Definitive Disproof of the Gateway Theory Ignored by the Government and the Field of Addictionology

Below is a letter I recently wrote the NY Times concerning two major issues this country is facing in addiction science fraud. 1. The government and the field of addictionology are maintaining fraudulent addiction theory to perpetuate their "moral" and political agendas to the detriment of addicts and non-addicts alike. 2. Even when excellent and definitive science is done disproving government backed theory, it is ignored. Kendler et al, a link to the abstract of the article is at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14990863 , have defintively shown in this study that the gateway theory of drug use, a major piece of the invalid and damaging Hijacked Brain Hypothesis that is running our country's addiction policies, is epidemiologically and genetically untenable, a fact that I've written about but for which we finally have the experimental proof. Not only does the study disprove the gateway theory but it supports Hypoism. From the abstract, "our results suggest that the use and abuse/dependence of cannabis and other illicit drugs are strongly linked via common risk factors that jointly influence their individual liabilities." In other words, common risk factors, such as an underlying genetic disease in these subjects, cause both the initial use of a drug and the subsequent use of other drugs. This is exactly what Hypoism says and predicts, an essential trait of any valid addiction theory. The whole abstract is as follows:

Cannabis and other illicit drugs: comorbid use and abuse/dependence in males and females.

Agrawal A, Neale MC, Prescott CA, Kendler KS.  Behav Genet. 2004 May;34(3):217-28

Department of Human Genetics, Medical College of Virginia of Virginia Commonwealth University, Virginia Institute for Psychiatric and Behavioral Genetics, Richmond, Virginia. aagrawa@hsc.vcu.edu

Cannabis and other illicit drugs are often used or abused comorbidly. Two competing theories to explain this comorbidity are (i) the phenotypic causation (gateway) model and (ii) the correlated liabilities model. We used data from 1191 male and 934 female same-sex twin pairs to test 13 genetically informative models of comorbidity. Models were fit separately for use and abuse/dependence in both sexes. The correlated liabilities model provided a good fit to the data for cannabis and other illicit drug use, as well as abuse/dependence. The relationship between the use or abuse of cannabis and other illicit drugs is not entirely phenotypic, as depicted by the random multiformity of cannabis model, which is an adaptation of the gateway model. The comorbidity appears to arise from correlated genetic and environmental influences. There is some evidence for a model in which high-risk cannabis users may be at increased risk for other illicit drug use. For abuse/dependence, a model with causal pathways between the liability for cannabis and other illicit drug abuse/dependence also fits well. Overall, our results suggest that the use and abuse/dependence of cannabis and other illicit drugs are strongly linked via common risk factors that jointly influence their individual liabilities.

A second study by the same group showed the same results:  

A twin study of early cannabis use and subsequent use and abuse/dependence of other illicit drugs, Psychological Medicine, 2004, 34, 1–11

Re: At the Center of the Storm Over Bush And Science
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/30/science/30ADVI.html
Yes, the government is lying about science that directs public policy. The issues raised by the concerned scientists are important but don't have the devastating impact on millions of people currently that their lies about addiction causation, prevention, treatment, and public policy are having. The concerned scientists, in their letter to the President, omitted addiction pseudoscience and lies because even they aren't aware of them out of their own ignorance and biases. However, I've been writing the Times about this malignant pseudoscience since 1995 and have been consistently ignored because the Times blindly believes the government's lies. The theory of addictions used by the government is called the Hijacked Brain Hypothesis (HBH) a theory invented by Alan Leshner as chief of NIDA years ago. Besides that the HBH itself was already disproven when it was invented and published in Science absent valid peer review, one of its mainstays is the concept of "gateway" effect - that early and prior use of one drug CAUSES the later use of other, and "worse," drugs; that adult addictions can be prevented by preventing the early use of gateway drugs such as alcohol, marijuana, or even cigarettes. A monumental 2003 study done by Arpana Agrawal, Michael C. Neale, Carol. A. Prescott, and Kenneth S. Kendler, Behavior Genetics, Vol. 34, No. 3, May 2004, completely demolishes this concept. Moreover, this study's results are completely consistent with Hypoism, my theory ignored by the field of addictions since 1993 and by the Times since 1995. This bombshell has yet to be publicized and I wonder if it ever will be considering its effect on one of the administration's most important policies, the drug war and the expensive, massive, ineffective, and invalid advertising and education programs utilizing the HBH's principles to stop drug use and addiction. It's truly amazing that this study even got published seeing that it probably was funded by the government. It is several months old and I have yet to read any media articles about it. Despite reams of (ignored) studies proving the HBH wrong over the last ten years, and now this study that demolishes the current government policies on addiction prevention, I predict that this study will not be publicized or cause any alteration in the current theory of addictions used by this country. I also predict that the media will not present a massive critique of the current theory of addiction causation to the public based on all this work because it has shown itself to be incapable of this public service over the last 12 years. However, those reading this letter, one of thousands of letters from me about this issue, will know they are part of the lie by not acting appropriately on it. When will the Times get honest with the public and show any signs of journalistic integrity?