Berridge Kent C
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA.
Neuroethics. 2017 Apr;10(1):29-33. doi: 10.1007/s12152-016-9286-3. Epub 2016 Nov 7.
Where does normal brain or psychological function end, and pathology begin? The line can be hard to discern, making disease sometimes a tricky word. In addiction, normal 'wanting' processes become distorted and excessive, according to the incentive-sensitization theory. Excessive 'wanting' results from drug-induced neural sensitization changes in underlying brain mesolimbic systems of incentive. 'Brain disease' was never used by the theory, but neural sensitization changes are arguably extreme enough and problematic enough to be called pathological. This implies that 'brain disease' can be a legitimate description of addiction, though caveats are needed to acknowledge roles for choice and active agency by the addict. Finally, arguments over 'brain disease' should be put behind us. Our real challenge is to understand addiction and devise better ways to help. Arguments over descriptive words only distract from that challenge.
正常的大脑或心理功能从何处结束,病理学又从何处开始?这条界限可能很难辨别,这使得疾病有时成为一个难以捉摸的词汇。根据动机-敏感化理论,在成瘾过程中,正常的“渴望”过程会变得扭曲且过度。过度的“渴望”源于药物诱导的潜在大脑中脑边缘动机系统的神经敏感化变化。该理论从未使用过“脑部疾病”这个词,但神经敏感化变化可以说极端到足以且问题严重到足以被称为病理性的。这意味着“脑部疾病”可以是对成瘾的合理描述,不过需要注意的是要承认成瘾者的选择和主动行为所起的作用。最后,关于“脑部疾病”的争论应该被我们抛在脑后。我们真正的挑战是了解成瘾并想出更好的帮助方法。关于描述性词汇的争论只会分散我们应对这一挑战的精力。