Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Watch: A neuroscientist debunks common beliefs about drug addiction

Carl Hart is a neuroscientist and drug addiction expert at Columbia University. In a recent TEDMED talk, Hart spoke about drug addiction and the many misconceptions surrounding the topic — and how those misconceptions can mislead drug policy.

Hart went into neuroscience to cure the drug addiction he blamed for causing crime and poverty in his old Miami neighborhood. But when he began to work on the issue, he learned that his assumptions were wrong.

About 80 to 90 percent of the people who use illegal drugs don’t turn out addicts, Hart explained. As an example, Hart pointed to the three previous presidents, all of whom used drugs when they were younger. “Their drug use did not result in an inevitable downward spiral leading to debauchery and addiction,” Hart said. “And the experience of these men is the rule, not the exception.”

As Hart explained, many of the current assumptions about drug addiction are based on old animal experiments from the 1960s and 1970s. In these tests, animals were put in a cage with a lever that they could pull for a shot of a drug. Researchers found the animals would pull the lever until they died from an overdose.

Hart said these animals were never presented with an alternative, though. In other experiments, animals were given another option: a mate or a sweet treat. At that point, the animals began choosing the non-drug alternative, and they didn’t take the drug until they died.

Hart followed up on these experiments with human participants in 2000 and 2012. His lab recruited meth and crack cocaine addicts, and the addicts were given the option to choose between a small amount of money or their drug of choice. When the money option was $5, they chose the money about half the time. When the money option was $20, they chose the money about eight out of 10 times.

The results, of course, don’t diminish the real problems of crime, poverty, and drug addiction in some of America’s communities. But the findings show the problems are much more complicated than some, including a younger Hart, believe.

More in War on Drugs

Policy
The Supreme Court appears likely to let stoners own gunsThe Supreme Court appears likely to let stoners own guns
Policy

Gun lovers may soon have the right to bear bongs.

By Ian Millhiser
Policy
The Supreme Court will decide if marijuana users may be barred from owning gunsThe Supreme Court will decide if marijuana users may be barred from owning guns
Policy

Do stoners have a right to bear arms?

By Ian Millhiser
Politics
What we know about the mysterious closure and reopening of the El Paso airportWhat we know about the mysterious closure and reopening of the El Paso airport
Politics

The US shut down a major city’s airport, and nobody is quite sure why.

By Joshua Keating
Podcasts
Who is Nicolás Maduro?Who is Nicolás Maduro?
Podcast
Podcasts

And why did Trump want him out?

By Ariana Aspuru and Noel King
Politics
There is a real chance of a US-Venezuela war — so why does it feel fake?There is a real chance of a US-Venezuela war — so why does it feel fake?
Politics

“Fog of war” is the least of it.

By Joshua Keating
Politics
Why is Trump suddenly so obsessed with Honduras?Why is Trump suddenly so obsessed with Honduras?
Politics

As the US considers strikes on Venezuela, another Latin American country has caught the president’s attention.

By Joshua Keating