Editor’s Note: Points today welcomes the first in a two-part series by Alexandra Bogren, associate professor of Sociology at the Centre for Social Research on Alcohol and Drugs, Stockholm University (Sweden). Today Bogren lays out the case for a more clear understanding of how media portrayals of biomedical models of addiction affect popular understanding of drug and alcohol abuse. In a follow-up that will appear tomorrow, she describes how her own work– present and future– will help to achieve that understanding.
Swedish and American researchers have discovered a mechanism that stops stress-induced alcohol cravings. […] -This is a big break-through and the most exciting experience I have had in my career as a researcher, says the Swede Markus Heilig, head of clinical research at the American NIAAA in Washington. […] The fact that long term alcohol intake increases the number of genes that code for the CHR-R1-receptor, at the same time as this increased activity is inherited, can also explain why humans are more or less sensitive to the addictive effects of alcohol.
— “Discovery Can Help Alcoholic with Craving,” October 3, 2006, Dagens Nyheter [Swedish daily newspaper ]
Browsing through the pages of many daily newspapers, you find that biomedical research on alcohol use and addiction is a common topic in the news. To a social scientist, such media discussions bring to the fore a host of questions, among them the issue of language use and the metaphors and models used to explain scientific results in ways the public will find understandable. From a social scientific perspective, the choice of terms and models are not just coincidental or innocent, but merit study in and of themselves. For example, what does it mean that “long term alcohol intake increases the number of genes that code for the CHR-R1-receptor, at the same time as this increased activity is inherited”? How do we, as ordinary citizens, deal with and make sense of this type of news story?
