Addiction in America

[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.

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]

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]

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.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

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.

I hope not, but alcoholism is a powerful disease. And, the cats broke my crystal ball.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

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

No, honestly it isn't. I'm not at all saying that people who go to AA don't get sober, I'm saying there is little evidence that people who go to AA get sober at a significantly different success rate than people who don't go to AA.

I can provide millions of people who believe that horoscopes accurately predict their life, that doesn't make it so.

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

If it actually does anything. And if it does actually do anything it will be a quantifiable difference. If no matter what 5% each year will go sober, then the 5% who do it cold will think they are giants of willpower. The 5% who do AA will give AA credit. The 5% who try hypnosis will think it was the greatest thing ever. The 5% who find god will credit god.

The 95% who went to AA will just move on. The 95% who tried willpower will just move on. Then 5% of those 95% will find success in the next year with whatever they are doing and they will say "wow, this works so much better than that thing I was trying before."

Now go one step farther and create a society where everybody is pressured to believe that the only effective treatment is Treatment X so almost everybody who tries to kick the habit tries it with Treatment X and then 5% of the people get better. It will certainly look like Treatment X should get the credit for every sober person.

Show me a solid differential then I will grant that it is even worth considering forcing people to AA. There is no clear evidence of this so if you want to claim it, that's fine, but it has all the power of someone saying that sunspots are causing global warming because it seems to make sense to them.

But I still won't accept it because it is religion (even if loosely defined) and a fundamental bedrock of our nation is that nothing is more important than not forcing religion on someone. And if given a choice between pretending to religion and going to jail I'd like to think I'd stand by my principals and go to jail but I wouldn't. That doesn't make it ok, though.

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Alex

No, honestly it isn't. I'm not at all saying that people who go to AA don't get sober, I'm saying there is little evidence that people who go to AA get sober at a significantly different success rate than people who don't go to AA.

You know what's odd.....I can name only ONE person - of all of the thousands of people I know - that got sober without AA. I know lots of sober people who went to AA and i know lots of drunks. But, only one who did it another way.

[Alex]

And I know quite a few people who just reached a point in their life and stopped drinking despite years of near daily excessive consumption. My dad drank about two six packs a day and several bottles of Kahlua a week (gross) until he was 40 woke up one day and said "I'm sick of feeling like **** every morning" and that was that.

But that is anecdotal too and has no more value than the people you know.

The experts, when they study these things find similar results regardless of method. And, regardless of method, the results over the short term are poor and requires years upon years before you even get a majority of successes.

There is a huge perception bias. At any given time the core of an AA meeting are going to be the success cases. If you have a group and every week a group of ten people gathers. If there are two new people who show up, make it two meetings, then disappear and are replaced by two new people who do the same, but also a core group of 8 people who stay sober for the full year, attending every week, you are going to say "wow, everybody I know has found great success with AA" but tend to forget about the 52 people who completely failed to find any help.



I am still curious, would you be ok with a high school teacher saying this to his class:

I want every student in this room to pray to a god, any god you want because I think this will help you do better on tests; if you really find that objectionable I suppose you don't have to but I find it really helps.

If you're fine with that, then we definitely just have to disagree. If not, what is different about AA that is ok for a judge to require me to go listen to someone say it to me?

[€uroMeinke]

Originally Posted by Alex

I am still curious, would you be ok with a high school teacher saying this to his class:

I guess I agree with this ax your grinding, but honestly I kind of put it up there with the whole "God" in the pledge of allegiance thing, and the "In God We Trust" motto emblazoned on our money - that stuff shouldn't be there either, but as a pragmatic atheist I just chalk it up for living in predominantly Christian culture