Eye on Science, Science Blog, Michael D. Lemonick, TIME

July 29, 2007 12:57

A Radical New Theory of Addiction?

Posted by Michael Lemonick | Comments (20) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This

Dan Umanoff, MD thinks he has one, and writes in a comment:

Say what you want about me. It's not about me. It's about the science. You say that the validity of my argument is dependent upon its acceptance by the mental health community. Please. Science doesn't work that way. Scientific validity is boss, not the results of some poll.....So, if you really are interested in improving the field of addictions and helping addicts you will read and study my work and let the people know about it so they can chose to use it. Only then will we know if it works. Absent this, we are stuck with the same old nonsense which we know doesn't work.

To which I answer: no, I won't read and study your work. I am a journalist, not a scientist, and certainly not a specialist. That being the case, it would be absurd for me to judge your theory, and highly irresponsible to send addicts to you for treatment. You won't like hearing this, but when evaluating radical new theories, of which I receive at least two per week (most of them proving Einstein or the Big Bang wrong), I have to rely on the judgments of scientists, not on my own reading of scientific papers.

I didn't say that the validity of your work depends on the opinions of others. But I do say that if you expect anyone to pay attention to you, you'd better convince a significant number of others in the field that you're right. Ultimately, a majority vote of your peers is essential to your credibility, like it or not.

If you can't convince them, it's either because, despite your certainty, your work isn't valid after all. Too bad, but it happens all the time. Or it's because the vested interests of the Establishment are conspiring against you. That happens too, unfortunately, but my reading your papers isn't going to change it. If you're right, you'll be vindicated, eventually.

Alas, if you're looking for publicity, you're stuck with the unfortunate fact that while they laughed at Wegener (who proposed continental drift) and they laughed at Barry Marshall (who claimed, correctly, that ulcers are caused by bacteria), they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.

Sphere Related Blogs & Articles

Reader Comments (20)

Ben Bonsens:

M.L. its usually not the eloquence of a thoughtful argument that proves a theory. Instead it is the repeatability by an outside second and third lab/study that proves a theory.

Further, science is basically the questioning of a system (hypothesis), determining a controlled environment to study the system (experiment), and reviewing the results as they pertain to the original question. Every one does this every day without even thinking. Otherwise we would still be in trees flinging our feces at each other.

As a researcher I read articles every day of experiments that compete with mine. Sometimes there are valid lessons to be learned and sometimes they don't know what they are talking about. But I can never discount someones work until I hear it out in its entirety.

Posted by Ben Bonsens | July 29, 2007 3:23 PM

Intrepyd:

Tom Cruise and company may disagree, but addiction is a disease. The "controversy" is more one-sided than the global warming debate. I've taken care of scores of patients with substance abuse disorders.

Posted by Intrepyd | July 29, 2007 8:15 PM

dan umanoff, m.d.:

I have no practice in addictions. I have no conflicts of interest. I make no money from addictions or addicts. My work is a purely critique and synthesis of the existing science of addiction causation and their implications only to help addicts and other people interested in addictions but unable to read the scientific literature understand the disease that causes addictions. Many people agree with my take on the current addiction causation science including Hiroi at Einstein and Gardner at NIDA but they are afraid to go public with their agreement for fear of losing their jobs and grants, controlled by NIDA and Volkow, a political appointee. If you don't read my material then you are passively allowing the experts, the ones who do have conflicts of interest, to run roughshod over the field and the country. The result of this is the present state of addictionology - a complete failure and scam as well as damaging to addicts and the country. That I am unable to get my work published in addiction journals doesn't mean my work is invalid. It may mean they don't want to hear the truth and don't want the truth to get to the public because it will ruin their scams, scams that make them tons of money. Your intellectual passivity allows this and prevents debate on the science, something the public needs. When was the last time you heard a debate on the science of addiction causation? Never. It's always NIDA's agenda and always one sided. Shame on you and the rest of the media.

Posted by dan umanoff, m.d. | August 4, 2007 1:02 PM

Mina:

Dan: Since you make 'no money' from addictions or addicts, I'll assume your book is free. Should we all include our mailing addresses to obtain a free copy? Thanks. ;)

Posted by Mina | August 4, 2007 2:17 PM

dan umanoff, m.d.:

Much of the book published in 1996 is on my web site for free. See: hypoism.com, under "learn more about the book." The entire continually updated argument against the current addiction theory, the hijacked brain hypothesis, is also available for free on the web site along with all the principles of Hypoism: http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/hypoismhypothesis/ Those who chose to read the rest of the book, along with the suggested addiction prevention and recovery methods, do happily pay for it, but I wouldn't say it has been profitable because only a few hundred copies have been sold and it pays for the publishing of the book as well as the web site. I have also worked for free as the ceo of the national association for the advancement and advocacy of addicts, inc. (N4A) for seven years. http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/thenationalassociationfortheadvancementandadvocacyofaddicts/ . This is the only educational and advocacy organization for addicts by addicts in the world.
By the way, Hypoism is not a radical theory by any stretch unless you consider the word radical to mean the only theory backed by only the valid science of addiction causation and its correct interpretation. Of course if you don't read it you'd not know this.
The sad and horrible thing about these comments is that none of you are interested in knowing the real science of addictions gleaned by me over the last 17 years from the morass of mostly nonsense in the addiction literature, otherwise you would be commenting not on me personally, invalid ad hominum attacks, but on the science and its interpretations I lay out in my writings, thus starting a debate, as necessary, on the science, the only meaningful outcome of all this. In the meantime, millions of addicts and their families are suffering and dying from the lack of this debate. I'm afraid this will only continue indefinitely because of your closed-minded attitudes and unfounded biased beliefs, allowing NIDA, NIAAA, AA, and ASAM to maintain their murderous stanglehold on all things related to addictions. Under their trance, nothing will or can change for the better as proved by the history of the last 70 years. It's only gotten worse. Your choice.

--You're sounding like a crank again, Dan. Millions are suffering and dying because the vast majority of mental-health professionals refuse to see the Obvious Truth as presented by none other than yourself. Don't you appreciate how you come across? Do you care?
M.L.

Posted by dan umanoff, m.d. | August 4, 2007 3:10 PM

Mina:

Dan: Attitude is important for getting people to listen. Ultimately, I can only speak for myself, but I'm judging your book by its cover, as presented by you here. It's your words that put me off reading it - not the topic of the book itself.

Condescension, ego and hyperbole make me cringe.

Posted by Mina | August 5, 2007 1:30 PM

dan umanoff, m.d.:

If you would read my book and web articles linked to these messages you would understand that Hypoism is the genetic disease of low activity of the reward system and instinct regulating mechanism caused by low dopamine and dopamine receptors as well as other neurobiological reasons for low activity of this large neurological system defined here: http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/thehypoismaddictionhypothesis/
I've been writing about this neurobiological deficiency (HYPO - thus how the name of the disease Hypoism is derived) and its implications since 1992.
Just recently we have two studies confirming this in patients with ADHD, a subset of mislabled children and adults with Hypoism, named on the basis of clinical features rather than neurobiology. In other words, adhd is hypoism. These two studies done by two different groups but showing essentially the same thing, show low dopamine and low dopamine activity receptors due to genetic alleles, exactly what Hypoism is. read: "Depressed Dopamine Activity in Caudate and Preliminary Evidence of Limbic Involvement in Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder", http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/64/8/932, and "Polymorphisms of the Dopamine D4 Receptor, Clinical Outcome, and Cortical Structure in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder," http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/short/64/8/921
My main article on Hypoism has much more neurobiological support in many different ways than just these two studies which my hypothesis predicted would come to pass: http://www.nvo.com/hypoism/hypoismhypothesis/
That these studies don't mention my work just means that the author's are scientifically neglegent, especially Volkow who has known about my work at least since 2000 when I gave a lecture on Hypoism at her work place, Brookhaven Labs at the request of Jack Wang, one of her co-authors. Ask him. She has fraudulently ignored Hypoism because she knows Hypoism destrys her pet theory, the hijacked brain hypothesis, the theory that runs everything in the world of addictions today. Too bad the hijacked brain hypothesis is wrong and is killing million of addicts and ruining their families via the drug war which is based on that theory. Hypoism destroys the massive addiction complex, a multibillion dollar industry defined and explained in my book. That is the conflict of interest they have in ignoring and censoring Hypoism, the correct addiction theory. Here's a quote from one of the authors of one of the above studies: "Individuals with ADHD also reported liking methylphenidate more than individuals without ADHD, the authors note. "The reinforcing responses to methylphenidate were negatively correlated with the dopamine increases, suggesting that decreased dopaminergic activity may also be involved in modulating the magnitude of the reinforcing effects of methylphenidate," they continue. "This suggests that dopamine dysfunction is involved with symptoms of inattention but may also contribute to substance abuse comorbidity in ADHD." Exactly what I describe as Hypoism for the last 15 years. Of course they are describing Hypoism, just by another name, a wrong name.
The implications of all this is discussed in my web articles and book. Not reading them means you are all putting your heads in the sand and allowing the wrong theory to continue to run the addiction world and ruin the lives of addicts of all kinds. The hijacked brain hypothesis pushed by Volkow has diametrically opposite implications from Hypoism on prevention, treatment, and public policy. Unless you read about it and stop defaming me you are just helping allow Volkow and the rest of the addiction community to kill addicts and ruin their families. The paradigm must change before addicts can be helped. I think that's a pretty good attitude on my part.

--Nobody's defaming you, Dan. I'm only pointing out how you come across. Maybe you do have the answer to the addiction problem that "they" refuse to acknowledge. Maybe not. But ranting and raving on and on in blog comments is about the last way to establish your scientific credibility, either among scientists or among science journalists. Do you really not understand this? What do other readers think?
--M.L.

Posted by dan umanoff, m.d. | August 9, 2007 3:25 PM

Mina:

'Not reading them means you are all putting your heads in the sand and allowing the wrong theory to continue to run the addiction world and ruin the lives of addicts of all kinds.'

-blink-

'Unless you read about it and stop defaming me you are just helping allow Volkow and the rest of the addiction community to kill addicts and ruin their families.'

-blinks again-

I have never read marketing quite like this before.

--Sadly, I have. All too often.
M.L.

Posted by Mina | August 10, 2007 4:00 AM

T McD Kluyts:

Hyppoism as a disease interest me because I encounter addicted persons on a daily basis. Unfortunately the hypoism website does not give a clear synopsis of what the disease criteria is.
What is the symptoms and signs of the disaese and what is the diagnostic modalities that need to be applied? What is the prognosis and how is it treated, please? Thanx, Tom.

Posted by T McD Kluyts | September 1, 2007 5:59 AM

Lionel Mills:

Occam and Addiction.
Ingesting any of the wide variety of addictive toxic substances will be attractive to anyone who has poor self esteem because drugs disrupt brain function (i.e. intoxicate). Poor self esteem can be found amongst the rich and famous as well as the poor and needy and it is an emotional response rather than something we can control easily.
The mechanism is a crude `jamming the works’ of the brain and thus disrupting the more complex (and hence most easily disrupted functions) which are the self esteem and hence the inhibitory function of the brain. It has implictions for
1. Education: we must try to ensure children do not suffer from poor self esteem even though they have no choice but to go where they are constantly being corrected.
2. The treatment of addiction: weaning off the drug is not enough. The recovering addict needs an understanding of the role of self esteem and how drugs is no more effective a solution for him that smashing the mirror would be to an ugly girl.

Posted by Lionel Mills | September 7, 2007 10:04 AM

brg8:

تامر حسني-برامج-1-a1-19-b2-78-71-18-21-59-60-58-61-22-42-9-a9-b9-b3-bb-77-65-53-73-56-49-5-84-ss-دردشة-شات-دردشه-دردشات-دردشه
كتابيه-دردشة كتابية-شات
كتابي دردشه صوتيه-دردشة
صوتية-صوتيه-صوتي-شات
صوتي 57-63-62-67-6-b6-b7-ab-6-29-75-4-8-82-83-15-16-17-11-12-55-13-72-80-79-25-64-24-51-26-tt-برامج
جوال-مقاطع بلوتوث-مسجات-نغمات-ثيمات-العاب
جوال-تصاميم-هكر-صور-صور
انمي-صور فنانين-ماسنجر-افلام-افلام
اجنبيه-منتدى للتعارف-منتديات
ادبية-منتدى للبنات فقط-العاب-العاب
بنات-سكس اناشيد-صور
سيارات-رياضة-تحميل
اهداف-محمد-سياحة
وسفر-منتديات عامة-منتديات
اسلامية-منتديات سياسيه-تعليم
لغات اجنبيه-تعليم اللغه الانجليزية نكت-خواطر-شعر-قصص-اساطير-روايات-حكم
وامثال-ازياء-منتدى
العروس-طبخ-طب-علم
النفس-برق-موقع
اغاني-مركز تحميل منتديات-شات-دردشة-دليل
مواقع-مسجات--ثيمات-صور بنات-صور
حب-1-2-3-4-5
6-7-8-9-10-دردشة
بنت الدلع-دردشة بنات-شات
بنات-شات الحب-دردشة
الحب-منتديات بنات-شات
الغلا-صور رومانسيه-صور
رومنسيه-صور فناين-صور
سيارات-افلام-خواطر-ازياء-صور
حلوه-روايات-كويت
25-هيفاء وهبي-بنات
السعودية-موقع عمرو خالد-ناصر
الفراعنة-نانسي عجرم-ياسر
القحطاني-شات-نغمات
نوكيا-قصص وروايات-مسجات حب-مسجات
عتاب-مسجات شوق-
مسجات مقالب-مسجات
نكت-مسجات حلوة-بلياردو-شعر
حامد زيد-ازياء اطفال-ازياء
خليجية-فساتين سهرة-فساتين
افراح-مركز تحميل صور مقاطع فيديو مركز تحميل الصور تحميل صور صور رومانسية رسائل حب موقع باربي صور عيون منتديات صور بنات تحميل الماسنجر مسجات حب مسجات ثيمات العاب للبنات فقط mobile9 برامج الماسنجر مكياج خلفيات تحميل العاب صور أنمي ترجمة نصوص صور حب العاب تلبيس تلبيس باربي العاب ماريو sitemap صور سيارات برامج جوال رسائل الجوال موقع باربي اكواد جافا العاب بنات فساتين صور تلوين اليوتيوب صور مقاطع صوتية مقاطع فيديو للتحميل صور حلوه موسوعة الصور دليل مواقع صور قلوب تحميل برامج windows live messenger 9 عيون
برامج جوال وموبايل Drivers برامج صوت وفيديو تحميل العاب جديدة برامج شبكات برامج حماية برامج إدارة النظام برامج تصميم وفوتوشوب نسخ اقراص و DVD برامج كمبيوتر الكمبيوتر كتب عربية تحميل كتب عربية برامج اطفال برامج بورتابل portable برامج عربية ومعربة برنامج هندسة معمارية برنامج ضغط وفك ضغط تعاريف الأجهزة وخدمات أخرى برامج المكتبة برامج منوعة موقع برامج العاب بنات العاب مسجات مرض منتديات صور صدام حسين العاب تلبيس العاب باربي العاب ترتيب غرف العاب طبخ العاب مغامرات العاب اكشن العاب ميك اب العاب مكياج العاب بنات منوعة hguhf hguhf fkhj tr'-1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138

Posted by brg8 | May 22, 2008 4:10 AM

toome

Posted by toome | July 23, 2008 9:18 AM

naber: