Las Vegas Sun

The Sun’s March 8 article, “Problem gambling worse than thought: figures are bad news for the gaming industry,” gets it wrong right from the start.  Contrary to the dire tone of the headline, the concept that there is a small percentage of gamblers who suffer from “problem” gambling but are not pathological is nothing new.  In fact, the 1997 meta-analysis by Dr. Howard Shaffer cited in the piece discusses this fact at length.  But determining a prevalence rate for “problem” gambling is a tricky business, and the scientific community has yet to agree on just what is the right number.

The American Psychiatric Association defined “pathological gambling” as a psychiatric disorder in 1980, and to be classified as a pathological gambler, an individual must meet a set of diagnostic criteria, thus making the term clinically meaningful. A similar tool to precisely and clinically define “problem gambling” has yet to be developed. 

What researchers, treatment professionals and the National Council DO agree on is the prevalence rate for pathological gambling, which is widely accepted as being about 1 percent around the world.  That’s why the industry cites this number more than any other – because it is widely accepted and, most importantly, can be defined. 

All that aside, it is a disservice to the public and policy makers to combine the two categories, because the social impact and treatment requirements are substantially different for pathological gamblers and problem gamblers.

The story also incorrectly cites a 2002 study showing that the prevalence of problem gambling in Nevada is nearly twice as high as the national average.  In fact, a closer look at the data shows that two different test screens were used in the 2002 study – one that found Nevada’s prevalence rate to be higher than the national rate, and one, endorsed by the federally mandated National Gambling Impact Study Commission, that found it to be quite a bit lower.  To present only one side of the story here is misleading and irresponsible.
 
What the story does get right is that more money needs to be devoted to research so we can find better ways to help the people who suffer from disordered gambling, whether pathological or otherwise.  To date, the gaming industry has poured more money into peer-reviewed scientific research on disordered gambling than any other entity, including the federal government. 

The bottom line is this story attempts to create a controversy where there simply isn’t one.  The gaming industry takes the issue of disordered gambling very seriously, and to imply that we have misled people is just plain wrong.  We simply choose to rely on measurable, clinical facts rather than educated guesses. 

Sincerely,
Frank J. Fahrenkopf, Jr.
President and CEO
American Gaming Association