generally decrease attribution of responsibility. Further research on attribution of free will should consider the effects of context and respondent characteristics, which appeared surprisingly larger than those induced by experimental treatments.

Medicalisation, smoking and e-cigarettes: evidence and implications

There is debate in the tobacco control literature about the value of a medical model in reducing smoking-related harm. The variety of medical treatments for smoking cessation has increased, health professionals are encouraged to use them to assist smoking cessation and tobacco dependence is being described as a 'chronic disease'. Some critics suggest that the medicalisation of smoking undermines the tobacco industry's responsibility for the harms of smoking. Others worry that it will lead smokers to deny personal responsibility for cessation, create beliefs in 'magic bullets' for smoking cessation, or erode smokers' confidence in their ability to quit. We argue that the medicalisation of smoking will have limited impact due to the emphasis on population-based interventions in tobacco control, the ambiguous place of nicotine among other drugs and the modest efficacy of current pharmacotherapies. These factors, as well as lay understandings of smoking that emphasise willpower, personal choice and responsibility, have contributed to the limited success of medical approaches to smoking cessation. While the rapid uptake of e-cigarettes in some countries has provided an option for those who reject medical treatments for smoking cessation, current regulatory developments could limit the potential of e-cigarettes to provide non-therapeutic nicotine for those who currently smoke tobacco.

Stigma and the addiction paradigm for obesity: lessons from 1950s America

AIMS

To discuss an historical episode in which obesity was conceptualized as an addictive disorder and declared to be a major epidemic in the early postwar United States. This history illuminates past consequences of framing obesity as an addiction in ways that may inform constructive policy responses today.

METHODS

Review of secondary and primary sources, including archival documents, relating to obesity in biomedical and popular thought of the 1940s and 1950s.

RESULTS

In the United States in the late 1940s and 1950s, new medical thinking about obesity reinterpreted overweight and obesity as chiefly the consequence of addiction (understood in the then dominant psychodynamic theory as a psychological defect, oral fixation). This new conception was rapidly taken up in popular discourse and clinical practice, with adverse effects through amplification of weight stigma. Further, in the conservative political context, the addiction concept contributed to an ineffective policy response to the alarming new epidemiological evidence about obesity's consequences. Despite a lack of evidence for efficacy of the intervention, public health efforts focused on correcting individual eating behaviour among obese people by encouraging self-help in lay groups modelled, in part, on Alcoholics Anonymous. Population-level intervention was neglected.

CONCLUSIONS

Current public health policy initiatives must be mindful of the risks of reframing obesity as an addiction. These include inadvertently reinforcing stigma, narrowing responses to those aiming to modify individual behaviour and biology and neglecting population policies aiming to reduce the consumption of energy-dense foods, as all occurred in the 1950s United States.