Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 229 posts

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#151

Post by lisper »

wu-ikkyu wrote: post #141
lisper wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> matter is just a bunch of atoms Well, it is. > Our understanding of the fundamental nature of reality (physics) and consciousness (neuroscience/psychology) is still highly theoretical. It's much more than that. No experiment has ever been done that contradicts either GR or the Standard Model. So unless the operation of the brain depends on new, undiscovered physics, we do in fact have all the information we need in…

>>matter is just a bunch of atoms >Well, it is. Nah, it's much deeper than that as you well know. The word "just" implies there's nothing more to be explained. >No experiment has ever been done that contradicts either GR or the Standard Model. The Standard Model is an incomplete theory that fails to explain many physical phenomenon. Let's not pretend otherwise. >So unless the operation of the brain depends on new, un…

> it's much deeper than that as you well know

Sure, but atoms are an extremely good approximation to the truth in the regime in which human brains operate.

> The Standard Model ... fails to explain many physical phenomenon.

Yeah? Like what?

> you're just extrapolating?

Of course. Until we have a full understanding of the human brain, there will be things about its behavior about which we must extrapolate (that's what "not having a full understanding" means). But I'm extrapolating from some pretty damned good data and some pretty damned solid math. So I am highly confident in this extrapolation.

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#152

Post by leggomylibro »

coldtea wrote: post #98
hellofunk wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also revealing how the unique ability of humans to overcome their fundamental biological nature can be quite impressive and inspiring. Humans have many natural tendencies that are not socially accepted, and better behavior can be learned and tendencies suppressed. Addicts and alcoholics can turn their lives around, even though they remain addicts for life.

> Addicts and alcoholics can turn their lives around, even though they remain addicts for life. The "addicts for life" is an American puritan view (by AA and other such groups) -- not some scientific fact. Certainly not the view everywhere in the world. You can have an alcoholic of 5-10 years that recovered and can still enjoy the occasional drink just fine without getting back to regular drinking.

Neal Stephenson does a good job of presenting that sort of attitude in Cryptonomicon:

"I don't like the word 'addict' because it has terrible connotations," Root says one day, as they are sunning themselves on the afterdeck. "Instead of slapping a label on you, the Germans would describe you as 'Morphiumsüchtig.' The verb suchen means to seek. So that might be translated, loosely, as 'morphine seeky' or even more loosely as 'morphine seeking.' I prefer 'seeky' because it means that you have an inclination to seek morphine."

"What the fuck are you talking about?" Shaftoe says.

"Well, suppose you have a roof with a hole in it. That means it is a leaky roof. It's leaky all the time--even if it's not raining at the moment. But it's only leaking when it happens to be raining. In the same way, morphine-seeky means that you always have this tendency to look for morphine, even if you are not looking for it at the moment. But I prefer both of them to 'addict,' because they are adjectives modifying Bobby Shaftoe instead of a noun that obliterates Bobby Shaftoe."

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#153

Post by mc32 »

crawfordcomeaux wrote: post #149
mc32 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certain aspects? Sure. All aspects? No. I don’t mind the buying the use and the minor incidentsl things. But if the addiction causes harm, be it physical, material or other major impacts on others, then it becomes both a health issue and a criminsl issue (stealing, hit and runs, deception, and obviously more). But yes, let’s try and treat it first rather than seek punishment first.

Punishment runs counter to all forms of sustainable learning, according to the science of learning how to learn. Let's lovingly apply science to criminalization of people being human, rather than criminalizing human behavior. Let's not seek to punish. Let's start exploring other solutions spaces.

Let’s say you havd someone in the Army of some country, any country, and that soldier does heinous things contrary than that allowed by internstional convention on clearly a civilian population, let’s say, do we still say, “oh, hey, they were high, it’s an illness, let’s treat them and after done, let’s get them back in the army”.

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#154

Post by FabHK »

This brings home the point Sam Harris makes often in his writing and blog (and books [1]): Our subjective experience of free will and being in control is largely an illusion.

I used to find that very depressing, but now made peace with compatibilism (the notion that determinism and free will are compatible) [2][3].

Sam Harris objects to compatibilism: both argue that determinism is true, but Harris thinks that thus we have no free will, while compatibilists argue that we still have the "free will worth having" (see the book by Dennett [4]).

Harris and Dennett had an insightful podcast/debate on that [5].

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/books/review/free-will-by...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatibilism

[3] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compatibilism/

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elbow_Room_(book)

[5] https://samharris.org/podcasts/free-will-revisited/

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#155

Post by the_jeremy »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #58
rfinney wrote: post #5

Link to PNAS research paper: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/09/19/1811940115 Human Endogenous Retrovirus-K HML-2 integration within RASGRF2 is associated with intravenous drug abuse and modulates transcription in a cell-line model Not all humans have the same HK2 viruses in their genomes. Here we show that one specific uncommon HK2, which lies close to a gene involved in dopaminergic activity in the brain, is…

Very sensible that the mutation relates to the dopaminergic activity, just based on our knowledge of the reward pathway and the effect of addictive drugs on dopamine. There may even been a positive feedback loop here, as any viral gene inserted that increases risky, impulsive behavior may also encourage procreation.

While that might be true today, I don't agree that increasing risk-taking behaviors was evolutionarily advantageous past some equilibrium (otherwise, we'd have a new equilibrium).

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#156

Post by x220 »

ergothus wrote: post #42
x220 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't just a product of that, we are also a product of human sexual selection and epigenetic inheritance of individually acquired traits. Many of your important traits (such as general intelligence) were acquired in part by conscious processes by your ancestors.

That's a bit circular...I may choose to breed with someone, but i do that because I find them attractive (because DNA tells me what is attractive), because my (known in humans to be inaccurate) risk assessment says it is worth it, etc. Plus, of the countless decisions I make every day, almost none of them are conscious. I can retroactively justify them as if they had been, but studies show we are far less conscious t…

I think selection for intelligence was a feedback loop. I think you're interpreting my idea as circular, and I disagree.

Here's what I think was part of what lead to the development of large brains (and general intelligence). Keep in mind that biology and psychology are not my fields.

Intelligence was inherently advantageous for humans because they allowed us to operate better in different environments. That's where natural selection took effect.

Human tribes were and are (like most populations of social species) characterized by hierarchies, particularly among males in the species. Females tended to choose (and still tend to choose, as far as we can tell) males higher up in social hierarchies when all else is equal (just like most social species, even favoring position in a hierarchy more highly than most other traits). If a tribe has many different possible kinds of hierarchies for males (e.g. they inhabit many different kinds of environments), then one trait that enables a male to do well across many hierarchies is general intelligence. When females select males as high up the hierarchy as possible (in general), they are in effect sexually selecting for intelligence.

I think something similar likely happened with males selecting females with higher intelligence, but it was likely more subtle of a process than I can grasp, since males tend to mate far less selectively than females among humans (and most other animal species), which complicates it quite a bit for me.

Also, just because a choice is unconscious does not mean it is illogical. Many unconscious human choices are quite logical and make a lot of sense, but are not well suited to our current environment.

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#157

Post by x220 »

toasterlovin wrote: post #120
x220 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We aren't just a product of that, we are also a product of human sexual selection and epigenetic inheritance of individually acquired traits. Many of your important traits (such as general intelligence) were acquired in part by conscious processes by your ancestors.

Genetic inheritance via epigenetic pathways is extremely rare and basically irrelevant. It explains essentially 0% of the evolved traits that you see in humans and other complex organisms. And none of our important traits were acquired by conscious processes on the parts of our ancestors, unless you mean by that statement that our ancestors consciously endeavored to further their own interests and as a side effect of…

>Genetic inheritance via epigenetic pathways is extremely rare and basically irrelevant. It explains essentially 0% of the evolved traits that you see in humans and other complex organisms.

I would like a source to read more about this. I don't distrust you. I'm genuinely interested in reading more about this.

>And none of our important traits were acquired by conscious processes on the parts of our ancestors

I think humans sexually select for intelligence, because it's a trait that affects how high up a human can climb across different social hierarchies.

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#158

Post by Kenji »

FabHK wrote: post #154

This brings home the point Sam Harris makes often in his writing and blog (and books [1]): Our subjective experience of free will and being in control is largely an illusion. I used to find that very depressing, but now made peace with compatibilism (the notion that determinism and free will are compatible) [2][3]. Sam Harris objects to compatibilism: both argue that determinism is true, but Harris thinks that thus w…

[dead]

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#159

Post by hellofunk »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #145
Frondo wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it's been studied for effectiveness, it turns out AA works for between 5% and 10% of the people in it; as it also turns out, that's about the same percentage of people for whom any group support program would work. This isn't a distortion, this is the empirical view of AA. As for explicitly unreligious, I would like to include the twelve steps here: 1) We admitted we were powerless over alcohol—that our lives ha…

I think the key here is that people function better, and break addictions better, when they realize and submit to the concept that they do not (and can't) have complete power and control over their own lives. The notion of a "higher power" or "God" can help people get into that posture of "letting go", which helps them find real support outside of themselves (and their addictions). Being a Christian myself, I know I…

I'm not a religious man myself, but I think your perspective is wiser than most of those who call themselves Christians, and frankly, I think what you have expressed here runs deeper than the particulars of any specific religion.

Re: Evidence that addictive behaviors have links with ancient retroviral infection

#160

Post by Kenji »

dang wrote: post #131
lisper wrote: post #6

I have some bad news for you: your perception of free will is a by-product of your ignorance of how your brain works. Every decision you think you make is actually just a bunch of neurons firing, and those neurons were built by your DNA.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18066758 and marked it off-topic.

More like: "We detached this subthread which spawned the most interesting discussion in this comment tree because we are addicted to controlling the conversation and we want things to conform to our social justice agenda - nothing controversial is allowed here."

Your moderating produces negative value.

Post reply on HN