Feb. 12, 1998
FOR RELEASE: Upon receipt
CONTACT:
Rick Blount, 802-656-2005
or Stephen Mills, 802-656-2886
WHAT CAN ECONOMISTS TEACH ADDICTS? FEDERALLY-BACKED RESEARCH WILL TELL
The hefty tax on cigarettes being debated in Congress is supported by research at the University of Vermont (UVM) College of Medicine.
Warren Bickel, Ph.D., professor of psychiatry and psychology at UVM, is one of only a handful of researchers nationwide studying how concepts of economics can be applied to efforts to curb substance abuse. In the case of the proposed federal tax on cigarettes, Bickel's work with cigarette smokers and others who are dependent on drugs suggests that raising the price of a pack of cigarettes might help keep people from smoking -- especially if the price of substitutes such as nicotine patches or nicotine gum falls below the price of cigarettes.
That theory is just one of four economic concepts Bickel is exploring in a project titled "Behavioral Economics of Human Drug Choice," which in January won a $1.2 million grant from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). The five-year grant is part of a selective program to provide long-term support to a few outstanding researchers.
The topics Bickel will explore -- and the questions they raise -- are: Normal vs. inferior goods. Economists know that to sell goods that consumers consider inferior (as hamburger is inferior to steak, or perhaps as nicotine patches are to cigarettes, the price of the inferior good must be considerably lower. Can influencing the price of drugs or their inferior substitutes change patterns of drug use?
Substitutes vs. complements. Some things such as alcohol and coffee seem to go along with -- or complement -- the use of cigarettes or illegal drugs such as marijuana. Other things such as nicotine replacement products or plain chewing gum are used as substitutes. Is it tougher to quit using a drug when you're surrounded by complements? Do substitutes really make it easier? When a person abuses more than one drug at a time, do the drugs act as substitutes or complements?
Temporal horizon. People who abuse drugs seem to be less able than others to wait for a promised reward, even if waiting greatly increases the value of the reward. For example, most people in studies say they'd rather have $200 in a week than $100 today, whereas substance abusers tend to choose the immediate reward. Citing theories of economics and
more . . . anthropology, Bickel suggests that our consumer-oriented society might make it increasingly difficult to fight substance abuse by shortening this "temporal horizon" in both drug users and nonusers.
In one set of studies on these topics, Bickel offered participants imaginary sums of money at different times -- say, $800 now or $1000 in a week. The studies found a fivefold difference in the temporal horizon of people dependent on heroin compared with people who don't abuse drugs. Now a follow-up study is looking for any such difference between heroin users who share needles and those who don't. Another set of experiments determined how much value smokers put on cigarettes and gauged their temporal horizon. Smokers were given the opportunity to earn two puffs on a cigarette by pulling a lever. The smokers were willing to pull the lever an average of 2,000 times to get those two precious puffs, even when they knew that they could smoke as much as they wanted if they waited just three hours.
In addition to his work on the economics of substance abuse, Bickel directs a project testing the effectiveness of buprenorphine, a drug that appears to be as effective as methadone for treatment of heroin addiction and is safer to use in a rural setting where users don't have easy access to clinics. Bickel's work is conducted at UVM's Human Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory in Burlington. An internationally known center that combines psychological and pharmacological approaches to substance abuse, the laboratory is co-directed by Bickel; cocaine-addiction specialist Steven Higgins, Ph.D.; and UVM/Fletcher Allen Health Care nicotine- and caffeine-addiction specialist John Hughes, M.D.
Bickel's special NIDA grant is part of the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) "Method to Extend Research in Time" (MERIT) program. According to NIDA, the program recognizes "investigators who have demonstrated superior competence and outstanding productivity." In addition to initial four- or five-year periods, the grants provide an expedited application process for an additional three to five years of funding. Of 312 total research grants awarded by NIDA last year, only five were MERIT grants.
"A MERIT grant provides a rare mix of time and resources to researchers of proven intellect and ability," said UVM College of Medicine Executive Dean John Evans, Ph.D. "It allows an investigator to really delve into promising projects with an intensity of focus that you can't have when you're concerned about having to write new grants every couple of years."
Four other UVM reserchers have MERIT grants from various NIH institutes. Their grants fund research on cancer, cardiovascular disease and infectious disease.
-30-
RSS