navysteve

If AA did an entire internal survey. How come I wasn't handed one???? I go to meetings. This paper does not report to validate any claims friend. They only report that no credible research has been done on AA itself. AA takes surveys of 5% of its population, that is not research into its effectiveness.

They even fess up to their own myths in the Big Book:

That is your opinion and I would call into question your credibility to make such a claim?

pg 1

Then you didn't read it. Their names are on page one. I don't know their credentials either. I do agree with you that it is not written in typical academic format ( there aren't any empirical research referencese, no true studies, only a census survey, which is not research data) Oh yeah, the title of the paper:

Contemporary Myth and Misinterpretation

They are not trying to prove any facts, or make an argument for any success rate. They are talking about the myths in AA about success and failure.

Perhaps a second read?????

Fishfin

What I meant by "entire internal survey" was that they have only released one survey in its entirety (the 1989 internal survey), not that they do a survey of the entire AA membership. For all other surveys, they released select information such as gender, average length of sobriety, etc.

Five percent is more than enough of a research sample to get an accurate figure on their success rates. In fact, five percent is fairly large sample. Not that it really matters what percentage is surveyed. What matters is the size of the sample itself, and 11,000 people is an extremely large sample. Not only that, the more surveys that are done, the greater the accuracy of the data; and AA has done internal surveys for more than 20 years with almost identical figures each year.

Credible research has been done on 12-step treatment that utilizes AA, so I do not know why they say that in this report. Again, I can't post a link because I have too few posts here, but google Are alcoholism treatments effective? The Project MATCH data, and it will take you a peer review of Project MATCH, which is the largest study done to date. Amazingly, this study and others correspond almost exactly to the figures in AA's surveys, and that is 5% after one year (some of the studies look at longer sobriety, but the results are still almost identical to the AA's internal survey).

I read every word of this. It does list the names Arthur, Tom and Glenn; but that does not really say who these people are, as there are millions of Arthurs, Toms and Glenns.

As I wrote before, I was only responding to the quotes you cited, but I could explain how they erroneously came up with those numbers where you would understand. I'm not a mathematician, but I can explain how 2 + 2 does not equal 10. That is not my opinion, it is a mathematical fact. This is almost as basic. It is just amazingly poor.

Of course they are trying to prove that AA has a higher success rate than 5%. They are talking about myths, but they are trying to make the argument that a 5% success rate is a myth, hence the title of the paper. I don't know if they manipulated the data on purpose or because they do not understand basic statistics, but that is what they did in reaching their conclusions. As somebody in recovery myself, I don't want to see numbers manipulated and exaggerated to prove a method of recovery is what it is not. I would rather understand the truth and hope we can improve on things. Believing the myth of a 50% or 75% success rate perpetuates a false myth as to AA's effectiveness, and I doubt you or anybody else would want mislead. The difference between five and seventy-five percent goes beyond misleading and into Pinnochio territory, and it is pretty blatant.

I hope I did not offend you, Steve. I understand you just posted a link, and this is not a personal thing against you, the fellowship or anybody on this forum; but that is just a horrifically bad piece of work.

navysteve

Which means they studied treatment centers, one of which promoted 12 steps.

You did not offend me at all, honestly.

This paper does not say AA has a 75 percent recovery rate, it in fact called that into question. And even said that it was left in the Big Book only to not change the original writing. It even goes on to call into question how AA's take what Bill Wilson wrote as gospel. I think that is pretty bold, since he is either deified or vilified ( depending on who you are talking to):

That is not AA though. A treatment center that promotes AA membership is not a study of AA


I do see a slant in the paper because it is written by AA members. But the folks who claim AA once had a 75% success rate are incorrect because no empirical research has ever been done on AA.

tiburon88

I believe the often cited AA success rate is 10%. I think AA's biggest failure is it's dogmatic views. I mean cancer treatment today is very much changed than in 1955. It is also more successful. I've had sponsers, worked steps daily, prayed ect... and continue to drink. I feel like AA has indeed failed me and I feel better knowing that perhaps it's NOT the solution for me.

tib

jimhere

Well tib, I hope that you find some sort of solution.

We've been watching you die for the last several years.

Kimmers927

To me, AA is simply a program of recovery... not a quick fix to sobriety. It is a community of those who hope to stay sober by connecting with others who are in the same place of wanting and hoping to stay sober. It is not a guarantee of sobriety, a cure for alcoholism or a treatment facility. It is merely a place that offers suggestions on maintaining sobriety. It offers a solution to help you choose to continue to use alcohol to deal with life -- or face life's challenges head on without the use of the substance. If you choose to maintain sobriety, it is a place where you can find others who enrich your life and enjoy life with you -- without the use of alcohol. Some may choose to leave this community, others may choose to embrace it and increase the chance that they may lead a happier life without alcohol in it. Those that embrace it may increase their chance of success - or not. It is just simply a community that helps you make that choice. I don't think any statistical analysis can capture that percentage of choosers.

navysteve

Very true Kim, but many put alot of stock in statistics in meetings. Many use these stats as a means of speaking about how poorly another brand of AA is doing. They actually think people do studies about us. It is the same as studying which religious people are going to Heaven?????? Doesn't make much sense to me, but I get sick of hearing the Chris R and Wally P wannabe's in AA meetings spouting off nonsense about how great AA was and how it is suffering today

fraankie

when i was in high school
we had debate teams in speech class
brother lucian would give a social issue as homework
to write either a pro or con
sometimes an outline
then he would have two students speak for 5, 10 minutes to state and debate the issue
so
AA, as with any treatment, organization, institution, illness has 2 sides to the story
the fact is it works for a large amount of alkies
for sure, even some who have other problems
they find a place in AA
i happened upon a site, n. y. times article
it was about how alcoholism is really not a disease
butif it helps alkies who think it is a disease to stop drinking
and
start talking, instead
it went on about
hey, call it a disease,
a culture of rehabs, doctors, therapists, nurses, etc make a living
and insurance companies pay
it's a job
noble deed
people go to rehab
rehab sends them to AA
they get to repeat what they leaned in the rehab to newcomers
they are getting help,
they are helping others
i'll drink to that
lol
so
AA
it works if you work it
don't get tied up with the other stuff
statistics, facts, fiction, cult, balony, falsification of records, plagiarism, word of mouth, etc
same going on at thanksgiving dinner?
bill w. found his own way to stay sober
stop drinking, reasearch the problem from experience, write, share about it, carry the message



best
fraankie

navysteve

There is actually validity to that claim. The Big Book itself never labels alcoholism as a disease. The only reference to disease in the Big Book is:

pg 64 of the Big Book

Contrary to common opinion, Alcoholics Anonymous neither originated nor promulgated what has come to be called the disease concept of alcoholism. Yet its members did have a large role in spreading and popularizing that understanding.

Most members of Alcoholics Anonymous do speak of their alcoholism in terms of disease. The closest the book Alcoholics Anonymous comes to a definition of alcoholism appears on p. 44, at the conclusion of the first paragraph of the “We Agnostics” chapter, where we are told that alcoholism “is an illness which only a spiritual experience will conquer.” For Alcoholics Anonymous also has a literature, some of which enjoys a kind of “official” status because it is approved, published and distributed by the General Service Office of Alcoholics Anonymous.

Bill Wilson gave addressed this issue specifically asked about alcoholism as
disease after he had addressed the annual meeting of the National Catholic Clergy Conference on Alcoholism in 1961:
We have never called alcoholism a disease because, technically speaking, it is not a
disease entity. For example, there is no such thing as heart disease. Instead there are many separate heart ailments, or combinations of them. It is something like that with
alcoholism. Therefore we did not wish to get in wrong with the medical profession by
pronouncing alcoholism a disease entity. Therefore we always called it an illness, or a
malady -- a far safer term for us to use.

That is a direct quote from Bill on the subject.
All BB quotes are from the first edition

jimhere

You mean my disease isn't out in the parking lot doing pushups?

navysteve

I guess for those who haven't recovered Jim????

jimhere

Looks like my attempt at humour failed.

Tommyh

not with me it didn`t Jim

I can laugh here about it but in a meeting I would not....I would throw the correct information out there.

my second sponsor drilled me good on saying "Illness and malady"

and he cautioned me about saying disease-he said half the crowd would run over you after the meeting trying to get to the Dr to get pills if we talk disease enough

jimhere

I was being somewhat sarcastic.

I have to laugh at some of the b.s. that is perpetuated in AA meetings.

Peter

I conducted a poll this morning.

I asked myself if I was still sober and the answer was yes. That represents an AA success rate of 100% for me.

That is the only "statistic" I trust.

navysteve

Not at all Jim. My apathetic response was not the right one

navysteve

I don't get uptight about the disease idea. I prefer malady ( which is what the book calls it). But if the disease idea gets people taking a course of action to treat "it" then ok.I have to remember that psychological stuff is a part of this thing.

All BB quotes are from the first edition

Ago

/bows

/kowtows chanting "I'm not worthy I'm not worthy"

Good thread by the way Steve, I was able to "bust out" some of the info I got from it and almost "appear intelligent" to my sponsor

CAPTAINZING2000

Not too concerned with any stats on AA.

While I hate to see people go back out, they give me the added incentive to stay in the rooms when, I read their names in the paper after another drunken arrest.

Read an article today in one of the local papers. There's one person that's been arrested 22 times for DUI's. That's a sobering stat in itself. The article went on to mention Anyone convicted of their 4th DUI can never get another lic. to drive in the state of IL.

The stats. I'm most concerned with are, how many people going to die this year from alcohol??

My chances of being in those stats decrease immensely if , I continue doing what I did yesterday, what I did today and use those principles when, I wake up tomorrow.

fraankie

"You mean my disease isn't out in the parking lot doing pushups?"
rehab, 1989
at the nightly community meeting
20 or so
someone came in that day
shared of his disease as the little green man on his shouldeer
they were still sharing of the little green man when i left
i personally am a John barleycorn afficionado

John Barleycorn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For the novel by Jack London, see John Barleycorn (novel).
"John Barleycorn" is an English folksong. The character of John Barleycorn in the song is a personification of the important cereal crop barley, and of the alcoholic beverages made from it, beer and whisky. In the song, John Barleycorn is represented as suffering attacks, death, and indignities that correspond to the various stages of barley cultivation, such as reaping and malting.

Contents [hide]
1 Metaphorical interpretations
2 Versions and variants
3 Adaptations
4 See also
5 References
6 Recordings
7 External links



[edit] Metaphorical interpretations
Some have interpreted the story of John Barleycorn as representing a pagan practice. It has also been suggested that "John Barleycorn", or rather an early form of the song, may have been used by the early church in Saxon England to ease the conversion of pagans to Christianity from their native Anglo-Saxon polytheism. The reasoning behind this idea is that John Barleycorn represented the ideology of nature cycles, spirits and the harvest of the pagan religion (and may have represented human sacrifice also) but that the song was Christianized in order to show John Barleycorn as a Christ-like figure.

Barleycorn, the personification of the barley, encounters great suffering before succumbing to an unpleasant death. However, as a result of this death bread can be produced; therefore, Barleycorn dies so that others may live. Finally his body will be eaten as the bread. Compare this with the Christian concepts of the Sacrament and of Transubstantiation and it is not difficult to imagine how the song might have been beneficial to Christianity. A popular hymn, "We Plough the Fields and Scatter", is often sung at Harvest Festival to the same tune.

As shown above, the point of the tale told by the original versions is twofold: it focuses not only on the death and resurrection of John Barleycorn, but also on Barleycorn's revenge upon the tradesmen who misused him.


[edit] Versions and variants
Countless versions of this song exist. A version of the song is included in the Bannatyne Manuscript of 1568, and English broadside versions from the 17th century are common. Robert Burns published his own version in 1782, and modern versions abound. Burns's version makes the tale somewhat mysterious and, although not the original, it became the model for most subsequent versions of the ballad.

Burns's version begins:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:
John BarleycornThere was three kings into the east,
Three kings both great and high,
And they hae sworn a solemn oath
John Barleycorn should die.

An early English version runs thus:

There was three men come out o' the west their fortunes for to try,
And these three men made a solemn vow, John Barleycorn must die,
They plowed, they sowed, they harrowed him in, throwed clods upon his head,
And these three men made a solemn vow, John Barleycorn was dead.

Earlier versions resemble Burns's only in personifying the barley, and sometimes in having the barley be foully treated or murdered by various artisans. Burns' version, however, omits their motives. In an early seventeenth century version, the mysterious kings of Burns's version were in fact ordinary men laid low by drink, who sought their revenge on John Barleycorn for that offence:

Sir John Barley-Corn fought in a Bowl,
who won the Victory,
Which made them all to chafe and swear,
that Barley-Corn must dye.

Another early version features John Barleycorn's revenge on the miller:

Mault gave the Miller such a blow,
That from [h]is horse he fell full low,
He taught him his master Mault for to know
you neuer saw the like sir.


[edit] Adaptations
The song is frequently cited by supporters of Sir James George Frazer and his well known work The Golden Bough as being evidence of the antiquity and survival of the institution of the Frazer sacred king and spirit of vegetation, who died as a human sacrifice in a fertility rite.

Many versions of the song have been recorded, most notably by Traffic, whose album John Barleycorn Must Die is named after the song. The song has also been recorded by Fire + Ice, Gae Bolg, Bert Jansch, The John Renbourn Group, Pentangle, Martin Carthy, the Watersons, Steeleye Span, Jethro Tull, Fairport Convention, The Minstrels of Mayhem, Oysterband, Frank Black, Chris Wood, Woody Lissauer, Quadriga Consort, Maddy Prior, Heather Alexander, Tim van Eyken and many other performers. Jack London gave the title John Barleycorn to his 1913 autobiographical novel that tells of his struggle with alcoholism. The song is also a central part of Simon Emmerson's The Imagined Village project. Martin and Eliza Carthy perform the song alongside Paul Weller on The Imagined Village album. Billy Bragg sang in Weller's place on live performances.


[edit] See also
Anglo-Saxon polytheism, subset of Germanic paganism, practiced by the English until Christianization.
Beowa
Byggvir
Corn dolly
Freyr or Ing, Germanic fertility God.
Hærfest-mónaþ
Harvest
Sceafa
Sif
Vanir, Germanic Gods of the land.
Yule Goat

[edit] References

[edit] Recordings
Quadriga Consort CD "As I Walked Forth" ORF Early Music Edition, Vienna 2005

[edit] External links
"Two versions of John Barleycorn" and an accompanying MIDI
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barleycorn"
Categories: English folk songs | English legendary characters | Ballads | Poetry by Robert Burns | Traffic songsViewsArticle Discussion Edit this page History Personal toolsLog in / create account Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Search
Interaction
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact Wikipedia
Donate to Wikipedia
Help
Toolbox
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Printable version
Permanent link
Cite this page
Languages
Deutsch
日*********語