Individual differences in biological regulation: Predicting vulnerability to drug addiction, obesity, and other dysregulatory disorders.

Abstract

Physiological regulation is so fundamental to survival that natural selection has greatly favored the evolution of robust regulatory systems that use both reactive and preemptive responses to mitigate the disruptive impact of biological and environmental challenges on physiological function. In good health, robust regulatory systems provide little insight into the typically hidden complex array of sensor-effector interactions that accomplish successful regulation. Numerous health disorders have been traced to defective regulatory mechanisms, and generations of scientists have worked to discover ways to correct these defects and restore normal physiological function. Despite progress, numerous chronic health disorders remain resistant to treatment, and indeed for some disorders the incidence is increasing. We propose that an individual’s susceptibility to acquire certain persistent dysregulatory disorders can be traced to interindividual variation in how that individual’s regulatory system responds to challenges. Preexisting reliable individual differences among regulatory systems are typically unrecognized until appropriate regulatory challenges (e.g., exposure to a drug of abuse) lead to dysregulation (e.g., drug addiction). Specific characteristics of an individual’s regulatory responsiveness may include etiological factors that participate in the acquisition, escalation and maintenance of health disorders characterized by dysregulation. By appropriately challenging a healthy individual’s regulatory systems to identify its underlying characteristics, it is possible to ascertain whether an individual has an elevated risk for acquiring a dysregulated health condition and thereby enable strategies designed to prevent, rather than treat, the condition. This model is applied to drug addiction, and in addition we relate this approach to other dysregulated conditions such as obesity.

Relationship between level of response to alcohol and acute tolerance

“…In addition to the hypothesis that low LR reflects a diminished sensitivity to interoceptive cues that does not highly correlate with intra‐session tolerance per se (Paulus et al, 2012; Schuckit et al, 2008), the present results shine new light on several older theories intended to explain the relationship between an individual's initial sensitivity to a drug and the development of acute tolerance. Regardless of whether these models evoked theories involving classical Pavlovian conditioning principles (Siegel, 1983; Siegel et al, 2000), the opponent‐process theory of acquired motivation (Solomon, 1980), the regulatory model of addictive vulnerability (Ramsay et al, 2020; Ramsay & Woods, 1997) or Koob's and Le Moal's allostatic model of addiction (Koob & Le Moal, 2001), a key element that cuts across these 4 models is the view that acute tolerance likely represents an individual's counter‐regulatory response to a drug's pharmacodynamic effects. Viewed through this lens, another interpretation of our results might be that low LR individuals exhibit diminished acute tolerance compared with the high LR group because their compensatory physiological responses underwent more rapid, long‐lasting, or intense adaptation after their initial exposures to alcohol earlier in their histories.…”

Separating the Signal from the Noise: How Psychiatric Diagnoses Can Help Discern Food Addiction from Dietary Restraint

“…Recent review articles have discussed highly processed foods (often high in glycemic index) as impacting neurohormonal and inflammatory signaling pathways in ways that create a vicious cycle of impulsivity, compulsivity, FA, and EDs [ 93 , 94 , 95 ]. The Regulatory Model of Addictive Vulnerability (RMAV) proposes that susceptibility to addictive disorders is linked to how well an individual’s regulatory system responds to challenges, also referred to as allostasis [ 96 ]. According to these authors, both obesity and drug addiction are examples of major disorders characterized by dysregulated control systems.…”

The Role of Making Voluntary Function in Prognosticating and Preventing from Addiction Potential: A Survey Study Among Some Members of the Iranian Red Crescent Society

“…Taking these issues into account, the AP theory states that some people, unlike others, are prone to addiction provided that some conditions are met (12). According to research's, some of the prognosticating measures of addiction include social and cultural milieu, biological, interpersonal, and emotionalbehavioral factors (13)(14)(15). As such, the main goal of the present study is to explore socio-psychological dynamics in the AP (16).…”