Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Tuesday January 28 2020, @04:10PM   Printer-friendly
from the can't-catch-a-break dept.

UCI researchers identify a connection between early life adversity and opioid addiction:

[Note: UCI is the University of California, Irvine. --Ed.]

Published in Molecular Psychiatry, the study titled, "On the early life origins of vulnerability to opioid addiction," examines how early adversities interact with factors such as increased access to opioids to directly influence brain development and function, causing a higher potential for opioid addiction.

"We already know that genetics plays a major role in addiction vulnerability. But, this factor alone cannot account for the recent exponential rise in opioid abuse," said Tallie Z. Baram, MD, PhD, the Danette Shepard Chair in Neurological Sciences at the UCI School of Medicine and one of the senior researchers for the study. "Our team was determined to find out if environmental factors, like early life adversity, were contributing."

Until now, it was unclear whether alterations of the maturation and function of pleasure/reward circuits in the brain, resulting from ELA, actually caused individuals to be more vulnerable to opioid use disorder.

[...] For this study, researchers simulated ELA in rats by limiting bedding and nesting materials during a short, postnatal period of time. In female rats, this led to striking opioid addiction-like characteristics including an increased relapse-like behavior. Remarkably, as observed in addicted humans, the rats were willing to work very hard (pay a very high price) to obtain the drug.

"Our study provided novel insights into potential origins and nature of a reward circuit malfunction in the brain," said Baram. "Ultimately, we found that conditions during sensitive developmental periods can lead to vulnerability to the addictive effects of opioid drugs, especially in females, which is consistent with the prevalence of ELA in heroin addicted women."

Journal Reference:
Sophia C. Levis, Brandon S. Bentzley, Jenny Molet, Jessica L. Bolton, Christina R. Perrone, Tallie Z. Baram, Stephen V. Mahler. On the early life origins of vulnerability to opioid addiction. Molecular Psychiatry, 2019; DOI: 10.1038/s41380-019-0628-5


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Immerman on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:02PM (13 children)

    by Immerman (3985) on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:02PM (#950143)

    Of course we are! Unrestrained Capitalism is the best of all possible economic systems. So sayeth the almighty Dollar from It's throne on high. You're not one of the heretics are you? Perhaps you've heard we got religious freedom here? You're free to worship The Dollar and the glory of the Divine Superiortiy of the Rich in any way you please. But every once in a while "scientists" like these start trying to claim there might be negative consequences to The Divine Order. Obvious they have fallen to the darkness, and it's always shocking to see such depravity from otherwise intelligent people.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Funny=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:11PM (12 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:11PM (#950147)

    If our economic system were anything resembling "unrestrained capitalism", the banks would have been allowed to fail in 2008 instead of being bailed out by the government.

    • (Score: 5, Touché) by FatPhil on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:49PM (11 children)

      by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @06:49PM (#950172) Homepage
      It's so unrestrained, even the government itself is a free market, and big-finance is a large shareholder.
      --
      Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:14PM (5 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:14PM (#950187)

        So a central banking system that effectively can't fail because of protection from a centralized federal government is a feature of unrestrained capitalism, a system of finance which emphasizes as little government interference in the economy as possible.

        Makes perfect sense.

        • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday January 28 2020, @08:57PM (4 children)

          by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @08:57PM (#950223) Homepage
          Except the US doesn't really have a central banking system in the way that the rest of the world understands. It puts up a good pretence, in particular with its sneaky naming, so most people won't notice the difference, I will admit.
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
          • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:08PM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:08PM (#950233)

            The Federal Reserve is a central bank, the fact that the federal government has ceded its constitutional authority to issue money to a non-government entity has nothing to do with whether or not it's a central bank.

            You still haven't addressed how the government providing economic assurance to private players is compatible with a philosophy that emphasizes government non-intervention in the economy. You know that "invisible hand" Adam Smith kept talking about? Ponder for a second on what the word "invisible" means in this context.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29 2020, @12:54AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 29 2020, @12:54AM (#950355)

              Not what you think it means, for starts. Smith wasn’t a bloody anarcho-capitalist nitwit.

            • (Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Wednesday January 29 2020, @09:48AM

              by sjames (2882) on Wednesday January 29 2020, @09:48AM (#950567) Journal

              Ponder that Smith cautioned against handing out corporate charters except in the most extreme circumstances and advised that then the crarter corporation be kept on a very short leash and held strictly to it's charter. Ponder also that he advised that markets would need significant regulation to keep them working.

            • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday January 31 2020, @10:07AM

              by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Friday January 31 2020, @10:07AM (#951714) Homepage
              > You still haven't addressed

              ... something that I wasn't even attempting to address. Read my post and what it's a response to.

              Stop attempting to drag me into an irrelevant argument of your own making, troll.
              --
              Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
      • (Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:23PM (4 children)

        by Arik (4543) on Tuesday January 28 2020, @07:23PM (#950190) Journal
        Which means it's not a free market at all.
        --
        If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
        • (Score: 2, Interesting) by FatPhil on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:01PM (3 children)

          by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:01PM (#950228) Homepage
          If you think you can't buy a share, that's only because you're not offering enough - which is perfectly consistent with it being a free market.
          --
          Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
          • (Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:15PM (2 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 28 2020, @09:15PM (#950238)

            So when issues are caused by lack of government intervention, that's capitalism. When issues are caused by improper government intervention, that's also capitalism. When big business has too much power: capitalism. When government has too much power: capitalism. Hell, I guess the USSR's Gosbank and FDR's National Recovery Administration were great forces of capitalism too.

            Words have meanings, and you've demonstrated throughout this conversation that you don't know or recognize them.

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 29 2020, @04:08AM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 29 2020, @04:08AM (#950455) Journal

              Hell, I guess the USSR's Gosbank [...] were great forces of capitalism too.

              Welcome to the concept of state capitalism [soylentnews.org].

            • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday January 31 2020, @10:04AM

              by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Friday January 31 2020, @10:04AM (#951713) Homepage
              In what way is anything you've just ranted about anything to do with anything that I've just said?

              You're having an argument with yourself.
              --
              Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves