Unwarranted optimism in media portrayals of genetic research on addiction overshadows critical ethical and social concerns.

The cost of addiction in the United States, in combination with a host of new tools and techniques, has fueled an explosion of genetic research on addiction. Because the media has the capacity to reflect and influence public perception, there is a need to examine how treatments and preventive approaches projected to emerge from addiction genetic research are presented to the public. The authors conducted a textual analysis of 145 news articles reporting on genetic research on addiction from popular print media in the United States and from popular news and medical internet sites. In articles that report on prevention, the media emphasize vaccine development and identifying individuals at genetic risk through population screening. Articles that emphasize treatment often promote current pharmaceutical solutions and highlight the possibility of tailoring treatments to specific genetic variants. The authors raise concerns about the tendency of this coverage to focus on the benefits of pharmaceutical treatments and genetic-based approaches to prevention while neglecting or downplaying potential risks and ethical issues. This analysis suggests a need for more balanced, evidence-based media reporting on the potential outcomes of genetic research.

The media and behavioral genetics: Alternatives coexisting with addiction genetics.

To understand public discourse in the U.S. on genetic causation of behavioral disorders, we analyzed media representations of genetic research on addiction published between 1990 and 2010. We conclude first that the media simplistically represent biological bases of addiction and willpower as being mutually exclusive: behaviors are either genetically determined, or they are a choice. Second, most articles provide only cursory or no treatment of the environmental contribution. A media focus on genetics directs attention away from environmental factors. Rhetorically, media neglect the complexity underlying of the etiology of addiction and direct focus back toward individual causation and responsibility.

The experience of addiction as told by the addicted: incorporating biological understandings into self-story.

How do the addicted view addiction against the framework of formal theories that attempt to explain the condition? In this empirical paper, we report on the lived experience of addiction based on 63 semi-structured, open-ended interviews with individuals in treatment for alcohol and nicotine abuse at five sites in Minnesota. Using qualitative analysis, we identified four themes that provide insights into understanding how people who are addicted view their addiction, with particular emphasis on the biological model. More than half of our sample articulated a biological understanding of addiction as a disease. Themes did not cluster by addictive substance used; however, biological understandings of addiction did cluster by treatment center. Biological understandings have the potential to become dominant narratives of addiction in the current era. Though the desire for a "unified theory" of addiction seems curiously seductive to scholars, it lacks utility. Conceptual "disarray" may actually reflect a more accurate representation of the illness as told by those who live with it. For practitioners in the field of addiction, we suggest the practice of narrative medicine with its ethic of negative capability as a useful approach for interpreting and relating to diverse experiences of disease and illness.

Research and reporting on the development of sex in fetuses: gendered from the start.

Research into human genetics has been expanding rapidly and most people learn about that research from mass media. Because prior research finds gender bias in aspects of both science and the media, we investigate the messages presented to the public concerning the relationship between biology and gender, taking as a case research on the genetic development of sexual difference before birth. We examine both the science that is getting media attention and the form that coverage takes. We find that gendered assumptions direct the science but also that scholarly discourse makes gender biases in method and interpretation accessible to scientific critique. On the other hand, mass media reporting ignores feminist critiques, marginalizes women and dramatically reinscribes gendered beliefs about the inherent superiority of men and the biological basis for gender differences in personality and behavior.

"Why did I get that part of you?" Understanding addiction genetics through family history.

Scientists have sought to uncover the genetic bases of many diseases and disorders. In response, scholars defined "geneticization" to describe genetic infiltration of understandings of health and illness. In our research, we interviewed 63 individuals in addiction treatment programs to identify what form of geneticization best fits individuals' description of their own addiction. Individuals' narratives of their lives, which include family history and are influenced by cultural and structural factors, affect respondents' reactions to a potential genetic basis of addiction. Most who had a family history of addiction subscribed to a notion that addiction "runs in families," while most who lacked a family history of addiction used this fact to reject the notion of genetic inheritance of addiction. We conclude that though we see elements of several different versions of geneticization, Nikolas Rose's version, that genetics affects peoples' perceptions of addiction in small but important ways, best describes our respondents' views.

"I don't have to know why it snows, I just have to shovel it!": Addiction Recovery, Genetic Frameworks, and Biological Citizenship.

The gene has infiltrated the way citizens perceive themselves and their health. However, there is scant research that explores the ways genetic conceptions infiltrate individuals' understanding of their own health as it relates to a behavioral trait, like addiction. Do people seeking treatment for addiction ground their self-perception in biology in a way that shapes their experiences? We interviewed 63 participants in addiction treatment programs, asking how they make meaning of a genetic understanding of addiction in the context of their recovery, and in dealing with the stigma of addiction. About two-thirds of people in our sample did not find a genetic conception of addiction personally useful to them in treatment, instead believing that the cause was irrelevant to their daily struggle to remain abstinent. One-third of respondents believed that an individualized confirmation of a genetic predisposition to addiction would facilitate their dealing with feelings of shame and accept treatment. The vast majority of our sample believed that a genetic understanding of addiction would reduce the stigma associated with addiction, which demonstrates the perceived power of genetic explanations in U.S. society. Our results indicate that respondents (unevenly) ground their self-perception of themselves as an addicted individual in biology.

Challenges in translational research: the views of addiction scientists.

OBJECTIVES: To explore scientists' perspectives on the challenges and pressures of translating research findings into clinical practice and public health policy. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 20 leading scientists engaged in genetic research on addiction. We asked participants for their views on how their own research translates, how genetic research addresses addiction as a public health problem and how it may affect the public's view of addiction. RESULTS: Most scientists described a direct translational route for their research, positing that their research will have significant societal benefits, leading to advances in treatment and novel prevention strategies. However, scientists also pointed to the inherent pressures they feel to quickly translate their research findings into actual clinical or public health use. They stressed the importance of allowing the scientific process to play out, voicing ambivalence about the recent push to speed translation. CONCLUSIONS: High expectations have been raised that biomedical science will lead to new prevention and treatment modalities, exerting pressure on scientists. Our data suggest that scientists feel caught in the push for immediate applications. This overemphasis on rapid translation can lead to technologies and applications being rushed into use without critical evaluation of ethical, policy, and social implications, and without balancing their value compared to public health policies and interventions currently in place.

Framing Nicotine Addiction as a "Disease of the Brain": Social and Ethical Consequences.

OBJECTIVES: In this article, we seek to better understand how a genomic vision of addiction may influence drug prevention and treatment. Though social influences on substance use and abuse (e.g., peer and family influence, socioeconomic status) are well documented, biomedical intervention is becoming increasingly technoscientific in nature. We wish to elucidate how emphasizing biological influences on substance use may lead to a vision of addiction as a phenomenon isolated within our bodies and neurochemistry, not lived daily within a complex social web of relationships and a particular political economy, including the tobacco industry, which aggressively markets products known to cause harm. METHODS: We explore the emerging view of addiction as a "disease of the brain" in open-ended interviews with 86 stakeholders from the fields of nicotine research and tobacco control. Interview data were analyzed using standard qualitative techniques. RESULTS: Most stakeholders hold a medicalized view of addiction. Though environmental variables are understood to be a primary cause of smoking initiation, the speed and strength with which addiction occurs is understood to be a largely biological process. Though stakeholders believe that an increased focus on addiction as a disease of the brain is not likely to lead to widespread unrealistic expectations for cessation therapies, they remain concerned that it may reinforce teenagers' expectations that quitting is not difficult. Finally, stakeholder responses indicate that genetic and neuroscientific research is unlikely to increase or decrease stigmatization, but will be used by interest groups to buttress their existing views of the stigma associated with smoking. CONCLUSION: We argue that the main potential harms of focusing on biological etiology stem from a concept of addiction that is disassociated from social context. Focusing on genetic testing and brain scans may lead one to overemphasize pharmaceutical "magic bullet cures" and underemphasize, and underfund, more traditional therapies and public health prevention strategies that have proven to be effective. Genetic research on addiction may fundamentally change our conception of deviance and our identities, and may thus transform our susceptibility to substance use into something isolated in our biology, not embedded in a biosocial context.

'To prove this is the industry's best hope': big tobacco's support of research on the genetics of nicotine addiction.

BACKGROUND: New molecular techniques focus a genetic lens upon nicotine addiction. Given the medical and economic costs associated with smoking, innovative approaches to smoking cessation and prevention must be pursued; but can sound research be manipulated by the tobacco industry? METHODOLOGY: The chronological narrative of this paper was created using iterative reviews of primary sources (the Legacy Tobacco Documents), supplemented with secondary literature to provide a broader context. The empirical data inform an ethics and policy analysis of tobacco industry-funded research. FINDINGS: The search for a genetic basis for smoking is consistent with industry's decades-long plan to deflect responsibility away from the tobacco companies and onto individuals' genetic constitutions. Internal documents reveal long-standing support for genetic research as a strategy to relieve the tobacco industry of its legal responsibility for tobacco-related disease. CONCLUSIONS: Industry may turn the findings of genetics to its own ends, changing strategy from creating a 'safe' cigarette to defining a 'safe' smoker.