>
> The denial is more ubiquitous than you'd imagine Rob and extends far beyond AP's or even gambling. Psychologist's definition of gambling and gambling related disorders includes anything involving risk taking.
>
> Picking risky partners for marriage, car racing, military service, the stock market, buying and selling antiques, etc... are all risky and are all subject to abuse. The list is nearly infinite.
>
> The issue is not whether or not one gambles, we all gamble, everyday. The issue is how risky are our choices and how much forethought preparation and diligence one puts into managing their risk. If they take unnecessary risk without proportionate potential reward, "Houston we have a problem!".
>
The molecular genetics of risk will take a long time to unravel, but an important point is that evidence already exists that risk pathways can be independent. This is because side effects of certain drugs have been documented to influence specific types of risk. I can not recall the specific drug, but it is being considered to have an additional warning added to its label because it specifically targets gambling risk taking and no other.
Since this drug's side effects (surprised its not in the food at every casinos buffet) dramatically cause increased gambling risk taking behavior while leaving other risk taking behaviors unaltered that the molecular pathways for risky behaviors are not the same. Since I don't write technical papers anymore I don't have the references but this stuff is fascinating.
