The Search for Solutions

“Chemsex,” the use of psychoactive drugs to enhance sex, is a recognized public health concern due to its association with increased risks of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs).

In response, a range of programs, from counseling to medication, have been developed to address these risks. The common assumption is that the primary goal of these programs is to help individuals reduce or stop the drug use associated with chemsex.

However, a major new systematic review and meta-analysis that synthesized the results of 12 different studies challenges this assumption, revealing a more nuanced and surprising picture of what “success” actually looks like in this area. 

Takeaway #1: Chemsex Interventions Target a Specific Risk, Not the Drug Use Itself 

The single most effective outcome identified by the review was a clear and significant victory for public health: bio-behavioral interventions were found to substantially decrease the number of episodes of unprotected anal intercourse (UAI) with serodiscordant partners, or partners with a different HIV status, a result so strong it was highly statistically significant (p<0.001). 

However, in what may be the most counter-intuitive finding, the review also concluded that the interventions did not lead to a reduction in the use of psychoactive substances during sexual activities.

This is a significant finding because it reframes the goal of these interventions from one of drug abstinence to one of harm reduction. The data shows that the programs are succeeding at reducing a primary risk factor for HIV transmission, even if they don’t stop the underlying drug use itself.

They are making a high-risk behavior safer. 

Bio-behavioral chemsex interventions reduce the risk of UAI with serodiscordant partners, a high-risk factor for HIV seroconversion. 

Takeaway #2: The Evidence is Narrower and More Fragile Than It Appears 

While the primary finding is promising, the review also reveals critical limitations in the current body of research, suggesting the evidence is not as robust as it might seem. 

• Geographic Bias: All 12 studies included in the meta-analysis were conducted in the USA. This raises what the review calls “concerns regarding the generalisability of these findings to other countries” in Europe, Asia, and Australia where chemsex is also practiced.
• Drug-Specific Focus: Chemsex is known to involve several drugs, including mephedrone and GHB/GBL. Yet, 11 of the 12 studies focused exclusively on methamphetamine use. The review notes this highlights a “dearth of research” for interventions targeting other relevant substances.
• Risk of Bias: The quality of the evidence is a concern. The majority of the studies (67%) were rated as having a “high risk of overall bias.” Key issues included a reliance on participants self-reporting their behaviors and high drop-out rates, which tempers confidence in the overall conclusions. 

---

Are you exploring your trauma? Do you feel your childhood experiences were detrimental to your current mental or physical health? Utilize this free, validated, self-report questionnaire to find out.

Take the Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) Questionnaire

---

Takeaway #3: Beyond a Single HIV Risk Factor, the Benefits Remain Unclear 

While the interventions successfully reduced UAI with serodiscordant partners, their impact on other risky behaviors was more ambiguous.

The review found that interventions led to a decrease in the total number of sexual partners and the number of partners with whom UAI occurred, but these reductions were not large enough to be statistically significant.

Specifically, the review could not establish a statistically significant link between the interventions and outcomes such as the total number of sexual partners, the number of partners where UAI took place, the overall number of episodes of UAI, or the frequency of sex involving substance use.

This finding does not mean the interventions are failures. Rather, it suggests they are highly targeted in their effect, acting on one very specific, high-stakes behavior rather than serving as a “magic bullet” for all behaviors associated with chemsex. 

Conclusion: Reframing the Success of Chemsex Interventions

This comprehensive review sends a clear message: chemsex interventions show tangible promise for reducing a critical HIV risk behavior, even if they don’t reduce drug use itself.

At the same time, the scientific evidence supporting these interventions has significant gaps, including a narrow geographic and substance focus and a high risk of bias in the underlying studies. The review presents a paradox: the most successful interventions are the ones that ignore the most obvious target: drug use and, instead, focus on mitigating its most dangerous consequences. 

As we move forward, should the goal of public health be focused less on abstinence and more on providing tools that demonstrably make risky behaviors safer?

Are you a professional looking to stay up-to-date with the latest information on, sex addiction, trauma, and mental health news and research? Or maybe you’re looking for continuing education courses? Then you should stay up-to-date with all of Dr. Jen’s work through her practice’s newsletter!

---

Are you a Licensed Professional Counselor seeking engaging, unique Continuing Education courses? Dr. Weeks offers accredited courses on her practice website on the effects of Pornography Abstinence and other unique topics!

Do you feel your sexual behavior, or that of someone you love, is out of control? Consult with a professional.

Are you looking for more reputable, data-backed information on sexual addiction? The Mitigation Aide Research Archive is an excellent source for executive summaries of research studies.

The post Chemsex Interventions Succeed by Not Targeting Drug Use first appeared on Dr. Jen's Recovery Readings.

Introduction: The Hidden Cost of Gaming

For hundreds of millions of people, video games are a favorite pastime. A source of entertainment, social connection, and challenging fun. The common view is that it’s a widespread and generally harmless hobby. But as with any deeply engaging activity, there’s a potential for a downside. New research is revealing that this downside can extend directly into our wallets in the form of a gaming disorder.

A study published in the journal Addictive Behaviors has uncovered a powerful, and often overlooked, link between problematic gaming behaviors and significant financial consequences.

The findings challenge common assumptions about who is at risk. And they highlight a major gap in how we officially define and screen for gaming disorder. 

Have you ever logged off after a gaming session and felt you spent more money than you should have? The results of this study suggest that for some, that feeling is a sign of a much larger issue. Here are four surprising truths about the financial risks of Gaming Disorder.

---

Do you have enough hours for your LPC renewal? Are you in need of continuing education, but bored with the current offerings? Check out Dr. Weeks’ course on Cannabis Use Disorder, and other unique courses on her practice website.

Sexual Addiction Treatment Services has been approved by NBCC as an Approved Continuing Education Provider, ACEP No. 7250. Programs that do not qualify for NBCC credit are clearly identified. Sexual Addiction Treatment Services is solely responsible for all aspects of the programs.

---

The Link Between Gaming Disorder and Overspending is Staggering

The core finding of the study is impossible to ignore: there is a massive correlation between being at risk for Gaming Disorder (GD) and overspending on gaming-related activities.

The research found individuals identified as being at risk for GD had 6-9x higher odds of reporting overspending.

The gap between those at risk for GD and those who are not is stark. The study’s data reveals a consistent pattern of overspending across different categories:

• Purchasing Games: 76% of at-risk individuals reported overspending, versus only 24% of those not at risk.
• In-Game Purchases: 73% of at-risk individuals reported overspending, compared to just 24% of those not at risk.
• Esports Betting: 63.5% of at-risk individuals reported overspending, versus a mere 13% of those not at risk.

This isn’t a minor or incidental issue.

The data shows that for those struggling with the behavioral patterns of Gaming Disorder, significant overspending is not an exception but a common, defining feature of their experience. It’s important to note, however, that the study measured players’ perception of overspending. Future research is needed to quantify the link to actual financial hardship or debt.

It’s Not Just a Problem for Young People

A persistent stereotype frames problematic gaming as an issue exclusive to teenagers and young adults. While the study confirmed that younger people reported higher rates of overspending, it also found that a “non-negligible proportion” of older adults are also impacted. 

Specifically, the research showed that between 4% and 9% of adults aged 66 and older reported various types of game-related overspending. This finding is particularly concerning for this demographic.

As the study’s authors discuss, older adults often rely on fixed incomes from pensions or savings, which limits their ability to absorb financial losses. The source identifies further vulnerabilities, noting that “technological illiteracy and susceptibility to scams further exacerbate the risks for older adults,” making this a cross-generational concern that demands attention.

Are you a professional looking to stay up-to-date with the latest information on, sex addiction, trauma, and mental health news and research? Or maybe you’re looking for continuing education courses?

Stay up-to-date with all of Dr. Jen’s work through her practice’s newsletter!

Official Definitions of Gaming Disorder Overlook the Financial Damage

Despite the study’s clear evidence linking Gaming Disorder to serious financial issues, overspending is not currently part of the official diagnostic criteria from major health organizations.

Diagnostic frameworks like the World Health Organization’s ICD-11, and the screening tools like the Gaming Disorder Identification Test, focus on impairments in personal, social, or health-related areas. They largely omit the potential for financial harm as a key symptom or consequence. As the researchers state in their discussion: 

“Our findings highlight that overspending is integral to GD, yet it is absent from diagnostic frameworks such as ICD-11 and DSM-5.”

This omission is critical.

The data reveals staggering rates of overspending (Truth #1) that affect even vulnerable older populations (Truth #2).

However, the very tools used to identify the disorder are blind to what may be its primary financial symptom. As a result, we may be under-identifying individuals for whom financial distress is the most significant negative consequence.

The Line Between Gaming and Gambling is Blurring

The study uncovered a significant relationship between Gaming Disorder and overspending on betting with real money on video games, also known as esports betting. The researchers describe this convergence of gaming and gambling as a “concerning” trend. 

This blur is not limited to betting.

The study also notes the role of gambling-like mechanics built directly into games, such as loot boxes. These features use a “chance-based reward structure” that, as the source notes, can “foster compulsive spending and addiction-like behaviours.”

These in-game mechanics can prime users for the more explicit gambling behaviors seen in esports betting. It makes the convergence even more seamless and risky. 

This finding underscores a growing need for greater awareness. The study’s authors call for specific, concrete actions, including “regulatory and harm minimization strategies such as spending limits, and educational initiatives to inform gamers about the risks” inherent in these evolving financial systems within games. 

Conclusion: Rethinking the Risks

The key takeaway from this research is clear. The financial consequences of Gaming Disorder are a significant, underappreciated, and integral aspect of the condition.

These risks affect a wider range of people than is commonly believed. They are driven by an industry where lines between entertainment and finance are becoming increasingly blurred. 

For clinicians, policymakers, and gamers themselves, these findings show that financial behaviors should be a key part of the conversation around healthy gaming. Recognizing overspending not just as a bad habit, but as a potential indicator of a deeper problem, is the first step toward better assessment and support. 

How can we better recognize the warning signs of financial harm in ourselves and others? What can we do as the worlds of gaming and finance become more intertwined?

---

Are you exploring your trauma? Do you feel your childhood experiences were detrimental to your current mental or physical health? Utilize this free, validated, self-report questionnaire to find out.

Take the Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) Questionnaire

Do you feel your sexual behavior, or that of someone you love, is out of control? Then you should consult with a professional.

Have you found yourself in legal trouble due to your sexual behavior? Seek assistance before the court mandates it, with Sexual Addiction Treatment Services.

Are you looking for more reputable, data-backed information on sexual addiction? The Mitigation Aide Research Archive is an excellent source for executive summaries of research studies.

The post Financial Risks of Gaming Disorder: More Than Just a Game first appeared on Dr. Jen's Recovery Readings.