Boffin finds gene for coke addiction A German researcher has found a gene linked to cocaine addiction - coke addicts were 25 per cent more likely to have the gene than those who do not use the drug. Rainer Spanagel, a professor at the Central Institute of Mental Health in Germany, said: "If you are a carrier of this gene variant, the likelihood of getting …
just because of "coke addicts were 25 per cent more likely to have the gene" it is happily assumed by some terrible teuton that this gene boosts cocaine addiction? How many people were screened? If the number was fair below 100, I believe that there are MULTIPLE genes which ALL of the of the subjects share and yet have NO BEARING AT ALL with any type of addiction
I have to agree with Ylydxi.
We seem to be getting alot of report where 'scientists' have found a strong corollation between this or the other, but when you read it they havent seemed to fo followed any of the standard scientific methods, and whats really funny they sometimes go out there way to dismiss the time honoured methods in favour of this lunacy - or make a quick buck method, (or am i just being cynical?)
25% of anything is just a correlation at best its hardly a possitive link to anything.
Its the old argument that because birds sit on powerlines, does it mean that birds are responsible for power cuts?
*\. Picking up a lab coat, Im not a trained scientist but neither are any of these clowns - now wheres my government grant?
This is bullshit science. Sample a bunch of people who prefer cake to ice-cream and you'll no doubt be able to find at least one gene (out of the 25,000 or so in humans) which is more prevalent in cake fanciers.
This is just like all those stupid studies that say people who eat cabbage are 25% more likely to play with their nads first thing in the morning. There are way too many variables to make these daft connections.
Cocaine is not a proper grown-up addiction anyway, like alcohol, most downers,nicotine & opiates are. Coke addiction is largely in the mind - people think they're addicted because they like doing it - just like many other things they do that they wouldn't want to do without. Plus a little bit of rebound tiredness on withdrawal - big deal.
Lightweights.
Coke addicts were 25% more likely to have the gene. and this means that if you have the gene you may want to be vaccinated against the high... right.
So what proportion of people are coke addicts? And what proportion of people with the gene are coke addicts?
Methinks this guy's got shares in a coke vaccine company. The 0.1% or less of people with coke problems do no in any way justify screwing around with the brain chemistry of the 99.9% of folks (maybe 99.8% of those with this gene) that don't get into coke problems in the first place.
Coke vaccine! Honestly, it's not like you can "catch" coke like a disease, and if you're planning on sticking it up your nose then it would seem to me that a vaccine would make the whole thing a waste of time and money...
Paris, because she's a statistic.
So people can be screened to see the likelihood that they could be addicted to a criminal act? So if you get the all clear you can just go right ahead and break the law in the knowledge you probably won't get addicted. Alternatively people could not take the drug in the first place.
I'm not anti-drugs as it happens, but it seems a pointless task to be screening people for this gene.
25% isn't a lot. Mind you, 25% *more* people had this gene. Annoyingly I can't find the paper on PNAS yet so I don't even know how many people actually have that gene. 1% vs 1.25% isn't really interesting, you see. Also, there isn't necessarily a direct relation - assuming addicts are 25% more likely to be male one could've marked the whole bloody Y-chromosome as "linked to addiction". Please, try and write a slightly less stupid headline.
Note: the submission form didn't think "25%?" was a title, for some reason.
As far as I know cocaine is a pretty addictive drug, so its not beyond reason to suggest that the marker exists in people who are more likely to be exposed to the drug. Maybe it's an indicator for people who are likely to end up working at a strategy boutique? If that's the case then we would be able to detect the buggers at an early age and send them to a special school where all such tendencies are "educated" out of them
A while ago they found a gene affecting fat uptake in the intestines. They then said that people with the active form of this gene were more likely to be fat.
The reality is that the people with the inactive form are the mutant freaks that can't absorb vital nutrients and end up being these people that can eat what they like and stay thin.
Point being, fat gene or not....if you eat healthily and exercise you will stay thin. Coke gene or no, you can't get addicted if you never take it.
Now where's the gene for attraction to Paris Hilton?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
