Alcoholic Consumption Increases with Stress and Research Goes into Why

It's an intuitive understanding that people who are stressed more are probably more likely to drink but it usually doesn't go past to try to discover how that works.  This research goes into the biochemistry of the reward system since finding what physiological reaction takes place due to stress means they may be able to mitigate the effects through some type of chemical intervention.  In other words, maybe they can come up with a pill to solve the problem.  (Science Daily:  Stressed-out rats consume more alcohol, revealing related brain chemistry)

A team led by John Dani, PhD, chair of the department of Neuroscience in the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, found that rodents that had been exposed to stress had a weakened alcohol-induced dopamine response and voluntarily drank more alcohol compared to controls. The blunted dopamine signaling to ethanol arose due to changes in the circuitry in the ventral tegmental area, the heart of the brain's reward system. The team published their findings in Neuron.

Stress alters the intricate system of checks and balances in the firing and quiescence of many types of neurons. "These effects happen at the minute level of potassium, chloride, and other ions moving across the neuron outer membrane via channels and transporters," Dani said. "In addition, by chemically blocking stress hormone receptors on neurons, we prevented stress from causing increased drinking behavior."
- Science Daily


The article goes into some of the specifics and with this result:

To reverse the negative effects of the erroneous excitatory signal, the team chemically prevented the excitatory switch within the reward circuitry. This correction prevented the blunted alcohol-induced dopamine signal, causing the stressed rats to consume less alcohol. "We gave the rats a chemical called CLP290 to restore the stress-altered circuitry to normal, which in turn corrected the firing of the dopamine neurons."

- Science Daily

There's one possibly minor quibble since the 'erroneous excitatory signal' is not erroneous since there was some form of stress, we just don't want it to have this effect.  They found CLP290 will prevent the effect but that's a long distance from being ready for prescriptions due to the long testing and approval process.


Here's a real life example since I remember when my grandfather died and my father was notified.  He immediately disappeared and wasn't seen again for three days.  He was said to have been 'on a bender' although no-one really knows what happened during that time.

So here's Real Life Dilemma 101:  is it better to take that bender when something supremely shitty happens as nothing will ever prepare a man for when his father died and likely the connection is the same for women when mother dies.  It's too supremely shitty to even comprehend for a while so you go off and get shit-faced, cry and scream, or whatever you do.

He wasn't one to do anything of that nature and he never did it again so I would need to really talk to him, I suppose, to get the perspective on whether it would have been better if he could take temporarily some kind of stress-tranquilizing pill and skip the dramatics.

In my own case, I was notified at a time when tearing out on a bender was not a possibility and it was paramount that I must not abandon my post.  That created a whole different kind of stress since blowing my cork was an impermissible response.

If I could have taken a pill to change that, I do not believe I would have done it.  My thinking is it's necessary to experience, process, all of those things which come at that moment and I would be deeply suspicious of the consequences of suppressing that even when it's rip your heart out painful.


Sorry this one isn't exactly kick up your heels but a whole lot of people get into deep trouble with this one.  It would be interesting to pursue the same research only to substitute reefer for the reward.  My hypothesis going into it would be the stress won't affect reefer consumption but it would be interesting to know.

A hard-core atheist researched in a gigantic national study whether secular dry-out organizations work better for drunkies than AAA or any which require some sort of religious engagement.  The research found AAA actually works better but he dutifully published the results.  If you don't have the balls to accept answers you don't like, science may not be for you.  I have huge respect for my friend's scientific integrity since atheism has been a fundamental part of his philosophy.