Serotonin Transporter Promoter Polymorphism Genotype Is Associated With Behavioral Disinhibition and Negative Affect in Children of Alcoholics

Serotonergic (5-HT) dysfunction has been implicated in the etiology of both behavioral disinhibition (BD) and negative affect (NA). This work extends our previous finding of relationships between whole blood 5-HT and both BD and NA in pubescent, but not prepubescent, children of alcoholics and continues examination of a hypothesized role of 5-HT dysfunction in alcoholism risk. The long and short (L and S) variants of the 5-HT transporter gene-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) are responsible for differing transcriptional efficiencies in 5-HT uptake. Although associations have been found between the SS 5-HTTLPR genotype and severe alcoholism and neuroticism, recent reports describe relationships between the LL genotype and both low level of response to alcohol and alcoholism diagnosis and a predominance of the LL genotype in early-onset alcoholics. Methods : This report is from an ongoing prospective study of the development of risk for alcoholism and other problematic outcomes in a sample of families classified by father's alcoholism subtype. This study examines relationships between 5-HTTLPR genotype and both child BD (Child Behavior Checklist Aggressive Behavior) and NA (Child Behavior Checklist Anxious/Depressed) in offspring from 47 families. Results : Results showed significantly higher levels of BD and NA in the 16 children with the LL genotype than the 46 SS or SL children. Conclusions : Behaviors of undercontrol, which occur at increased rates in children of alcoholics, may be genetically influenced through the regulation of the 5-HT transporter. Due to the small sample size and the preliminary nature of our findings, replication is necessary.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/65855/1/j.1530-0277.2001.tb02302.x.pd

Pain Sensitivity: An Unnatural History from 1800 to 1965

Who was truly capable of experiencing pain? In this article, I explore ideas about the distribution of bodily sensitivity in patients from the early nineteenth century to 1965 in Anglo-American societies. While certain patients were regarded as “truly hurting,” other patients’ distress could be disparaged or not even registered as being “real pain.” Such judgments had major effects on regimes of pain-alleviation. Indeed, it took until the late twentieth century for the routine underestimation of the sufferings of certain groups of people to be deemed scandalous. Often the categorizations were contradictory. For instance, the humble status of workers and immigrants meant that they were said to be insensitive to noxious stimuli; the profound inferiority of these same patients meant that they were especially likely to respond with “exaggerated” sensitivity. How did physicians hold such positions simultaneously? Pain-assignation claimed to be based on natural hierarchical schemas, but the great Chain of Feeling was more fluid than it seemed