January 5th, 2017
Tracy: In a recent interview about your new book, Rest, Play, Grow, you stated that we need to “end our cold style of parenting”. This really stood out to me because we now know that parental affection significantly impacts brain development. In your own words could you expand on this comment further?
Dr. MacNamera: If you look at what the most essential human need is, you’ll always find you go back to relationship and attachment, which is especially true the younger you are. Everything we do in terms of raising a child, whether you're a teacher, a coach, a parent, or a grandparent, we always have to look through the lens of the relationship. Oftentimes we look at people through the lens of their actions and their behavior, also know as a “behavioral worldview”, but what we now know is that there are incredible innate drivers: instinct and emotion that drive those actions and behavior. The more immature [in the developmental sense of the word] you are, the less you understand and can control what those drivers are, and the more important it is for the adults in your life to help you understand and assist in the tempering of those emotions and instincts. Because our primary role as adults is to help children have a healthy relationship with things that drive behavior. Imposed ‘consequences’ or a strict focus on behavior misses the mark on the whole internal world of a child. We want to grow that child by understanding the emotions that lie behind that behaviour, because that's where true maturity comes from. When we talk about maturity, it’s [less about age and more] about a place of being able to relate to others as a social and emotional being. It's really that place, most of all, that is where you want to help a child grow.
October 27th, 2016
Tracy: I'd like to open by touching on the research showing how early childhood experiences affect brain development. Based on your own work in the field, can you describe why this is important to look at?
Megan: Absolutely. We learn how to self-regulate and cope with difficult feelings in an environment that enables us to do so. When evolutionary responses like 'fight-or-flight'--which happen in the reptilian part of our brain called the amygdala--are piqued, it's through the safety of healthy, reliable, and stable relationships that we learn how to manage those uncomfortable feelings and react to them in healthy ways. But if a child grows up in a home where abuse is the norm, or where there is neglect of the child's attachment needs, then ultimately they develop while constantly feeling fearful, feeling anxious, or having that distrust response heightened. Their relation to others is ingrained at such a young age to be on high alert. Therefore they're that much more likely to look towards substances like alcohol, narcotics, food, pornography, etc., to relieve them of that heightened anxiety.
These things activate the brain in such a way that helps them feel a sense of joy, security, and safety--albeit fleetingly. They learn to cling on to things or activities, rather than relationships, or being able to just be with themselves. Now, cognitively speaking, if a person grows up in a home where they're abused, or where there's more criticism than love, or where there is only conditional love, they will internalize that relationship within themselves. So when they're alone, the voice that chatters in their head is a very critical one. They are left running from themselves, or abusing themselves with their own running commentary, which again activates that fight-or-flight response. They experience life under constant threat responses, rather than experiencing life within a frame of compassion, which reduces stress.
Maia Szalavitz: Social environments impact our biochemistry, & addiction as a maladaptive form of learning
October 12th, 2016
You've mentioned that when people experience addiction, there's often a void of adequate relationships to other people: they've now found themselves in a relationship with a drug. Can you explain this a bit further?
Absolutely yes. You could define addiction as falling in love with a drug rather than a person, and that is really what goes on in the brain. The same kinds of brain systems and chemicals are involved in both love and addiction. If you listen to love songs, you could easily replace the 'you' lyrics in the song with the name of a drug, and everyone who has ever had an addiction would identify with it, because it's the same template. We can understand addiction once we understand love because it requires the same neuro-pathways. What happens is that the biological drive that mammals have for love, which is critical to reproductive success, gets transferred to this drug. When you don't have that drive for love towards other humans, you often have it for a drug or substance that gets abused.
If you look at the bad behavior people have during affairs, it's virtually the same as you see within individuals afflicted by addiction. Aside from some of Bill Clinton's biggest haters, most people wouldn't wish prison on an individual who can't control their behaviour surrounding affairs. We know that if you don't go out with that person, you're not going to have a problem with them. They're not horrendous people in a different context (if you're not married to them or dating them). Similar with addiction. We shouldn't send these people to jail because they can't control their impulsive behaviour, we should be offering them help. And while yes, there are certainly antisocial people within [the addicted population], not all people with addiction have antisocial personality disorder. But it's those that do who are the addicts that lie and are more prone to theft.
Chris Arnade on addiction as a result of the innate, biological drive for humans to connect in an alienating society
September 6th, 2016
Tracy: You’ve driven across the country multiple times photographing communities that are often marginalized and afflicted by addiction. Your portrait project Faces of Addiction gained a lot of attention. Want to tell me a bit about it?
Chris: Yes, I’ve put almost 200 thousand miles on my car over the last five years just driving and visiting places that--for lack of a better way to put it--very few people visit. Many people live in these places, but nobody visits. I did this because I had spent 6 years interviewing and becoming friends with a group of homeless addicts in Hunts Point, which is just up from us in the Bronx. It’s part of New York City just off the 6th train, so by subway it's 20 minutes from the Upper East Side, but it’s the poorest neighbourhood in New York, and by some measures one of the poorest in the United States. It's home to about 15,000 people and is one of the most statistically dangerous neighbourhoods in New York. It’s also one of the last places in New York that has a relatively open and active market for street walkers, so prostitutes who walk the streets, who are almost all homeless or heroin addicts. And frankly, I became very close friends with most of them.
Don MacPherson on Drug Policy: separating drug compulsion from drug use, & how addiction is a result of bio-psycho-social factors
August 16th, 2016
Tracy: Let's open with the Canadian Drug Policy Coalition. From what I understand, your mandate is to raise awareness around harm reduction, and trying to get public policy away from the criminalization and incrimination of drug users. Want to open with a few words on the CDPC?
Don: Yes, the genesis of the group grew out of the harm reduction action in the 90's, shortly after we got together at the end of a UN meeting in 2009. In 1998, there was a UN meeting in New York with the aim of the global eradication of narcotics. The slogan was something like, "A drug free world, we can do it!", because that was where the thinking was back then. It was this sort of fantasy thinking. When they were saying "A drug free world", they weren't talking about tobacco, alcohol, or prescription drugs, they were only talking about illegal drugs. It should've been called, "An illegal drug free world, we can do it." It was a fantasy meeting. So that was when a lot of drug policy reform people stood up and said, "Okay this is ridiculous, countries are actually aspiring for something that's impossible." They were aspiring to literally rid the planet of plants like the coca bush, the cannabis plant, the opium poppy. It was nonsense. So we had a meeting here in Vancouver afterwards with the North American UN regions. We met people from all over Canada and the US who were doing very interesting work discussing reducing the harm of using these drugs while they were still being consumed here on this planet until we could effectively curb their use.
Mike Pond & Maureen Palmer: fMRI brain scans prove we need to approach addiction and criminal justice system in new ways
August 4th, 2016
Tracy: You two are fresh off from filming your documentary Wasted, which is mirrored off your book Michael, that tells the story of your own journey through alcoholism. I want to start with discussing addiction in general and what the word means to you both.
Michael: Yes, addiction. I once read that the word is Latin for "to be enslaved by." We're enslaved by this substance or by this behavior. So whatever that is: eating [highly palatable] foods like chocolate, or drinking coffee. These things can affect our lives so powerfully that we can't function or focus properly on our lives without being in pursuit of them - of course there are varying degrees of this. Addiction is on a spectrum; it's all based on how severely the substance or behavior is negatively affecting your life.
Maureen: Right now there are a lot of competing theories as to what the cause of addiction is. Is it a learning disorder? Is it a habit? Is it brain disease? Is it genetic? Is it a lack of willpower?
Dr. Carl Hart: drugs & genetics themselves not the cause of addiction; how current system ignores root causes
July 29th, 2016
Tracy: You have a fascinating backstory. Can you talk a bit about how you chose to go into neuroscience and why you specifically focus on narcotics in your research?
Dr. Hart: One of the reasons that I got into this field is because I grew up in the hood. It was a place that was very poor and primarily black within the United States - in Florida. As a youth I carried a gun, I sold drugs, I used drugs and as I’m sure you know, that’s a dangerous endeavour particularly in the US. But eventually I decided to get serious about my formal education and earned a PhD in neuroscience, which changed my trajectory a bit. [Laughter] I went into neuroscience specifically because I wanted to fix the drug addiction problem that I saw in my community. I was told and I fully believed that the poverty and crime in my community was a direct result of drugs like crack-cocaine. But more than 25 years later I have still not found any evidence to support this. But pertaining to my path, the skills that sustain people throughout life are usually obtained through the critical period of young adulthood. I spent most of my young adult years in classrooms and labs, learning how to think and how to write, which were skills that enabled me to support myself and my family financially, and as a result, I have a stake in my sick society. I often say that because of this, society and I both benefit. Many of my friends that I grew up with didn’t ever get this same chance because they didn’t get the support they needed during that critical period. Instead they were under the supervision of a system that doesn’t seem to understand or care about the importance of the black male role in society.