Neuroendocrine science is based on the
study of the interactions between the neurological and endocrine systems. With
regards to love and related behavioral states, research has revealed the
interplay between hormones such as oxytocin and vasopressin, and the
neurotransmitter dopamine. The ratios of oxytocin, vasopressin and dopamine vary
according to relationship phases (De Boer, Van Buel and Ter Horst 120).
Oxytocin and vasopressin promote trust,
bonding and affection. Oxytocin has been referred to as the “love hormone”. It
is released in large quantities in both mothers and infants during birth and
breastfeeding, it is released in large quantities when people are physically
affectionate with each other, and it is an important component of the “bonding
glue” between people in long term relationships (Mikolajczak1, Gross2, Lane1,
et al 1). Vasopressin has been referred to as the “monogamy” hormone, when
vasopressin levels are adjusted in prairie and mountain voles their
relationship longevity in terms of promiscuity or monogamy are predictably
altered (Lim, Hammock, Young).
Dopamine is released when we feel euphoric
pleasure; we learn to seek out more of whatever that something was to get more
dopamine. According to neurologists it’s not what we are doing that feels good,
it is the shot of dopamine that transmits messages of pleasure through the
brain’s reward system that feels good. Dopamine is strongly involved with the
sensations of pleasure and reward that motivate addictions. It is for the shot
of dopamine that the cocaine addict snorts one more line, that the compulsive
gambler cashes in on his children’s trust fund to take the chance on a big win,
and it is the almost universal craving for dopamine bliss that is at the root
of a consumerist culture in which so many will dig themselves deeply into debt
in order to buy unessential goods for the rush of acquisition.
There are uncountable popular references
to passionate love as an addiction. Robertson Davies writes “The pleasures of
love are for those who are hopelessly addicted to another living creature. The
reasons for such addiction are so many that I suspect they are never the same in
any two cases.”(qtd. in Brundage, Lahey 422) Modern neuroscientists would most
certainly disagree with Davies as it seems that the reason for the addictive
quality of love is universally the same in all cases. The addiction to love is
seen within the discipline of neuroscience as a basic addiction to the pleasure
sensations that spurts of dopamine provide as a reward for romantic interaction
that could lead to evolutionary propagation of the human species. The
sensations of falling in love are the fodder for prose and songs throughout
recorded time; the butterflies in the stomach, the bliss, the anxiety, effects
that are explained by neuroscientists and endocrinologists as correlating with
various hormonal and neurological processes and substances. But it is
ultimately a craving for more dopamine that creates the sense of neediness for
the object of our love. Dopamine is what drives us to want to do more of
anything that results in a sense of pleasure, most obviously seen working when
we observe the drive of the addict to get more of what they feel they can’t
live without, including those who would describe themselves as being in love.
Whoa, you like to think that you're immune to
the stuff, oh yeah
It's closer to the truth to say you can't get
enough
You know you're gonna have to face it, you're
addicted to love
-
Robert
Palmer, 1986
When people describe
themselves as being newly in love fMRI imaging reveals that their brains behave
similarly to those of addicts (De Boer, Van Buel and Ter Horst 117). All the lover
can think about is the object of their desire; they lose sleep, they often
forget to eat, and they will obsess over every encounter and how, when, and
where the next one can take place. Obsessive being an operative word, there is
some evidence that passionate love resembles Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
(OCD) in some individuals, due to similar patterns of serotonin levels, and
that medications used to control OCD symptoms may actually inhibit passionate
love symptoms (Langeslag). This could be problematic for OCD patients
in their personal relationships; however it could also be a treatment for love
“sickness” itself. Examples of where one could be treated for “love sickness”
include those who are suffering from the neurobiological effects of love that is
unrequited to a degree that it negatively impacts their lives, or the stalker
who cannot easily resist the compulsion to be near their target.
You're my drug
And I don't ever know if I can give you up
Well you bring me colour where once I had
just black and white
Now I have rainbows appearing round here in
the night
- Andy Partridge, 1987
The development of neuroenhancing love
drugs is also a possible reality in the not too distant future. Experiments on
prairie voles that are socially monogamous in ways similar to humans have revealed
that when their neurological and endocrine systems are manipulated the
relationships and attractions between these animals can be consistently
altered. It is unknown if similar manipulations on humans would work with the
same consistent efficacy, but there are enough similarities in the neurobiology
of humans and prairie voles to indicate the possibilities of pharmaceuticals
that could enhance the amorous feelings towards individual and between
partnered human beings. These could be use to enhance marital therapy, apparently
inhaled oxytocin nasal sprays have been demonstrated to increase feelings of
trust. More sinister possibilities include a whole new calibre of “date rape
drugs” that could hypothetical compel the recipient to be receptive to an
individual by stimulating the parts of the brain that activate trust, yearning,
the desire for closeness, and the sensations associated with the perception of
falling in love (Young).
The development of neuroenhancing love
drugs that would improve bonding and relationships between people brings up a
number of ethical quandaries, for example if one must take drugs to maintain
marital fidelity, is this “true” love as we think of and know it? What is the
value of “true love”? Is it ethically any different than medicating people for
ADHD or other behavioral issues? Would people feel pressured into taking these
neuroenhancements in order to feel “in love” with spouses of their parents
choosing, or to feel attracted to people they otherwise never would have for
reasons of convenience? What is right or wrong about these ethical issues if
one feels happily in love, attached, or bonded, regardless of how they got to
feel that way? Most people would agree that it would be unethical to drug
someone in this way without their consent, however such powerful “love potions”
would surely make their way to the black markets, as most pharmaceuticals
eventually do despite attempted controls. They may also be used in different
ways within different cultures, for instance in many traditions marriage is not
based on consent of both partners, nor is there universal emphasis on being “in
love” as a prerequisite for marriage, could drugs be used to enhance the
amorous feelings between pairs resistant to arranged couplings?
There is a body of collaborative research
devoted to the study and discussion of neuroethics, in Canada there is
substantial work in this field. Ethical questions around research techniques, discoveries
and potential brain and behavioural modification developments within
neuroscience research are not limited to love drugs, there are other issues
involving many facets of this science. The Neuroethics New Emerging Team (NET),
a Canadian multidisciplinary research group describes the magnitude of range
these ethical quandaries envelope as “matters raised by advances in functional
neuroimaging, brain implants and psychopharmacology as well as emerging issues
relating to behaviour, personality, and consciousness.” (NET)
While there are professional and academic
bodies that are looking at neuroethics from a wide range of standpoints, it is
undeniable that sexual enhancement drugs are popular items on the public
markets. Neuroenhancing love drugs that stimulate oxytocin, vasopressin and
dopamine productivity could be profitably enticing enough to motivate their
rapid development by pharmaceutical interests regardless of what is determined
by neuroethical research and collaborative organizations.
It is likely that the
understandings revealed by neuroscience on the nature of human bonding,
attraction and love will probably lead to shifts in how we understand what the
artists throughout time have struggled to define. It is also probable that one
day relationship troubles could be treated much in the way other human
behavioral difficulties are with pharmaceutical interventions. Passionate love
can be a beautiful state of being when it’s reciprocal, a dreadful one when it
is not, and a longed for state that some people wish they could have within an
existing relationship or with a potential partner for matters of practicality
and convenience. Bonded love can be
threatened by any number of incompatibilities as indicated by high divorce
rates. There are many circumstances under which individuals might appreciate
the option to medicate their brain chemistry to correct processes that are
perceived as detrimental to their lives, whether it’s to feel more or less love
in its various phases.
The sciences have been expanding our knowledge
about the nature of the material world for centuries, yet our understandings
about the neurobiology behind our behaviours, cognitive abilities and emotions
are still in their infancy. There could be exciting treatment possibilities,
ethical dilemmas, and dissonance between different belief systems as
neuroscience unravels the mysteries of our brains and their interconnected
physiological systems. Will this reduce the beautiful attempts by artists to
describe magic and romance into superstitious drivel, or will the mysteries of
our individuality be forever a weak spot untouchable by science, a reliable
haven for creative metaphorical expressions to remain relevant?
(Sources available upon request)
(Sources available upon request)







