Addiction in America - Page 3

Not Afraid · 07-13-2007, 09:15 PM

Although there are probably a few minor similarities in the behaviors of alcoholics and addicts, I would not be inclined to say all are of the 'addictive type". I would say "short attention span" would be more like it. But, not everyone with a proclivity to this type of behavior will become an aloholic or addict. And, not every alkie or addict exhibits this behavior. You really have to look for the similarities between alkies and addicts. They aren't usually very obvious.

Oh, and never say never about become an addict or alkie. It can happen at any age if you've got the right body for the disease to live in.

Re, drug therapy. I know of no current studies or attempts to create a drug that make an alcoholic or addict able to drink and use. There still disagreement over the concept of "disease" for anyone to get much past that.

Kevy Baby · 07-13-2007, 09:17 PM

I really have to hand it to iSm for an exceptional, insightful post. Thank you.
_____________________________

One detail on AA that both supporters and some opponents (as well as many researchers) admit: coming up with solid success numbers with AA is very difficult given their predominantly voluntary nature, their (mostly) lack of centralized organization (each group is for the most part autonomous), and the almost forced anonymity of the people who participate.

Alex · 07-13-2007, 09:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

All I can say is that I'm glad you're not an alcoholic or an addict, Alex.

Why? The studies indicate that I have about the same chance of kicking it as anybody else? But can you explain to me how those five steps do not require belief of a religious nature? Or at least a belief that almost all of us would laugh out of the room if put forward in a biology class?

But I too am glad I'm not an addict. Addicts tend to do stupid **** and if I have one phobia it is embarrassment. Being addicted to something seems like a surefire recipe for me to be embarrassed a lot (which is why my one drink-to-puking-in-the-bar-on-the-waitress incident was enough to keep me to 6-12 ever since).

I agree with Steve that the treatments ultimately (though way off in the future probably) are likely to be pharmacological (either in drugs that can "cure" the addiction or in creation of drugs that can create the highs without addiction).

Steve, I believe the 20% study was a multi-year study (sobriety without treatment among alcoholics approaches 50% over a ten year span) and also self-selected. That is one irony I find in enforced-AA. That if AA does have a benefit it is mostly likely to manifest among self-selected participants (those who were already motivated enough to find assistance in quitting) which is a benefit largely negated by mandated participation.

Kevy Baby · 07-13-2007, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

Why? The studies indicate that I have about the same chance of kicking it as anybody else?

Are you saying that an alcoholic has the same chance of recovering without any assistance as if he/she relied on AA?

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2007, 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Re, drug therapy. I know of no current studies or attempts to create a drug that make an alcoholic or addict able to drink and use. There still disagreement over the concept of "disease" for anyone to get much past that.

From what I understand, most drugs are not going to attempt that, but rather help increase the ability of a person to resist cravings, or not have cravings. A few drugs are actually going to target the dopamine system ... which theoretically would allow an addict to drink or use drugs "safely."

But the real object of all drugs is the same as other therapies ... i.e., to have addicts NOT drink or use drugs. Having them be ABLE to use or drink is not the goal.

Alex · 07-13-2007, 09:25 PM

I'm saying that according the AA's own internal surveys of all participants, that would appear to be the case. The 1989 survey that was leaked showed the 5% success rate over one year which is the same as found among untreated alcoholics.

But neither am I saying that I recognized myself as an alcoholic that I would seek no treatment. I would not seek treatment through AA and pretty much every researcher agrees that AA shows no significant improvement over alternate treatments. I just do not think it is a useful part of the process to find a god.

Not Afraid · 07-13-2007, 09:25 PM

I don't think AA is worried much about statistics (and the fact that the second initial stands for Anonymous make valid statistics difficult). It works for some if it is allowed to work and you work the program.

Re: religion. I guess we need to come to an agreement as to how religion is defined.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2007, 09:33 PM

I don't think the acknowledgment of a concept of GOD is a religion, per se. But I do see what Alex finds objectionable about it. Those who don't believe in any concept of god should not be coerced into partipating in a process which requires that belief.

Alex · 07-13-2007, 09:37 PM

Fine. But as soon as you say statistics are unimportant then you're just in the same category as magnetic healing, psychic surgery, and wishful thinking. If it is effective in a way that can't be quantified then that is meaningless so far as I am concerned.

And despite how "anonymous" supposedly makes study difficult many studies have been done over the decades showing minimal differential effectiveness.

We can discuss what defines religion but the 12 steps certainly define this "force," conveniently called "god," in most of the steps in terms that would pretty much fit any of them.

It is an external force that is unmeasurable and differently defined for every individual and yet has an interest in our lives and will work to effect change outside of the restrictions of the basic physical properties of the universe. Yes, I can say my "power" is a rock, but if that rock has a will that I can gain a better understanding of and it can grant me the power to achieve that will then we've moved into religious territory and I don't want my government forcing that on me.

Again, I have no problem with people doing AA so long as it is completely voluntary. But we'd freak if any teacher in a public school asked students to engage in "prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His Will for us and the power to carry that out."

Why? Because in that context we'd recognize it as an unacceptable encroachment of religion into government.

Not Afraid · 07-13-2007, 09:38 PM

The term "God" can be anything but yourself: The jar of honey in the cupboard, the Matterhorn, the granite peaks of Kings canyon, the man with the great white beard, Lounge of Tomorrow as a collective group. It's not the god of religion - although to some it is. Religion is NOT a requirement. The 12 steps are not a requirement - but they are suggested as a way to stay sober.

07-13-2007, 09:15 PM	#21
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	Although there are probably a few minor similarities in the behaviors of alcoholics and addicts, I would not be inclined to say all are of the 'addictive type". I would say "short attention span" would be more like it. But, not everyone with a proclivity to this type of behavior will become an aloholic or addict. And, not every alkie or addict exhibits this behavior. You really have to look for the similarities between alkies and addicts. They aren't usually very obvious. Oh, and never say never about become an addict or alkie. It can happen at any age if you've got the right body for the disease to live in. Re, drug therapy. I know of no current studies or attempts to create a drug that make an alcoholic or addict able to drink and use. There still disagreement over the concept of "disease" for anyone to get much past that.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:17 PM	#22
Kevy Baby Chowder Head Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Yes Posts: 18,500	I really have to hand it to iSm for an exceptional, insightful post. Thank you. _____________________________ One detail on AA that both supporters and some opponents (as well as many researchers) admit: coming up with solid success numbers with AA is very difficult given their predominantly voluntary nature, their (mostly) lack of centralized organization (each group is for the most part autonomous), and the almost forced anonymity of the people who participate. __________________ The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot verify their validity. - Abraham Lincoln
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:25 PM	#26
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	I'm saying that according the AA's own internal surveys of all participants, that would appear to be the case. The 1989 survey that was leaked showed the 5% success rate over one year which is the same as found among untreated alcoholics. But neither am I saying that I recognized myself as an alcoholic that I would seek no treatment. I would not seek treatment through AA and pretty much every researcher agrees that AA shows no significant improvement over alternate treatments. I just do not think it is a useful part of the process to find a god.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:25 PM	#27
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	I don't think AA is worried much about statistics (and the fact that the second initial stands for Anonymous make valid statistics difficult). It works for some if it is allowed to work and you work the program. Re: religion. I guess we need to come to an agreement as to how religion is defined.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:33 PM	#28
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	I don't think the acknowledgment of a concept of GOD is a religion, per se. But I do see what Alex finds objectionable about it. Those who don't believe in any concept of god should not be coerced into partipating in a process which requires that belief.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:37 PM	#29
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	Fine. But as soon as you say statistics are unimportant then you're just in the same category as magnetic healing, psychic surgery, and wishful thinking. If it is effective in a way that can't be quantified then that is meaningless so far as I am concerned. And despite how "anonymous" supposedly makes study difficult many studies have been done over the decades showing minimal differential effectiveness. We can discuss what defines religion but the 12 steps certainly define this "force," conveniently called "god," in most of the steps in terms that would pretty much fit any of them. It is an external force that is unmeasurable and differently defined for every individual and yet has an interest in our lives and will work to effect change outside of the restrictions of the basic physical properties of the universe. Yes, I can say my "power" is a rock, but if that rock has a will that I can gain a better understanding of and it can grant me the power to achieve that will then we've moved into religious territory and I don't want my government forcing that on me. Again, I have no problem with people doing AA so long as it is completely voluntary. But we'd freak if any teacher in a public school asked students to engage in "prayer and meditation to improve our conscious contact with God as we understood Him, praying only for knowledge of His Will for us and the power to carry that out." Why? Because in that context we'd recognize it as an unacceptable encroachment of religion into government.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:38 PM	#30
Not Afraid HI! Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 17,108	The term "God" can be anything but yourself: The jar of honey in the cupboard, the Matterhorn, the granite peaks of Kings canyon, the man with the great white beard, Lounge of Tomorrow as a collective group. It's not the god of religion - although to some it is. Religion is NOT a requirement. The 12 steps are not a requirement - but they are suggested as a way to stay sober.
	Submit to Quotes