Some questions about AA from those who have been...
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 211,369
I'd also like to remind folks about rule 4 when sharing their opinions, or in how they choose to recount their experience
Dee
Moderator
SR
4. No Flaming: Posting of any content with the intention of disrupting the forum or inflaming members-be it on someone's person, religious beliefs, race, national background, sexual orientation, or recovery program. This includes flaming, flame baiting, registration of multiple accounts or impersonation of another member. Do not Harass, threaten, embarrass or cause distress or discomfort upon another Online Forum participant. This includes flaming on our forums or other public forums.
No posts that attack, insult, "flame", defame, or abuse members or non-members. Respect other members of the community and don’t belittle, make fun of, or insult another member or non-member. Decisions about health and recovery are highly personal, individual choices. "Flaming" and insults, however, will not be tolerated. Agree to disagree. This applies to both the forums and chat.
No posts that attack, insult, "flame", defame, or abuse members or non-members. Respect other members of the community and don’t belittle, make fun of, or insult another member or non-member. Decisions about health and recovery are highly personal, individual choices. "Flaming" and insults, however, will not be tolerated. Agree to disagree. This applies to both the forums and chat.
Moderator
SR
Laozi Old Man
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 6,665
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006 
However, I'm a very scientific minded person, and I disagree with many aspects of how "12 step programs" are structured, and the only thing that will change my mind about these programs is cold, hard evidence.
Second, we call it an "experience", because it is something one has to live through first hand, so to speak. Talking about it does not do it justice.
Third, you have to try it first before you will really know if it is something that will help you in particular. Other peoples experience is not the same as first hand experience.
Sobriety is Traditional
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Orcas Island, Washington
Posts: 9,064
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
the only thing that will change my mind about these programs is cold, hard evidence.
"...Neuroscientists have begun to recognize that some of the most important brain systems impaired in addiction are those in the prefrontal cortex that regulate social cognition, self-monitoring, moral behaviour and other processes that the AA-type approach seems to target...."
4 March 2009; Neuroscience: "Rethinking rehab", Jim Schnabel, Nature 458.
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,775
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
I like the idea of having a group of people with common experiences I can talk to about alcohol and recovery, and in my area AA is the only thing that seems to provide that easily.
However, I'm a very scientific minded person, and I disagree with many aspects of how "12 step programs" are structured, and the only thing that will change my mind about these programs is cold, hard evidence. However, I know that many people (not just at AA) think that anecdotes - or the fact that AA has helped *some* people - represent evidence, which isn't acceptable to me, or to science.
What's the environment like at these meetings? Are members receptive to non-traditional (for AA) viewpoints, or do they just pound the Big Book like a bible and insist that whoever disagrees with the 12 steps is "in denial"?
However, I'm a very scientific minded person, and I disagree with many aspects of how "12 step programs" are structured, and the only thing that will change my mind about these programs is cold, hard evidence. However, I know that many people (not just at AA) think that anecdotes - or the fact that AA has helped *some* people - represent evidence, which isn't acceptable to me, or to science.
What's the environment like at these meetings? Are members receptive to non-traditional (for AA) viewpoints, or do they just pound the Big Book like a bible and insist that whoever disagrees with the 12 steps is "in denial"?
All depends on the meetings you attend. In my experience most meetings/members aren't too ridge in their interpretation of the BB or how you work your program.
However, there is a cult like following in AA which I try and avoid.
http://www.thefix.com/content/cult-a...s2092?page=all
Member
Join Date: May 2012
Location: canada
Posts: 7,242
it really doesn't sound like AA is the way to go for you, from what you say.
you'd only be pissed off continuously, and even if you kept your mouth shut about your disagreements and requests for cold hard evidence (cold and hard actually doesn't sound helpful for anything, now that i think of it...funny, never thought of that before), you'd likely spend your time in inner argument, disproving logically what's being said .
i got sober years ago by joining a secular forum and attending one weekly secular meeting. i couldn't, at that time, have set foot in AA without utter disdain. knowing myself to be superior. not as superstitious or comfort-of-belief-in-pie-in-the-sky-Santa-needing as all those poor idiots who....
yeah, ugly. but that's how i was back then.
if you're anything like that, do yourself and everyone else there a favour and stay away.
this is a genuine post, and not in any way intended as sarcasm or to put you and your need for evidence and proof down at all. i needed those at the beginning, too. everything else seemed like something unbelievable i'd be forced to "swallow" just to get along. and i most certainly wasn't powerless, no way no how no never. couldn't be.
bears saying, though, that NOT going to AA is no reason NOT to get and stay sober.
though yes, company of others who know and understand is huge.
you'd only be pissed off continuously, and even if you kept your mouth shut about your disagreements and requests for cold hard evidence (cold and hard actually doesn't sound helpful for anything, now that i think of it...funny, never thought of that before), you'd likely spend your time in inner argument, disproving logically what's being said .
i got sober years ago by joining a secular forum and attending one weekly secular meeting. i couldn't, at that time, have set foot in AA without utter disdain. knowing myself to be superior. not as superstitious or comfort-of-belief-in-pie-in-the-sky-Santa-needing as all those poor idiots who....
yeah, ugly. but that's how i was back then.
if you're anything like that, do yourself and everyone else there a favour and stay away.
this is a genuine post, and not in any way intended as sarcasm or to put you and your need for evidence and proof down at all. i needed those at the beginning, too. everything else seemed like something unbelievable i'd be forced to "swallow" just to get along. and i most certainly wasn't powerless, no way no how no never. couldn't be.
bears saying, though, that NOT going to AA is no reason NOT to get and stay sober.
though yes, company of others who know and understand is huge.
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 322
What's more important, analyzing cold hard evidence about various recovery programs or getting and staying sober?
I don't use AA, but I also don't limit my tools for maintaining sobriety to statistically successful ones, simply because if it works for me I consider it 100% successful, even if it doesn't work for anyone else in the world.
I don't use AA, but I also don't limit my tools for maintaining sobriety to statistically successful ones, simply because if it works for me I consider it 100% successful, even if it doesn't work for anyone else in the world.
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,775
Originally Posted by fini
it really doesn't sound like AA is the way to go for you, from what you say.
you'd only be pissed off continuously, and even if you kept your mouth shut about your disagreements and requests for cold hard evidence (cold and hard actually doesn't sound helpful for anything...
you'd only be pissed off continuously, and even if you kept your mouth shut about your disagreements and requests for cold hard evidence (cold and hard actually doesn't sound helpful for anything...
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: liverpool, england
Posts: 1,708
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
Indeed, but I'd rather know what it's like at one of those places before I go there myself.
I'd like to point out that many people in this thread claimed anecdotes as evidence. There are thousands of alien abduction anecdotes too; the people who tell them are convinced, but no one takes them seriously.
As for the other question - the one demonstrating a poor understanding of how science works - this would involve a properly conducted scientific study. A large number of subjects - a hundred at least, the more the merrier - would be followed for a particular time interval, perhaps a year, and given a specific treatment or program or a particular combination of them (such as medical management, CBT, AA attendance, pharmaceutical therapy - such as naltrexone, addictions counselling, a stay in a recovery centre, etc.).
Another large cohort would be given one of the above treatments combined something that could generate a placebo (it would not be ethical to offer only placebo, and this research would not be permissible).
The remaining people who *freely* refused any form of treatment and wished to deal with the problem themselves would be the final cohort, this being the only ethical way to form a "no treatment given" group.
The data collected regarding total days sober, sobriety intervals, or complete abstinence would then be statistically analyzed for significance, and the researchers would then interpret these numbers to make a statement regarding which methods worked better than others, what placebo effects were involved in forming the data, and whether certain methods were actually no better than doing nothing at all.
These studies HAVE been done, and we have some hard facts. For example it has been well demonstrated that naltrexone reduces relapse severity, as well as increasing the chances of achieving long-term sobriety. (Latt NC, Jurd S, Houseman J, Wutzke SE (June 2002). "Naltrexone in alcohol dependence: a randomised controlled trial of effectiveness in a standard clinical setting". Med J Aust 176 (11): 530–4. PMID 12064984.)
AA is difficult to analyze properly because it is decentralized, doesn't keep records, and has attempted to report that regular attendance, rather than abstinence or reduced drinking, demonstrates success. However, an extensive analysis was recently done with the available information, and found that of eight studies done, "No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA or (Twelve Step Facilitation) approaches for reducing alcohol dependence or problems." (Ferri M, Amato L, Davoli M. Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programmes for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD005032. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005032.pub2)
If there are any studies from the past 8 years demonstrating otherwise which I don't know about, please tell me. Until then, I request that everyone touting AA as a good solution to problem drinking acknowledge that it is a matter of opinion, and a matter of opinion ONLY. If you want to make stronger statements, you need evidence. The sort of which is cited above.
I'd like to point out that many people in this thread claimed anecdotes as evidence. There are thousands of alien abduction anecdotes too; the people who tell them are convinced, but no one takes them seriously.
As for the other question - the one demonstrating a poor understanding of how science works - this would involve a properly conducted scientific study. A large number of subjects - a hundred at least, the more the merrier - would be followed for a particular time interval, perhaps a year, and given a specific treatment or program or a particular combination of them (such as medical management, CBT, AA attendance, pharmaceutical therapy - such as naltrexone, addictions counselling, a stay in a recovery centre, etc.).
Another large cohort would be given one of the above treatments combined something that could generate a placebo (it would not be ethical to offer only placebo, and this research would not be permissible).
The remaining people who *freely* refused any form of treatment and wished to deal with the problem themselves would be the final cohort, this being the only ethical way to form a "no treatment given" group.
The data collected regarding total days sober, sobriety intervals, or complete abstinence would then be statistically analyzed for significance, and the researchers would then interpret these numbers to make a statement regarding which methods worked better than others, what placebo effects were involved in forming the data, and whether certain methods were actually no better than doing nothing at all.
These studies HAVE been done, and we have some hard facts. For example it has been well demonstrated that naltrexone reduces relapse severity, as well as increasing the chances of achieving long-term sobriety. (Latt NC, Jurd S, Houseman J, Wutzke SE (June 2002). "Naltrexone in alcohol dependence: a randomised controlled trial of effectiveness in a standard clinical setting". Med J Aust 176 (11): 530–4. PMID 12064984.)
AA is difficult to analyze properly because it is decentralized, doesn't keep records, and has attempted to report that regular attendance, rather than abstinence or reduced drinking, demonstrates success. However, an extensive analysis was recently done with the available information, and found that of eight studies done, "No experimental studies unequivocally demonstrated the effectiveness of AA or (Twelve Step Facilitation) approaches for reducing alcohol dependence or problems." (Ferri M, Amato L, Davoli M. Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programmes for alcohol dependence. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2006, Issue 3. Art. No.: CD005032. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005032.pub2)
If there are any studies from the past 8 years demonstrating otherwise which I don't know about, please tell me. Until then, I request that everyone touting AA as a good solution to problem drinking acknowledge that it is a matter of opinion, and a matter of opinion ONLY. If you want to make stronger statements, you need evidence. The sort of which is cited above.
good luck to you and i hope you do give aa a try as it really might change the way you think feel and react to things you dont like, ask me to prove it and i will give you my story simple what more proof do you need other than that ?
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by Coldfusion
This article is available free online:
"...Neuroscientists have begun to recognize that some of the most important brain systems impaired in addiction are those in the prefrontal cortex that regulate social cognition, self-monitoring, moral behaviour and other processes that the AA-type approach seems to target...."
4 March 2009; Neuroscience: "Rethinking rehab", Jim Schnabel, Nature 458.
"...Neuroscientists have begun to recognize that some of the most important brain systems impaired in addiction are those in the prefrontal cortex that regulate social cognition, self-monitoring, moral behaviour and other processes that the AA-type approach seems to target...."
4 March 2009; Neuroscience: "Rethinking rehab", Jim Schnabel, Nature 458.
I'm also curious about McLellan's quote regarding the "excellent documentation that...", because he doesn't seem to have cited this documentation in any of his personal work.
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by desypete
my own life story is all the everdence you need my friend to know aa works and can help anyone who wants it
good luck to you and i hope you do give aa a try as it really might change the way you think feel and react to things you dont like, ask me to prove it and i will give you my story simple what more proof do you need other than that ?
good luck to you and i hope you do give aa a try as it really might change the way you think feel and react to things you dont like, ask me to prove it and i will give you my story simple what more proof do you need other than that ?
Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Eastern Us
Posts: 1,366
SMART is based upon scientific evidence. Perhaps try one of their meetings if you are lucky enough to live in an area that has them. They also have online meetings.
AA is what it is. Even though I don't subscribe to its program, I found just being around other sober people who have the same affliction helpful. Like others have said maybe go to a meeting and see if you find it useful. Most of the people I met were friendly and rather normal. They weren't pod people and they didn't make me do anything. I do hope that you try something.
AA is what it is. Even though I don't subscribe to its program, I found just being around other sober people who have the same affliction helpful. Like others have said maybe go to a meeting and see if you find it useful. Most of the people I met were friendly and rather normal. They weren't pod people and they didn't make me do anything. I do hope that you try something.
Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: liverpool, england
Posts: 1,708
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
Listen. A "life story" is not "evidence". Ever. It's an anecdote, something scientists very explicitly state is at the absolute bottom of the totem pole when it comes to proving anything.
Member
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Lakeside, Ca
Posts: 10,208
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
What's the environment like at these meetings? Are members receptive to non-traditional (for AA) viewpoints, or do they just pound the Big Book like a bible and insist that whoever disagrees with the 12 steps is "in denial"?
if I might say -- not perfect ones
Mountainman
Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 2,775
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
Listen. A "life story" is not "evidence". Ever. It's an anecdote, something scientists very explicitly state is at the absolute bottom of the totem pole when it comes to proving anything.
My advise is be respectful of others in the room because as sure as I'm typing this you're likely to upset some. But as long as you're not deliberately combative you should be fine.
AA is worth a shot and you can't beat the price.
Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,701
If you are looking for reasons to give up hope and just keep drinking, I think you may have found it!
The search for evidence ALWAYS works because there are problems with research into recovery. You can blow holes into almost any type of recovery. Because the nature of this condition and its treatment is not easy to quantify. Sure they can research the addictive brain and describe the pathology. But what cures it? Are you talking for a year? Ten years? A lifetime? How do you define successful recovery?
There is no documentation. There is no evidence. There is no proof. There is no guarantee. You simply have to rely on your own judgement. You may make a choice that does not help you. Then you have to try a different way to recover. And maybe another.
But if you want an excuse to not take any action, you can keep up the search for a sure-fire path to recovery. It can keep you busy for a very long time.
The search for evidence ALWAYS works because there are problems with research into recovery. You can blow holes into almost any type of recovery. Because the nature of this condition and its treatment is not easy to quantify. Sure they can research the addictive brain and describe the pathology. But what cures it? Are you talking for a year? Ten years? A lifetime? How do you define successful recovery?
There is no documentation. There is no evidence. There is no proof. There is no guarantee. You simply have to rely on your own judgement. You may make a choice that does not help you. Then you have to try a different way to recover. And maybe another.
But if you want an excuse to not take any action, you can keep up the search for a sure-fire path to recovery. It can keep you busy for a very long time.
Sobriety is Traditional
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Orcas Island, Washington
Posts: 9,064
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
What's the environment like at these meetings? Are members receptive to non-traditional (for AA) viewpoints, or do they just pound the Big Book like a bible and insist that whoever disagrees with the 12 steps is "in denial"?
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 43
Originally Posted by desypete
sorry you can not dispute my life story as its real hard facts
I'm sure you agree that cigarettes can cause early death (among other things). Then, suppose I say "Well, my uncle smoked and he lived until he was 80, so cigarettes DON'T cause early death". This is an anecdote. This is my imaginary uncle's "life story". If he existed, these would be "real hard facts".
But if I believed in that reasoning, I'd be an idiot. This is the kind of reasoning you are trying to use with me.
Forum Leader
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 16,945
Originally Posted by jsprplc2006
Listen. A "life story" is not "evidence". Ever. It's an anecdote, something scientists very explicitly state is at the absolute bottom of the totem pole when it comes to proving anything.
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
