The Fallacy of the Gateway Drug Theory

The Fallacy of the Gateway Drug Theory – Pain Medicine News – Dec 14, 2016 by Lynn R. Webster, MD

In 2012, Vanyukov et al published an article describing two separate views on the role that drugs play in initiating an addiction (Drug Alcohol Depend 2012;123:S3-S17).

One is the “gateway theory” and the other is the “common liability to addiction concept.”

The gateway theory places the drug as the primary factor in initiating a substance use disorder (SUD). The belief is that exposure to a licit rewarding drug (e.g., tobacco, prescription opioid) begins a developmental process that progresses like a disease to a more serious stage, culminating in the use of an illicit drug (e.g., marijuana, heroin).

Thus, in this theory, exposure to a drug initiates an SUD independent of the biology of the individual.  

The gateway theory can be traced to 1975, with a paper by Kandel reporting on the frequency with which adolescent illicit drug users had previously used marijuana (Science 1975;190:912-914).

The difficulty was the failure to demonstrate causality in the relationship.

People who use cocaine or heroin have usually been exposed to marijuana or a licit drug; however, the majority of marijuana users partake of no other illicit drug, and many heroin users skip the “steps” of softer drug use (Drug Alcohol Depend 2012;123:S3-S17)

Central to the gateway theory is that the locus of control is external, minimizing or eliminating the known biological contributions to the disease.

The mechanism by which one drug purportedly seeds an SUD involving another has never been fully explained, yet the gateway theory remains a popular precept, likely because it is a simple explanation.

And Americans LOVE simplicity, taking to heart a simplistic falsehood and rejecting a complex reality.

By this logic, drugs other than prescription opioids could also serve as a gateway to heroin use.

According to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health 2011-2013, most people using heroin had used at least three other drugs before heroin.

Yet the attorney general rightly disavows this theory.

Again, addiction is not a stepped disease driving people from softer to harder drugs.

Rather, the more likely theory is that people who develop SUDs have a shared vulnerability to other drugs of abuse based on biological factors, not on the sequence of exposures

Genetics and Environment at Play

In contrast, common addiction liability can explain the clinical spectrum of SUDs not explained by the gateway theory.

It does so by accounting for complex genetic and environmental factors that are activated in the disease of addiction.

This concept takes, as its basis, the overlapping genetic and behavioral factors that are common among people with various SUDs and that do not depend on any particular drug exposure or sequence of exposures (Drug Alcohol Depend 2012;123:S3-S17)

In accordance with the common addiction liability concept, people with an addiction to prescription opioids have a disease that is already expressed, and the person who subsequently seeks heroin is finding the most effective or affordable way to support the disease.

Muhuri et al emphasize this in showing that although prescription opioid abuse is a strong risk factor for heroin use and, indeed, most heroin users report having previously used prescription opioids nonmedically, heroin use among people who use prescription opioids for nonmedical reasons is rare, and the transition to heroin use appears to occur at a low rate (CBHSQ Data Review 2013. http://www.samhsa.gov/?data).

Understanding how the disease of addiction progresses is important to public health solutions to combat both prescription opioid and heroin addictio

Public policymakers seeking to solve the opioid crisis would be advised to acknowledge that the gateway theory of SUDs is unsubstantiated and potentially misleading.

Disorders develop where there is genetic vulnerability and an environment that drives individuals to seek relief from the stresses in their lives.

People vulnerable to developing SUDs have a common liability to substances of abuse that does not depend on a hierarchical sequence of exposures.  

Advertisements

Other thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s