How much does genetics influence illegal drug preference and use?

[TheBlackPirate]

My title is my question. After reading the below article I began wondering, "How much does genetics influence illegal drug preference and use?".

Smoking and caffeine consumption: a genetic analysis of their association
Jorien L. Treur1,2,*, Amy E. Taylor3,4, Jennifer J. Ware4,5, Michel G. Nivard1,6, Michael C. Neale7, George McMahon4,5, Jouke-Jan Hottenga1,2,6, Bart M. L. Baselmans1,2, Dorret I. Boomsma1,2,6, Marcus R. Munafò3,4,† andJacqueline M. Vink1,2,6,†

Article first published online: 30 MAR 2016

DOI: 10.1111/adb.12391


Smoking and caffeine consumption show a strong positive correlation, but the mechanism underlying this association is unclear. Explanations include shared genetic/environmental factors or causal effects. This study employed three methods to investigate the association between smoking and caffeine. First, bivariate genetic models were applied to data of 10 368 twins from the Netherlands Twin Register in order to estimate genetic and environmental correlations between smoking and caffeine use. Second, from the summary statistics of meta-analyses of genome-wide association studies on smoking and caffeine, the genetic correlation was calculated by LD-score regression. Third, causal effects were tested using Mendelian randomization analysis in 6605 Netherlands Twin Register participants and 5714 women from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children. Through twin modelling, a genetic correlation of r0.47 and an environmental correlation of r0.30 were estimated between current smoking (yes/no) and coffee use (high/low). Between current smoking and total caffeine use, this was r0.44 and r0.00, respectively. LD-score regression also indicated sizeable genetic correlations between smoking and coffee use (r0.44 between smoking heaviness and cups of coffee per day, r0.28 between smoking initiation and coffee use and r0.25 between smoking persistence and coffee use). Consistent with the relatively high genetic correlations and lower environmental correlations, Mendelian randomization provided no evidence for causal effects of smoking on caffeine or vice versa. Genetic factors thus explain most of the association between smoking and caffeine consumption. These findings suggest that quitting smoking may be more difficult for heavy caffeine consumers, given their genetic susceptibility.

Free full text

 

[TheBlackPirate]

^If this trend also occurs with illegal drugs, then the War on Drugs effectively criminalizes and removes from society a genetic subset of the population. This could have significant implications on the ethics of the War on Drugs and mass incarceration in various countries.

 

[Transform]

We know that children with alcoholic parents are more likely to become alcoholics, and we know that genetics has an effect on neurology. I would be very surprised if some of that was not a result of genetics.

Some people can smoke a few cigarettes and ignore it for the rest of their lives. Others are hooked for ever after. I don't think that's totally situational but sadly I have no data.

With regards to the role of this in politics, the devil's advocate would argue that the whole point of the war on drugs is to reduce prevalence to protect the most vulnerable. We shouldn't compromise the WoD so that those who are genetically resilient can get high as this is a big disadvantage to those who are susceptible.

 

[Coolwhip]

Are you kidding me? The WoD is a bigger disadvantage to those who are susceptible to addiction than the addiction itself. Although I guess that is more about the tactics employed in the WoD than opposition to drug use itself.

As far of the topic at hand, I can't imagine there is any way that genetics wouldn't play a role in ones propensity to become a habitual drug user, or what drugs they use or find the most enjoyable. From everything to self-medicating anxiety or depression to finding one class of drugs more euphoric than other people.

 

[Cotcha Yankinov]

If I recall correctly the twin studies have shown that genetics are playing a role in about 50% of cases with alcoholism. I would expect similar figures for most drugs, with the other 50% of drug addicts addiction stemming from environmental issues or emotional trauma, with no significant genetic role.

A great deal of people with drug abuse issues are really self medicating a mental illness, and a great portion of that mental illness is genetic, though last I heard we haven't really identified much in many genome wide association studies (which unfortunately makes it hard to make animal models of mental illness like bipolar or schizophrenia when we don't have any genes we can knockout to cause those diseases).

 

[Seppi]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addiction#Risk_factors

 

[willy33]

We know that children with alcoholic parents are more likely to become alcoholics, and we know that genetics has an effect on neurology. I would be very surprised if some of that was not a result of genetics.

Some people can smoke a few cigarettes and ignore it for the rest of their lives. Others are hooked for ever after. I don't think that's totally situational but sadly I have no data.

With regards to the role of this in politics, the devil's advocate would argue that the whole point of the war on drugs is to reduce prevalence to protect the most vulnerable. We shouldn't compromise the WoD so that those who are genetically resilient can get high as this is a big disadvantage to those who are susceptible.

I assume you are playing Devil's Advocate (like you said) when you insinuated the WoD is a good policy? Wasn't sure if you were distancing yourself from that assertion or not....I assume a Moderator wouldn't support the WoD.

 

[TheBlackPirate]

With regards to the role of this in politics, the devil's advocate would argue that the whole point of the war on drugs is to reduce prevalence to protect the most vulnerable. We shouldn't compromise the WoD so that those who are genetically resilient can get high as this is a big disadvantage to those who are susceptible.

...and I respond: The majority of people whom try drugs never become addicted. Also most drug users are healthy and functional adults. Most of the harm involving illegal drug usage results from prohibition. In fact occasional psychoactive consumption often has both physical and psychological benefits too.

Functionally the War on Drugs isn't about public health. Look at the writing on the walls about alcohol consumption. Alcohol is addictive, abnormally physically toxic in excess, and alcohol withdrawal wrecks brain chemistry as bad as the worst of illegal drugs. Alcohol is legal in most prohibitionist countries.

 

[Incunabula]

Transform did say "the devil's advocate would argue...."

It's clear you guys misunderstod his post.

 

[palmanita]

the War on Drugs effectively criminalizes and removes from society a genetic subset of the population. This could have significant implications on the ethics of the War on Drugs and mass incarceration in various countries.

Think and believe this is true. One part are the genetics, the other part are mental / psychiatric disorders, for which one scarcerly is solely self responsible. So, it's a big and dirty violation of basic human rights every second. Time to stop this shit is far over.

Let's invest the saved & earned money from decriminalization into research, education & social care. (Oh, and "you"'ll get many motivated, brilliant people and even guinea pigs completely for free, we are out there waiting for our time, but stupid Big System cares only for itself and jerks off over destroyed lives.)

 

[SergeKolpa]

I think we all agree here that genetics do play a strong role if we get addicted to something or not. However the War of Drugs criminalizes the existence of addicts. Addicts are not bad people and I think it is bad to make laws that exterminate them and reduce their chances of good future.

Humankind needs some form of release/relief, humankind was taking some highs all the time. However some members are more sensitive to particular substances and they should be helped if they wish to be helped, not exterminated.

 

[adder]

I used to feel shame that I took "hard" drugs, though it was only because the stigma put on addicts, especially heroin addicts, makes the society loathe them. I never shared any gear, always used fresh syringes and needles, I had zero chances of catching any disease, yet the first thing that comes to mind when people think about heroin users is HIV & HCV. Though I understand that there are places where war on drugs has been taken to a different level and getting syringes and needles is not as easy as going to a pharmacy and buying them dirtcheap. I'd say making syringes and needles available only by prescription makes no sense at all. Anyway, right now I don't give a damn what people are going to think about me when they find out I took opioids for many years, including heroin i.v.'ed. The problem is scumbags only wait to acquire such a knowledge to make your life harder for no reason. Funny thing is out of all the people I know, and who don't know details about my past, hardly anyone would think I might have been a heroin/morphine addict, I'm sure even those who know me fairly well would never guess, I suppose the moment they found out would be a big challenge for them and a moment of truth for me whether they are truly sincere and honest as they appear now or are just conformists. Also, it's ridiculous when the majority of the society can accept addicts to anxiolytics like benzodiazepines and even pity them and at the same time treat heroin addicts like junk.

As for the genetics, I'm not sure if it works in my case, my father was addicted to alcohol for a great part of his life while I never considered alcohol to be fun or relaxing. Although I suppose many people could make "successful addicts", but they don't touch any drugs because of what the society and people around them think about drugs, I've met a lot of people drinking excessively and insulting all drug users in general, they're slaves to the system, a free-thinking person, whether they use drugs or not, would never treat alcohol differently from other drugs.