New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Standard Treatments for Drug Addiction

Here are treatments that have been well-studied, and the evidence for how well they work—or do not

Courtesy NIDA

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Ibogaine's promise is that it works better than standard drug addiction treatments, though it has serious dangers and is illegal in many countries, including the United States. There are more orthodox treatments that have been better studied. The U.S. National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) has collected evidence for the effectiveness of various treatments in an online publication. Some treatments are pharmacological and some are behavioral. Medications used include naltrexone, methadone, and buprenorphine, which are given for addiction to opioids such as heroin and cocaine. They are often combined with behavioral therapy. For tobacco addiction, there are nicotine replacement medications and drugs that act to dampen the brain's reaction to nicotine stimulation. For alcohol addiction there is a different set of medications. The guidelines also review the evidence for proper use of behavioral treatments such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. There is also a useful "frequently asked questions" section that covers reasons for addiction and physical mechanisms behind it.

Josh Fischman was formerly senior editor for special projects at Scientific American and covered medicine, biology and science policy. He has written and edited about science and health for Discover, ScienceEarth and U.S. News & World Report. Follow Fischman on Bluesky @jfischman.bsky.social

More by Josh Fischman
Scientific American Magazine Vol 315 Issue 5This article was published with the title “Standard Treatments for Drug Addiction” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 315 No. 5 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican112016-4ezJl7wfqbNTifmf0cYyRd

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe