Reward comparison: the Achilles' heel and hope for addiction

In the words of the late Charles Flaherty, reward comparison is commonplace. Rats and humans, it appears, compare all rewards and this capacity probably contributes to our ability to select the most appropriate reward/behavior (food, water, salt and sex), at the most ideal level (e.g. a certain sweetness), at any given time. A second advantage of our predisposition for reward comparison is that the availability of rich alternative rewards can protect against our becoming addicted to any single reward/behavior. Thus, the potential protective effects of natural rewards/enrichment are addressed. Despite this, behavior can become inflexible when, through the development of addiction, stress, drug or cues elicit craving, withdrawal, and ultimately, drug-seeking. Drug-seeking corresponds with a 'window of inopportunity', when even potent natural rewards have little or no impact on behavior. During this time, there is a unitary solution to the need state, and that solution is drug. The present animal model explores this 'window of inopportunity' when natural rewards are devalued and drug-seeking is engaged and considers a mode of possible intervention.