Skip to main content

Addiction, deGuglielmo & Venniro

By
These papers were some of my favorite that we've read, especially the Venniro paper. In the Venniro paper, the authors sought to answer the question, "Can the option of social interaction override a rats desire for drug self-administration?" In particular, Venniro et al studied addictive behaviors using methamphetamines and heroin. Venniro et al studied one circuit-specific mechanism for this behavior, much like how the deGuglielmo paper focused their work on the functionality of the CRF^CeA-BNST pathway. The question that hte deGuglielmo paper primarily answered was, "are the CRF projections in the CeA-BNST pathway responsible for the behaviors seen in alcohol use disorder?" Both papers were, in my opinion, designed quite well for studying addiction. 

 Intermittently, I run into social media posts that tout how important social interaction is for preventing drug addiction; however, the Venniro paper is the first evidence I've seen of this that is scientifically grounded (not that I looked very hard, but I am more inclined to believe it now). Venniro's results convince me just how powerful the effects of socialization are to a being's mental health. As an aspiring healthcare worker, this is definitely a paper that I'll hold close. Popping pills to treat mental disorders isn't necessarily the best route--it certainly isn't the only route. However, in humans, if treatments were as easy as saying, "just socialize, it'll help you overcome your addiction," I suspect it would've been done by now. Societal and medical stratifications aside, this study makes me wonder how social networks in groups of people can be reinforced through being a drug user. That is, does continuous use of drugs strengthen existing social relationships, leading to a cycle of drug use, social reinforcement, and addiction?

 DeGuglielmo et al show convincing data that CRF projections from the CeA to the BNST are functionally related to withdrawal and addiction behaviors in rats addicted to alcohol. My one big critique for this paper is that the behavior is done in a very controlled environment. The authors state that this CeA-BNST pathway is a potential target to treat excessive alcohol use. However, this is stated without exploring factors such as chronic and acute stress, circulating levels of hormones, or ingesting excess alcohol in addition to another addictive drug. Though I am convinced that their experiment was clean, and the functionality of the circuit in their lab rats is valid, I think addiction of any sort is too complex of an issue to narrow down to one single pathway. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gut-Brain Interactions: Buffington et al, Reber et al 2016

By
April 13 Papers (Buffington et. al, Reber et. al) I found this week’s papers to be quite novel in that they both proposed potential treatments for neurodevelopmental or psychiatric disorders that target bacterial or microbial abnormalities and how these give rise to certain behavioral and physical symptoms associated with the disorders. I thought this was a very unusual yet interesting approach, and as I have not previously studied the gut-brain axis, these papers offered me a fresh perspective on researching psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders. They were also unconventional in their focus of the physical symptoms that often accompany mental disorders, as this is not something that I have seen many other papers touch upon very much. Particularly, I was surprised by the Reber et al paper’s focus on the link between psychiatric disorders and inflammation in organs other than the brain, such as the colon, and the Buffington et al paper’s description of a relationship between ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al. and Reber et al.: Gut-Brain Interactions

By
While I have not encountered a lot of gut-brain interaction literature yet. I found each paper unique and fascinating. Reber et al felt inaccessible for me. I felt like I didn’t understand what the goal of the paper really was and why they did the tests that they did. It seems like most of their relevant information got shoved into numerous supplementary figures and their behavior was quite difficult to follow. Multiple sections of their paper were supported with data found entirely in supplementary figures, which makes it difficult to follow the same conclusions. I have a few issues with the behavior they chose and because of this, I struggle to find driving conclusions from their work. I don’t understand why the CSC was not only the prior stressor but was also the acute stress condition both groups faced. To me, I feel like it would have made more sense to have the CSC be the prior stressor and then judge the effect on social behavior with maybe a three choice chamber test or te...
Post a Comment
Read more

Buffington et al (2016) and Reber et al. (2016)

By
This week's articles were about the role of the gut-brain axis in neurodevelopment and stress. Reber and colleagues used a heat-killed version of the bacteria, M. vaccae, as a type of vaccine and found that administration to mouse models resulted in decreased response to chronic stress, prevented colitis related to stress, and reduced measures of anxiety. Reber et al. also used the inactivated M. vaccae in a mouse model of IBD and found that the bacteria prevented stress-induce flare-ups of colitis, but that this could be reversed by removing T cells. Buffington and colleagues instead examined the role of gut microbiota in maternal high-fat diets (MHFD) in the neurodevelopment and social behaviors of their offspring. Buffington et al. found that housing MHFD rats with the offspring of regular diet (MRD) rats prevented social deficits in their offspring. They also found that this co-housing arrangement prevented an imbalance in the gut bacteria Reber and colleagues' findings w...
Post a Comment
Read more