Recent research from the University of Mississippi has revealed how repeated stress fundamentally alters brain function in ways that persist for weeks, potentially explaining why some individuals become more vulnerable to substance use disorders. The findings, published in the journal eNeuro, offer critical insights into the neurological mechanisms that link chronic stress to increased addiction risk.

How Stress Alters Decision-Making and Reward System…The study revealed a troubling pattern in brain activity following repeated stressful events. Activity in the prefrontal cortex decreased significantly, potentially compromising the brain’s ability to make sound judgements. Simultaneously, activity in the ventral tegmental area initially increased, heightening the desire for rewards, before dropping below normal levels in subsequent weeks.

This dangerous combination creates a perfect storm: diminished capacity for rational decision-making coupled with intensified cravings for immediate gratification, followed by a persistent “reward deficit” where normal rewards no longer provide satisfaction. The research demonstrates that chronic stress makes risky behaviours more tempting and harder to resist.

“Stress decreases the percentage of people who can just walk away from drugs and increases the risk of developing substance use disorder,” Del Arco noted. 

Read complete research here

Recent scientific research has introduced a groundbreaking tool for understanding one of the most powerful forces in addiction: craving. The Craving Assessment Scale for Behavioural Addictions and Substance-use Disorders (CASBAS) represents a significant advancement in how we measure and comprehend the intense desires that characterise addictive patterns.

What Is Craving Assessment and Why Does It Matter?

Craving is defined as an intense, subjective experience of desire—an overwhelming urge to use a substance or engage in a specific behaviour. This phenomenon sits at the heart of addiction, affecting everything from initial substance use to the likelihood of relapse after treatment.

Understanding craving is crucial because it plays both a symptomatic and mechanistic role in addiction development. Research demonstrates that craving intensity can predict:

• How likely someone is to engage in addictive behaviours
• Difficulties in controlling substance use or behavioural patterns
• Treatment outcomes and recovery success
• Risk of relapse during recovery attempts

The Three Faces of Craving Assessment

The CASBAS identifies three distinct types of craving experiences, each with different underlying motivations:

• Reward Craving

This type involves seeking positive feelings and stimulation. People experiencing reward craving are driven by the desire for pleasurable sensations and the positive reinforcement that comes from engaging in the behaviour or using the substance.

• Relief Craving

Relief craving centres on escaping negative feelings. Individuals seek to reduce tension, stress, or discomfort through their addictive behaviour. This form of craving often increases during periods of heightened stress or anxiety.

• Urgency

Characterised by intrusive, repetitive thoughts, urgency represents the obsessive component of craving. Those experiencing high urgency feel they cannot think about anything else and struggle with impaired functioning due to their intense desire.

Why Standardised Craving Assessment Transforms Research

Previously, researchers faced significant challenges because different tools measured craving differently across various substances and behaviours. This inconsistency made it difficult to compare findings or understand craving as a universal phenomenon in addiction.

The CASBAS addresses this gap by using the same six questions across eight different addictive patterns, including gaming, gambling, shopping, social media use, and substance use involving alcohol, cannabis, and nicotine. This standardisation allows researchers to identify common mechanisms whilst respecting the unique characteristics of different addictive behaviours.

Understanding Craving Changes Over Time

One particularly valuable finding shows that craving is not constant—it fluctuates based on situations and exposures. Research using the CASBAS demonstrated that craving levels:

• Decrease during neutral activities
• Increase significantly when people imagine engaging in their specific addictive behaviour
• Respond to environmental cues and triggers

This understanding has important implications. If craving is situational and changeable, interventions can be developed to help people manage these intense urges when they arise.

The Role of Mental Imagery in Craving Assessment

Interestingly, research revealed that mental imagery abilities play a significant role in craving intensity. When people vividly imagine engaging in an addictive behaviour, their craving levels rise substantially. This finding aligns with psychological theories suggesting that mental imagery is a precondition for forming subjective states of desire.

This insight opens possibilities for intervention strategies that address how people think about and imagine their addictive behaviours.

Looking Forward: Applications for Prevention

The development of reliable craving assessment tools represents progress in understanding addiction mechanisms. By identifying different craving types and their triggers, researchers can better understand the pathways that lead from initial experimentation to problematic patterns.

For young people and families, understanding that craving involves distinct psychological processes—seeking reward, avoiding discomfort, and experiencing urgency—provides a framework for recognising early warning signs. The transient nature of craving also offers hope: these intense feelings pass, and with appropriate strategies, they can be managed.

As research continues using standardised tools like the CASBAS, we move closer to comprehensive understanding of how addictive patterns develop and, crucially, how they might be prevented before they take hold. (Source: WRD News)

Author links open overlay panel 

(Note, it is NOT Cannabis – only one cannabinoid applied under therapeutic oversight that can aid in treating methamphetamine addiction) 

Abstract: Cannabidiol (CBD), a non-psychoactive cannabinoid, shows great promise in treating methamphetamine (METH) addiction. Nonetheless, the molecular target and the mechanism through which CBD treats METH addiction remain unexplored. Herein, CBD was shown to counteract METH-induced locomotor sensitization and conditioned place preference. Additionally, CBD mitigated the adverse effects of METH, such as cristae loss, a decline in ATP content, and a reduction in membrane potential. Employing an activity-based protein profiling approach, a target fishing strategy was used to uncover CBD's direct target. ATP5A1, a subunit of ATP synthase, was identified and validated as a CBD target. Moreover, CBD demonstrated the ability to ameliorate METH-induced ubiquitination of ATP5A1 via the D376 residue, thereby reversing the METH-induced reduction of ATP5A1 and promoting the assembly of ATP synthase. Pharmacological inhibition of the ATP efflux channel pannexin 1, blockade of ATP hydrolysis by a CD39 inhibitor, and blocking the adenosine A1 receptor (A1R) all attenuated the therapeutic benefits of CBD in mitigating METH-induced behavioral sensitization and CPP. Moreover, the RNA interference of ATP5A1 in the ventral tegmental area resulted in the reversal of CBD's therapeutic efficacy against METH addiction. Collectively, these data show that ATP5A1 is a target for CBD to inhibit METH-induced addiction behaviors through the ADO–A1R signaling pathway.

(Complete Research Download Here)

When New York Mayor Eric Adams proposed forcing addicted individuals into treatment if they posed risks to themselves or others, the backlash was immediate. One activist called the plan “horrific.” Another said it “sends a chill up my spine.” Yet this visceral opposition may overlook a crucial reality: mandated drug treatment, when properly executed, can transform lives and restore communities.

The debate over compulsory care has intensified as cities grapple with unprecedented drug crises. With the most lethal illicit drug supply in American history flooding streets, the question is no longer whether intervention is necessary, but what form it should take.

The debate over compulsory care has intensified as cities grapple with unprecedented drug crises. With the most lethal illicit drug supply in American history flooding streets, the question is no longer whether intervention is necessary, but what form it should take.

The Legal Framework for Mandated Drug Treatment

Civil commitment for mental health treatment has existed for a century in the United States. All 50 states have laws governing the practice, typically requiring evidence that individuals are gravely disabled or pose threats to their communities. The underlying principle remains consistent: governments can provide care to seriously ill people even against their wishes.

However, New York is amongst the minority of states that do not consider addiction alone sufficient legal foundation to mandate care. This distinction matters because the alternative to mandated drug treatment in cities like New York often isn’t voluntary treatment, but no treatment at all. For many, it means life on the street with fentanyl and other deadly substances.

What Research Reveals About Compulsory Treatment

One of the largest long-term studies examining mandated drug treatment followed 2,095 addicted patients. The findings challenge common assumptions: one year after treatment, patients who received mandated care are slightly more likely to avoid drug use than those who entered treatment voluntarily. Moreover, mandated patients are less likely to face rearrest than peers who voluntarily sought treatment within the justice system.

Other studies have produced mixed results, with some finding mandated patients do somewhat worse or the same as voluntary patients. A recent review of 22 studies found “a lack of high-quality evidence” either supporting or opposing involuntary treatment for addiction.

Yet these studies share a critical limitation: none compared involuntary treatment results with receiving no treatment whatsoever, the most relevant comparison for policy decisions. (Complete article WRD News)

Groundbreaking Research Challenges Traditional Addiction Treatment

A groundbreaking monograph by addiction specialist Brian Coon is challenging the traditional approach to substance use disorder treatment, advocating for a comprehensive tobacco-free addiction treatment model that could dramatically improve recovery outcomes.

The research presents compelling evidence that smoke-free recovery programmes deliver significantly better results than conventional methods. According to the findings, when addiction treatment centres adopt tobacco-free protocols, recovery rates increase by an average of 25% – a statistic that could transform thousands of lives annually.

Complete Article