martes, 17 de noviembre de 2015
Predigting addiction Trabajo escrito
PREDICTING ADDICTION
Outline
Predicting Addiction
1. La hija del senador George
McGroven murió por exceso de alcohol fuera de un bar
a) tuvo una vida de lucha de su
adicción al alcohol
b) empezó a beber a los 13 años,
se embarazo a los 15, experimento con marihuana y LSD en secundaria
c) estuvo en muchos programas de
tratamiento y más de 60 desintoxicaciones
d) la adicción puede ser pensada
como una enfermedad crónica
e) advertir a los jóvenes sobre
los peligros de la adicción lleva poca fuerza cuando los adultos bebe sin
consecuencias aparentes
Minnesota Twins
2. Estudios de gemelos son
particularmente útiles para el análisis de los orígenes de una conducta como la
adicción
a) MCTFR ha estudiado la salud y
el desarrollo de los gemelos desde la pre-adolescencia, atreves de la adolescencia
y en edad adulta
b) monocigoticos o gemelos
idénticos, y los dicigoticos que solo tienen en promedio la mitad de sus genes
c) la adicción puede ser uno de los
muchos comportamientos relacionados que se derivan de la misma raíz genética
d) lo que se pasa de padres a
hijos es una tendencia hacia un grupo de comportamientos
Markers of risk
Personality
3. Ciertos rasgos de personalidad
distinguen entre los adictos y no adictos
a) los adictos tienden a ser mas
impulsivos, rebeldes, y se aburren fácilmente
b) son mas propensos a cuestionar
la autoridad
c) las impresiones a sus 11 años
de edad fueron que tendrían problemas de alcoholismo a los 16
d) de acuerdo a un estudio por
Robert Cloninger, niños impulsivos, desordenados, distraídos eran casi 20 veces
mas probables de tener problemas con el alcohol en el futuro que niños que no
presentaban estos rasgos
Family background
4. Tener un padre con un
trastorno de abuso de sustancias es otro predictor establecido de la adicción a
futuro de un niño
a) más de 24 bebidas en 24 horas
coloca a sus hijos en una categoría especialmente arriesgada de posible
adicción
b) si el padre no ha tenido éxito
en la reducción del consumo del alcohol
c) si ha afectado por su forma de
beber a la familia y al trabajo son predicciones de adicción al menor
d) en nuestra sociedad los
episodios de consumo excesivo de alcohol, de ser capaz de “sostener su licor”, a
veces son fuente de orgullo masculino
Brainwaves
5. Un tercer factor de predicción viene
directamente del cerebro mismo
a) mediante el uso de electrodos
para detectar las señales eléctricas de grupos de neuronas
b) el complejo de ondas
cerebrales, el tamaño relativo de un pico denominado P300, indica riesgo de
adicción
c) tener un P300 menor a los 17
años predice el desarrollo de un problema de alcohol o drogas
d) la naturaleza fisiológica de
P300 hace que sea un marcador especialmente interesante ya que puede proceder
de genes de adicción
Precocious experimentation
6. Los jóvenes en riesgo se distinguen por la temprana
edad a la que primero tratan alcohol sin permiso de los padres
a) es relativamente inusual
probar el alcohol antes de la edad de 15
b) de 2600 padres, solo el 12 por
ciento de las madres y el 22 por ciento de los padres probaron el alcohol antes
de los 15
c) el consumo a una edad temprana
a menudo ocurre con el sexo, el consumo de tabaco y drogas ilícitas
d) esta experimentación precoz
indica que el individuo a heredado la personalidad impulsiva que eleva el
riesgo de adicción
A general inherited risk
7. El riesgo de adicción es
fuertemente heredable
a) en la infancia los rasgos de
de externalizacion incluyen hiperactividad y la conducta antisocial
b) en la edad adulta las
tendencias de externalizacion pueden dar lugar a una personalidad marcada,
abuso de drogas o alcohol, anarquía y agresión
c) una inclinación genética para
la externalizacion puede llevar a la adicción, la hiperactividad, la
criminalidad, etc.
d) el consumo del alcohol antes
de los 15 años de edad no se limita a predecir futuros problemas de alcohol y
drogas, sino también el futuro comportamiento antisocial
The role of the environment
8. los rasgos con fuerte
componente genético pueden estar influidos por factores ambientales
a) la influencia genética es la
observación repetida de que los niños que crecen con un montón de libros en su
casa tienden a mejorar en la escuela
b) los padres tienden a
proporcionar entornos que complementan los genotipos de sus hijos
c) los padres con problemas de
adicción tienden a a proporcionar una vulnerabilidad genética, con un hogar en
el que el alcohol o las drogas están disponibles y abusar de ellos es normal
d) las malas relaciones entre
padres e hijos ejercen influencias ambientales que promueven el uso de
sustancias y las conductas de externalizacion
durante la adolescencia temprana
e) dentro de las ciudades de
10000 o más los genes influyen sustancialmente que los adolescentes usan
sustancias ilícitas
f) los entornos urbanos permiten
una expresión más completa de los rasgos que interviene la genética
The future of addiction research
9. Genes influyen en el
comportamiento y la importancia relativa de un solo gen pueden diferir entre
las poblaciones étnicas o radicales
a) la adicción y el alcoholismo
de algunas personas puede ser mas ambiental que de origen genético
b) un gen que codifica una enzima
que metabolizan neurotransmisor, la monoaminooxidasa A o MAOA
c) el gen asociado con altos
niveles de MAOA era protectora de esos hombres que eran menos propensos a
mostrar comportamientos antisociales después de maltrato infantil que en el
grupo de bajo MAOA
d) hay una superposición genética
entre el alcoholismo, la farmacodependencia y comportamiento antisocial, en
lugar de simplemente alcohólicos
Much left to learn
10. Aunque los datos MCTFR han
resuelto algunas cuestiones relacionados con la adicción, muchos otros
permanecen
a) algunas evidencias sugieren
que los genes juegan un papel menor en la adicción de inicio tardío, los
marcadores de riesgo pueden variar
b) los genes más relevantes no
son específicos para el alcoholismo o drogodependencia
c) los mismos genes predisponen a
un conjunto de la superposición de los trastornos dentro del espectro de
externalizacion
d) el ADN puede empujar a alguien
en una cierta dirección, pero no obligarnos a ir
Elementos visuales
Verbos
Conectores
Predicting Addiction
Behavioral genetics uses twins and time to
decipher the origins of addiction and learn who is most vulnerable
In 1994, the 45-year-old daughter of Senator and former presidential
nominee George McGovern froze to death outside a bar in Madison, Wisconsin.
Terry McGovern's death followed a night of heavy drinking and a lifetime of battling alcohol addiction. The
Senator's middle child had been talented and charismatic, but also rebellious. She started drinking at 13, became pregnant at 15 and experimented with marijuana and LSD in high school. She was sober during much of her 30s but eventually relapsed. By
the time she died, Terry had been through many treatment programs and more than 60 detoxifications.
Her story is not unique. Even with strong family support, failure to
overcome an addiction is common. Success rates vary by treatment type, severity
of the condition and the criteria for success. But typically, fewer than a third of alcoholics are recovered a year or two after treatment. Thus, addiction may be thought of as a chronic, relapsing illness. Like other serious psychiatric conditions, it can cause a
lifetime of recurrent episodes and treatments.
Given these somber prospects, the best strategy for fighting addiction may be to prevent it in the first place. But warning young people about the dangers of addiction carries
little force when many adults drink openly without apparent consequences. Would
specific warnings for individuals with a strong genetic vulnerability to
alcoholism be more effective? Senator McGovern became convinced that his
daughter possessed such a vulnerability, as other family members also struggled with dependency. Perhaps Terry would have taken a different approach to
alcohol, or avoided it altogether, if she had known that something about her biology made
drinking particularly dangerous for her.
How can we identify people—at a young enough age to intervene—who have a high,
inherent risk of becoming addicted? Does unusual
susceptibility arise from differences at the biochemical level? And what social or environmental factors might tip the scales for kids at
greatest risk? That is, what kind of parenting, or peer group, or neighborhood
conditions might encourage—or inhibit—the expression of "addiction"
genes? These questions are the focus of our research.
Minnesota Twins
We have been able to answer some of these questions by
examining the life histories of almost 1,400 pairs of twins. Our study of
addictive behavior is part of a larger project, the Minnesota Center for Twin
Family Research (MCTFR), which has studied the health and development of twins from their pre-teen years through
adolescence and into adulthood. Beginning at age 11 (or 17 for a second group),
the participants and their parents cooperated with a barrage of questionnaires, interviews, brainwave
analyses and blood tests every three years. The twin cohorts are now 23 and 29,
respectively, so we have been able to observe them as children before exposure to addictive
substances, as teenagers who were often experimenting and as young adults who had passed through the stage of
greatest risk for addiction.
Studies of twins are particularly useful for analyzing the origins of a
behavior like addiction. Our twin pairs have grown
up in the same family environment but have different degrees of genetic similarity. Monozygotic or identical twins
have identical genes, but dizygotic or fraternal
twins share on average only half of their segregating genes. If the two types
of twins are equally similar for a trait, we know that genes are unimportant for that trait. But when monozygotic twins are more similar than dizygotic twins, we
conclude that genes have an effect.
This article reviews some of what we know about the development of addiction, including some recent findings from the MCTFR about early substance abuse.
Several established markers can predict later addiction and, together with recent research, suggest a
provocative conclusion: that addiction may be only one of many related
behaviors that stem from the same genetic root. In other words, much of the
heritable risk may be nonspecific. Instead, what is passed from parent to child is a tendency
toward a group of behaviors, of which addiction is only one of several possible
outcomes.
Markers of Risk
Personality. Psychologists can distinguish at-risk youth by their
personality, family history, brainwave patterns and behavior. For example, certain personality traits do not distribute
equally among addicts and nonaddicts: The addiction-vulnerable tend to be more
impulsive, unruly and easily bored. They're generally outgoing, sociable,
expressive and rebellious, and they enjoy taking risks. They are more likely to
question authority and challenge tradition.
Some addicts defy these categories, and having a certain personality
type doesn't doom one to addiction. But such traits do place individuals at elevated risk. For reasons not
completely understood, they accompany addiction much more frequently than the
traits of being shy, cautious and conventional.
Although these characteristics do not directly cause addiction, neither are they
simply the consequences of addiction. In fact, teachers' impressions of their
11-year-old students predicted alcohol problems 16 years
later, according to a Swedish study led by C. Robert Cloninger (now at Washington
University in St. Louis). Boys low in "harm avoidance" (ones who
lacked fear and inhibition) and high in "novelty seeking" (in other
words, impulsive, disorderly, easily bored and distracted) were almost 20 times
more likely to have future alcohol problems than boys without these traits.
Other studies of children in separate countries at different ages confirm that
personality is predictive.
Family Background. Having a parent with a substance-abuse disorder is another established predictor of a child's future addiction. One
recent and intriguing discovery from the MCTFR is that assessing this risk can
be surprisingly straightforward, particularly for alcoholism. The father's
answer to "What is the largest amount of alcohol you ever consumed in a 24-hour period?" is highly informative: The greater the
amount, the greater his children's risk. More than 24 drinks in 24 hours places
his children in an especially risky category.
How can one simple question be so predictive? Its answer is laden with
information, including tolerance—the ability, typically developed over many drinking episodes, to consume larger quantities of alcohol before becoming
intoxicated—and the loss of control that mark problematic drinking. It is also
possible that a father who equivocates on other questions that can formally
diagnose alcoholism—such as whether he has been unsuccessful at cutting down on his drinking
or whether
his drinking has affected family and work—may give a frank answer to this
question. In our society, episodes of binge drinking, of being able to
"hold your liquor," are sometimes a source of male pride.
Brainwaves. A third predictor comes directly from the brain
itself. By using scalp electrodes to detect the electrical signals of groups of
neurons, we can record characteristic patterns of brain activity
generated by specific visual stimuli. In the complex squiggle of evoked
brainwaves, the relative size of one peak, called P300, indicates addiction
risk. Having a smaller P300 at age 17 predicts the development of an alcohol or
drug problem by age 20. Prior differences in consumption don't explain this
observation, as the reduced-amplitude P300 (P3-AR) is not a consequence of
alcohol or drug ingestion. Rather, genes strongly influence this trait: P3-AR
is often detectable in the children of fathers with substance-use disorders
even before these problems emerge in the offspring. The physiological nature of
P300 makes it an especially interesting marker, as it may originate from
"addiction" genes more directly than any behavior.
Precocious Experimentation. Lastly, at-risk youth are distinguished by the young age at which
they first try alcohol without parental permission. Although the vast majority of people try alcohol at some point during their
life, it's relatively unusual to try alcohol before the age of 15. In
the MCTFR sample of over 2,600 parents who had tried alcohol, only 12 percent
of the mothers and 22 percent of the fathers did so before the age of 15. In
this subset, 52 percent of the men and 25 percent of the women were alcoholics.
For parents who first tried alcohol after age 19, the comparable rates were 13
percent and 2 percent, respectively. So, what distinguishes alcoholism risk is
not whether a person tries alcohol during their teen years,
but when they try it.
In light of these data, we cannot regard very early experimentation with alcohol as simply a normal rite of
passage. Moreover, drinking at a young age often co-occurs with sex, the use of
tobacco and illicit drugs, and rule-breaking behaviors. This precocious
experimentation could indicate that the individual has
inherited the type of freewheeling, impulsive personality that elevates the risk
of addiction. But early experimentation may be a problem all by itself. It, and the behaviors that tend to co-occur
with it, decrease the likelihood of sobriety-encouraging experiences and
increase the chances of mixing with troubled peers
and
clashing with authority figures.
A General, Inherited Risk
Some of these hallmarks of risk are unsurprising. Most people know that addiction runs in families, and they may intuit that certain brain
functions could differ in addiction-prone individuals. But how can people's gregariousness or their loathing of dull tasks or the
age at which they first had sex show a vulnerability to addiction? The answer
seems to be that although addiction risk is strongly
heritable, the inheritance is fairly nonspecific. The inherited risk
corresponds to a certain temperament or disposition that goes along with
so-called externalizing tendencies. Addiction is only one of several
ways this disposition may be expressed.
Externalizing behaviors include substance abuse, but also "acting out" and other
indicators of behavioral undercontrol or disinhibition. In childhood,
externalizing traits include hyperactivity, "oppositionality"
(negative and defiant behavior) and antisocial behavior, which breaks
institutional and social rules. An antisocial child may lie, get in fights, steal, vandalize or skip school. In adulthood,
externalizing tendencies may lead to a personality marked by low constraint,
drug or alcohol abuse, and antisocial behaviors, including irresponsibility,
dishonesty, impulsivity, lawlessness and aggression. Antisociality, like most
traits, falls on a continuum. A moderately antisocial person may never
intentionally hurt someone, but he might
make impulsive decisions, take physical and financial risks or shirk
responsibility.
It's worth reiterating that an
externalizing disposition simply increases the risk of demonstrating problematic
behavior. An individual with such tendencies could express them in ways
that are not harmful to themselves and actually help society: Fire fighters,
rescue workers, test pilots, surgeons and entrepreneurs are often gregarious,
relatively uninhibited sensation-seekers—that is, moderate externalizers.
So a genetic inclination for
externalizing can lead to addiction, hyperactivity, acting-out behavior, criminality, a
sensation-seeking personality or all of these things. Although the contents of this list may seem haphazard, psychologists combine
them into a single group because they all stem from the same latent factor. Latent factors are
hypothesized constructs that help explain the observed correlations between various traits or behaviors.
For example, grades in school generally correlate with one
another. People who do well in English tend to get good marks in art history,
algebra and geology. Why? Because academic ability affects grades, regardless of the subject matter. In
statistical lingo, academic ability is the "general, latent factor"
and the course grades are the "observed indicators" of that factor.
Academic ability is latent because it is not directly measured; rather, the statistician concludes that it
exists and causes the grades to vary systematically between people.
Statistical analyses consistently show that externalizing is a general,
latent factor—a common denominator—for a suite of behaviors that includes
addiction. Furthermore, the various markers of risk support this conclusion:
Childhood characteristics that indicate later problems with alcohol also point
to the full spectrum of externalizing behaviors and traits. Thus, drinking
alcohol before 15 doesn't just predict future alcohol and drug problems, but also future antisocial behavior. A parent with a history of excessive
binge drinking is apt to have children not only with substance-use problems,
but with behavioral problems as well. And a
reduced-amplitude P300 not only appears in children with a familial risk for
alcoholism, but in kids with a familial risk for hyperactivity, antisocial behavior or
illicit drug disorders.
The associations between externalizing behaviors aren't surprising to
clinicians. Comorbidity—the increased chance of having other disorders if you
have one of them—is the norm, not the exception, for individuals and families.
A father with a cocaine habit is more likely to find that his daughter is getting into trouble for stealing or breaking school rules. At first glance, the child's behavioral problems look
like products of the stress, conflict and dysfunction that go with having an
addict in the family. These are certainly aggravating factors. However, the familial and genetically informative MCTFR data have allowed us to piece together a more precise explanation.
Environment has a strong influence on a
child's behavior—living with an addict is
rife with challenges—but genes also play a substantial role. Estimates of the
genetic effect on externalizing behaviors vary by indicator and age, but among
older adolescents and adults, well over half of the differences between
people's externalizing tendencies result from inheriting different genes.
Our analysis of the MCTFR data indicates that children inherit the
general, latent factor of externalizing rather than specific behavioral
factors. Thus, an -antisocial mother does not pass on genes that code simply
for antisocial behavior, but they do confer vulnerability to a range of adolescent disorders and
behaviors. Instead of encounters with the law, her adolescent son may have problems with alcohol or
drugs. The outcomes are different, but the same genes—expressed differently
under different environmental conditions—predispose them both.
The Role of the Environment
Even traits with a strong genetic component may be
influenced by environmental factors. Monozygotic twins exemplify this principle.
Despite their matching DNA, their height, need for glasses, disease
susceptibility or personality (just to name a few) may differ.
When one member of a monozygotic pair is alcoholic, the likelihood of
alcoholism in the other is only about 50 percent. The high heritability of
externalizing behaviors suggests that the second twin, if not alcoholic, may be antisocial or dependent on another substance. But sometimes the second twin is problem free. DNA is never destiny.
Behavioral geneticists have worked to quantify the role of the environment in addiction, but as a group we have done much less to specify it. Although we know that 50 percent of the variance in alcohol dependence comes
from the environment, we are still in the early stages of determining what
those environmental factors are. This ignorance may seem surprising, as
scientists have spent decades identifying the environmental precursors
to addiction and antisocial behavior. But only a small percentage of that
research incorporated genetic controls.
Instead, many studies simply related environmental variation to
children's eventual problems or accomplishments. A classic example of this
failure to consider genetic influence is the repeated observation that children
who grow up with lots of books in their home tend to do better in
school. But concluding that books create an academic child assumes
(falsely) that children are born randomly into families—that parent-child
resemblance is purely social. Of course, parents actually contribute to their
children's environment and their genes. Moreover, parents tend to
provide environments that complement their children's genotypes: Smart parents
often deliver both "smart" genes and an enriched environment.
Athletic parents usually provide "athletic" genes and many
opportunities to express them. And, unfortunately, parents with addiction problems tend
to provide a genetic vulnerability coupled with a home in which alcohol or drugs are available and abusing them is
normal.
To understand the true experiential origins of a behavior, one must
first disentangle the influence of genes. By using genetically informative samples, we can subtract genetic influences and
conclude with greater confidence that a particular environmental factor affects
behavior. Using this approach, our data suggest that deviant peers and poor
parent-child relationships exert true environmental influences that promote
substance use and externalizing behaviors during early adolescence.
When considering the
effect of environment on behavior, or any complex trait, it's helpful to
imagine a continuum of liability. Inherited vulnerability determines where a person begins on the
continuum (high versus low risk). From that point, psychosocial or
environmental stressors such as peer pressure or excessive conflict with
parents can push an individual along the
continuum and over a disease threshold.
However, sometimes the environment actually modifies gene expression. In other
words, the relative influence of genes on a behavior can vary by setting. We see this context-dependent gene expression in recent,
unpublished work comparing study participants from rural areas (population less
than 10,000) with those from more urban settings. Within cities of 10,000 or
more, genes substantially influence which adolescents use illicit substances or show other aspects of the externalizing
continuum—just as earlier research indicated. But in very rural areas, environmental (rather than genetic) factors
overwhelmingly account for differences in externalizing behavior.
One way to interpret this finding is that urban environments, with their
wider variety of social niches, allow for a more complete expression of
genetically influenced traits. Whether a person's genes nudge her to substance use and rule-breaking, or abstinence and obedience, the city may offer more
opportunities to follow those urges. At the same
time, finite social prospects in the country may allow more rural parents to
monitor and control their adolescents' activities and peer-group selection,
thereby minimizing the impact of genes. This rural-urban difference is
especially interesting because it represents a gene-by-environment interaction.
The genes that are important determinants of behavior in one group of people
are just not as important in another.
The Future of Addiction Research
This complex interplay of genes and environments makes progress slow. But investigators have the data and statistical
tools to answer many important addiction-related questions. Moreover, the tempo
of discovery will increase with advances in molecular genetics.
In the last fifteen years, geneticists have
identified a handful of specific genes related to alcohol metabolism and synapse
function that occur more often in alcoholics. But the task of accumulating the
entire list of contributing genes is daunting. Many genes influence behavior, and the relative importance of a single gene may differ across ethnic or racial populations. As a result, alcoholism-associated genes in one population may not exert a
measurable influence in a different group, even in well-controlled studies.
There are also different pathways to addiction, and some people's alcoholism
may be more environmental than genetic in origin. Consequently, not only is any
one gene apt to have small effects on behavior, but that gene may be absent in
a substantial number of addicts.
Nonetheless, some day scientists should be able to estimate risk by reading the sequence of a person's DNA. Setting aside the possibility of a futuristic dystopia, this advance will usher
in a new type of psychology. Investigators will be
able to observe those individuals with especially high (or low) genetic risks for
externalizing as they respond, over a lifetime, to different types of
environmental stressors.
This type of research is already beginning. Avshalom Caspi, now at the University of Wisconsin, and his colleagues
divided a large group of males from New Zealand based on the expression level
of a gene that encodes a neurotransmitter-metabolizing enzyme, monoamine
oxidase A or MAOA. In combination with the life histories of these men, the
investigators demonstrated that the consequences of an abusive home varied by
genotype. The gene associated with high levels of MAOA was protective—those men
were less likely to show antisocial behaviors after childhood maltreatment than
the low-MAOA group.
Further advances in molecular genetics will bring opportunities for more
studies of this type. When investigators can accurately rank experimental
participants by their genetic liability to externalizing, they will gain insight into the complexities of gene-environment
interplay and answer several intriguing questions: What type of family
environments are most at-risk children born into? When children with different
genetic risks grow up in the same family, do they create unique environments by seeking distinct friends and experiences? Do they elicit different parenting
styles from the same parents? Could a low-risk sibling keep a high-risk child from trouble if they share a close friendship? Is one
type of psychosocial stressor more apt to lead to substance use while another leads to antisocial behavior?
Molecular genetics will eventually deepen our understanding of the
biochemistry and biosocial genesis of addiction. In the interim, quantitative
geneticists such as ourselves continue to characterize the development of
behavior in ways that will assist molecular geneticists in their work. For
example, if there is genetic overlap between alcoholism, drug dependence and
antisocial behavior—as the MCTFR data suggest—then it may help to examine extreme externalizers, rather than simply alcoholics, when searching for the genes that produce alcoholism
vulnerability.
Much Left to Learn
Although the MCTFR data have resolved some addiction-related questions, many others remain, and our team has just begun to scratch the surface of possible research. Our
work with teenagers indicates that externalizing is a key factor in early-onset substance-use problems, but the path to later-life addiction may be distinct. Some evidence suggests that genes play a lesser role in
later-onset addiction. Moreover, the markers of risk may vary. Being prone to
worry, becoming upset easily and tending toward negative moods may, with age,
become more important indicators. We don't yet know. However, the MCTFR continues to gather information about its participants as
they approach their 30s, and we hope to keep following this group into their 40s and beyond.
Meanwhile, the evidence suggests that for early-onset addiction, most
relevant genes are not specific to alcoholism or drug dependence. Instead, the
same genes predispose an overlapping set of disorders within the externalizing
spectrum. This conclusion has significant implications for prevention: Some
impulsive risk-takers, frequent rule-breakers and oppositional children may be just as much at
risk as early users.
At the same time, many kids with a genetic risk for externalizing don't
seem to require any sort of special intervention; as it is, they turn out just
fine. DNA may nudge someone in a certain direction, but it doesn't force them to go there.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
