Problem gambling issue downplayed

John Wilen

Wednesday, June 9, 1999 | 11:11 a.m.

Problem or pathological gambling may be a hot issue, but in fact it afflicts less than 2 percent of the gambling population, says Howard J. Shaffer, director of Harvard Medical School's Division on Addictions.

In fact, said Shaffer, one national study found that the percentage of Americans who met enough diagnostic criteria to be considered pathological gamblers is smaller than the percentage that honestly believe they were abducted by aliens.

"And we don't have a national commission on alien abductees," said Shaffer, referring to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission, a federal panel studying the effects of gambling on society. "I think pathological gambling is about a 1 percent phenomenon."

Shaffer made his comments Tuesday during the second annual Gaming Business and Law Update, a seminar for gaming attorneys this week at the Bellagio hotel-casino. Also speaking were Judy Patterson, vice president and executive director of the American Gaming Association, and Christine Reilly, executive director of the National Center for Responsible Gaming.

Shaffer is also author of "Estimating the Prevalence of Disordered Gambling Behavior in the United States and Canada: A Meta-analysis," a study funded by the National Center for Responsible Gaming. The National Center for Responsible Gaming is funded by the gaming industry. Only half of the Center's board of directors are members of the casino industry.

Shaffer quickly emphasized that he did not intend to question the legitimacy of pathological gambling as an issue. As he put it, gambling "is a form of adult play" that most people can handle. But, clearly, some cannot.

"The research confirms that a small percentage cannot gamble responsibly," agreed Patterson.

Shaffer reviewed a variety of definitions used to describe gambling disorders, including compulsive, pathological, problem, excessive and at-risk gambling. Because different words mean different things to different people, Shaffer cautioned that it is important to settle on clear definitions.

Most studies agree that people with true pathological gambling disorders must pass a variety of tests, including exhibiting at least five diagnostic symptoms of pathology. In several different studies, those who have met this definition at some point in their lives number between 1.2 and 1.6 percent of the gambling population, said Shaffer.

If the prevalence of pathological gambling is compared to the population as a whole -- instead of to the gambling population, as in the studies cited by Shaffer -- the percentages would plummet, he noted. They also plummet when incidence of pathological gambling behavior is looked at over just the past year, a measure Shaffer sees as more indicative of the current trend of pathological gambling prevalence.

Over the past year, the prevalence of pathological gambling in the gambling population ranges from 0.6 to 1.1 percent, said Shaffer. Because one study used a questionable methodology that could have resulted in counting the same people twice, Shaffer estimated it may be more accurate to say the range is from 0.1 to 1.1 percent.

The low end of that range -- 0.1 percent or one in one thousand -- is less than the 0.3 percent or three in one thousand of the population who honestly believe they have been abducted by aliens, said Shaffer.

Shaffer believes the percentage of gamblers exhibiting pathological behavior is declining because society is adapting to the widespread availability of gambling. He also noted that employees of casinos are almost twice as likely to exhibit symptoms that would cause them to be defined as pathological gamblers.

He said it was too early to tell whether this is because those employees are constantly exposed to gambling, or because a gambling work environment attracts people who are already at risk to become problem gamblers.

A recent study by UNLV found that 6.6 percent of Clark County residents are problem or pathological gamblers. It is unclear whether the results of the UNLV study can be compared to those in the studies cited by Shaffer. Clinically, problem gambling is defined as a less severe disorder than pathological gambling, said Shaffer.

In the studies Shaffer cited, people at risk of becoming pathological gamblers, meaning they at some point in their lives exhibited one or two pathological symptoms, or those who are defined as problem gamblers -- meaning they have exhibited three or four pathological symptoms -- constitute anywhere from 3.85 to 9.2 percent of the gambling population. Over the past year, 2 to 2.8 percent of the gambling population falls into these categories, said Shaffer.

Pathological gamblers are defined as gamblers who exhibit five or more pathological symptoms.

Shaffer said pathological gambling should be studied and treated, but cautioned against "knee-jerk" reactions like banning gambling.

During her presentation, Patterson noted that much of the gaming industry has already taken a pro-active stance toward problem gambling.

Earlier this year, the Nevada Gaming Commission enacted new regulations requiring employee training and toll-free problem gambling hotlines and brochures for all gaming properties.

"Now, most business leaders agree that all of these kinds of activities just make good business sense," said Patterson. "This is just an issue that we're going to be living with for a long time."

Still, both Shaffer and Reilly noted that much work remains before the causes and possible cures of gambling addiction can be found.

"I think we are where alcoholism and drug addiction studies were in the 1970s," said Reilly.