Addiction in America - Page 3

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?

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.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2007, 09:05 PM

Actually, it's likely that alcoholism and other addictions will become more and more treated (and more and more successfully so) with - heheh, ironically - drugs.

Treating the complex brain chemisty is going to be far more effective than talk therapy or will power for those who are physical addicts.

The "normal" pleasure procedure in your brain is for happy chemicals to be released, such as dopamine ... and they bind to receptors, providing that yummy jolt of pleasure. Any excess dopamine is taken back up by the nerve cell that released it. Other nerve cells release GABA, an inhibitory neurotransmitter that works to prevent the receptor nerve from being overstimulated.

Addictive substances not only increase the amount of dopamine, many of them (heroin and morphine, for example) actually block the release of the inhibitory neurotransmitters. This is a recipe for a fuctup brain.

Unfortunately, drug addiction also inhibits the cognitive skills of the brain ... making it far more difficult for addicts to make good choices, or to keep from relapsing. The damage done to brain's cognitive powers is kinda long-lasting ... which is probably why people who can keep from relapsing for a year or so are far more likely to refrain permanently.

Some people have messed up neurotransmitter reuptake chemicals to begin with. Some have cognitive disorders to start off. These people are far more susceptible to addiction. Yeah, I agree with Alex that the initial choice to take the risk is each individual's responsibility. That doesn't change that some folks have the brain chemistry deck stacked against them.

Most addicts are known to have the messed up brain chemistry and cognitive disorders ... but it's not known how much is the chicken and how much the egg.

The studies referenced in the Time article put the AA success rate at abouty 20%, with identical success rates for most other forms of treatment for both alcohol and drug addiction. That's better than 5%, but still rather poor. Drugs may change that.

I'm not one for wantonly overusing western medicine's pharmacopia for everything that ails ... but it seems to me drugs targeting brain chemistry or the stress network or hormonal conditions (female alcoholics tend to progress more quickly to alcoholism) are going to be more effective than talk therapy or will power exercises.

* * * * *

I guess I'm pretty fortunate when it comes to addiction susceptibility. There were about 5 years when I did cocaine every weekend for 8 weeks out the year ... and at no other time. For a few years, I smoked a half-pack of cigarettes a day, at work on a particular job. Never smoked away from work, stopped smoking with no effort when I changed jobs.

I smoked marijuana on an almost daily basis for 25 years. Cut back to once or twice a week with pretty much zero effort. I did lots and lots of LSD, a fair amount of ecstacy, and a good amount of mushrooms. But those are not particularly addictive drugs.

I did a little speed, didn't like it. Downers, hate 'em. Tried heroin once. Booze ... well, you all know I drink a bit socially. And that's it.

Heheh, I don't do caffeine at all.

But I've rolled the addiction dice pretty heavily, and I guess I was taking a fairly big risk. But when it became clear to me that I was not the addictive type, I re-assessed the risk at minimal.

Other people are not so fortunate ... and I can hardly judge them severely for taking the same risks I did ... but having a less lovely outcome.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex

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.

There are numerous former drunks that post on this board. ALL of them got sober initially through AA. Is that quantifiable enough?

Bottom line is that, it works for some - those some even include the people who were court mandated to do it. Low and behold, some are not driving drunk any more.

Yes, your argument can be successful on paper, but in reality, whatever it takes to get a drunk sober is probably a good thing.

innerSpaceman · 07-13-2007, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

those some even include the people who were court mandated to do it. Low and behold, some are not driving drunk any more.

Of course, heheh, "some" are not driving any more, period.

In all honesty, I don't think "some" will be driving drunk when they are once again driving. And I honestly don't think AA had anything to do with that.

But I do credit AA with helping other folks I love here on LoT. That's enough for me to acknowledge a general goodness about it.

07-13-2007, 09:25 PM	#2
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, 09:05 PM	#3
innerSpaceman Kink of Swank Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Inner Space Posts: 13,075	Actually, it's likely that alcoholism and other addictions will become more and more treated (and more and more successfully so) with - heheh, ironically - drugs. Treating the complex brain chemisty is going to be far more effective than talk therapy or will power for those who are physical addicts. The "normal" pleasure procedure in your brain is for happy chemicals to be released, such as dopamine ... and they bind to receptors, providing that yummy jolt of pleasure. Any excess dopamine is taken back up by the nerve cell that released it. Other nerve cells release GABA, an inhibitory neurotransmitter that works to prevent the receptor nerve from being overstimulated. Addictive substances not only increase the amount of dopamine, many of them (heroin and morphine, for example) actually block the release of the inhibitory neurotransmitters. This is a recipe for a fuctup brain. Unfortunately, drug addiction also inhibits the cognitive skills of the brain ... making it far more difficult for addicts to make good choices, or to keep from relapsing. The damage done to brain's cognitive powers is kinda long-lasting ... which is probably why people who can keep from relapsing for a year or so are far more likely to refrain permanently. Some people have messed up neurotransmitter reuptake chemicals to begin with. Some have cognitive disorders to start off. These people are far more susceptible to addiction. Yeah, I agree with Alex that the initial choice to take the risk is each individual's responsibility. That doesn't change that some folks have the brain chemistry deck stacked against them. Most addicts are known to have the messed up brain chemistry and cognitive disorders ... but it's not known how much is the chicken and how much the egg. The studies referenced in the Time article put the AA success rate at abouty 20%, with identical success rates for most other forms of treatment for both alcohol and drug addiction. That's better than 5%, but still rather poor. Drugs may change that. I'm not one for wantonly overusing western medicine's pharmacopia for everything that ails ... but it seems to me drugs targeting brain chemistry or the stress network or hormonal conditions (female alcoholics tend to progress more quickly to alcoholism) are going to be more effective than talk therapy or will power exercises. * * * * * I guess I'm pretty fortunate when it comes to addiction susceptibility. There were about 5 years when I did cocaine every weekend for 8 weeks out the year ... and at no other time. For a few years, I smoked a half-pack of cigarettes a day, at work on a particular job. Never smoked away from work, stopped smoking with no effort when I changed jobs. I smoked marijuana on an almost daily basis for 25 years. Cut back to once or twice a week with pretty much zero effort. I did lots and lots of LSD, a fair amount of ecstacy, and a good amount of mushrooms. But those are not particularly addictive drugs. I did a little speed, didn't like it. Downers, hate 'em. Tried heroin once. Booze ... well, you all know I drink a bit socially. And that's it. Heheh, I don't do caffeine at all. But I've rolled the addiction dice pretty heavily, and I guess I was taking a fairly big risk. But when it became clear to me that I was not the addictive type, I re-assessed the risk at minimal. Other people are not so fortunate ... and I can hardly judge them severely for taking the same risks I did ... but having a less lovely outcome.
	Submit to Quotes

07-13-2007, 09:15 PM	#4
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	#6
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	#7
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, 09:37 PM	#8
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