A.A(Alcoholics Anonymous) meetings religious?

sopretty · 21-02-2014 7:01pm

Kylith can I ask how you overcame your eating disorders?

sopretty · 21-02-2014 7:11pm

Can I just mention why step one appeals to me? The first part of the step was a bit of a cop-out to me initially. So I spent a further 4 years drinking and berating myself for being a weak piece of crap, who could quit if I really wanted to. I must be the most selfish person on the planet. I didn't accept step one at all. So I continued drinking, trying to moderate both the frequency and level of alcohol I consumed. Alarmingly to me, this did not work. Therefore, believing myself to be some sort of weak willed Jeremy Kyle type person, I attempted suicide in several occasions over those years. I then finally accepted the first part of that step. I stopped torturing myself and berating myself. I began to understand, that I had no choice in when or how much I was drinking. I stopped trying to kill myself.

kylith · 21-02-2014 8:36pm

sopretty wrote: »

Kylith can I ask how you overcame your eating disorders?

The first one was a trip to near-anorexia when I was 16. I lost my appetite due to stress in school (exams and bullying) and lived on polo mints for months. The first step was realising that what I was doing was unhealthy and that I was on the way to damaging myself. So I sat down with a bowl of porridge and made myself eat it. I must have chewed the first spoonful for 15 minutes; even the thought of swallowing it made me want to vomit but I said to myself 'If you don't do this you will die. You will be one of those skeletal girls being fed through a tube. You will ruin your fertility and your life.' After I swallowed it it was so hard to keep down, but I did. Then I ate another spoonful. Every day was a little easier. I relapsed in my mid twenties after a break up and didn't get over it until I met current OH. I knew him as a friend and basically ran away to where he was living to hide from life. He noticed that I never ate more than a bite or two and when I explained that eating made me want to puke and I only ate at all because he was there he didn't judge me or try to force me to eat or tell me to cop myself on, he supported me silently and, again, each day I ate a little more. Even today any form of stress shuts down my appetite and the thought of food makes me want to puke. I think it's a control thing, I've never felt very in control of my life but I can control food. Luckily both times I recognised what I was doing to myself before it went to far but every time I'm stressed and don't want to eat I think back to how hard it was to force down that first spoonful of porridge, how just one spoon seemed to grow in my mouth until I thought I'd choke on it.

When I was stuffing myself it was as hard to fix. I spent so long in shops and supermarkets staring at food. "Am I hungry? Am I actually hungry or do I just want crisps? If I'm really hungry I should buy a banana. If I'm not hungry I should turn around and walk out now". Then I'd mentally frog-march myself either to the fruit section or out of the shop. The poor shop assistants must have thought I was mental; walking in, staring at the chocolate for ten minutes while angrily muttering to myself, then storming out again. I stopped buying chocolate and biscuits completely. I stopped buying beer too, and started walking more; I even adopted dogs to make sure I stuck with it. I'm at the stage now where I can have a bar of chocolate in the fridge for weeks and only eat a square or two now and then. Sometimes I pig out and scoff the whole thing but it's important for me not to think of that as a failure, it's a setback. I am not powerless around chocolate, I've just had a moment of weakness, and tomorrow I won't.

I know that I can do it because I have done it. If I can make myself eat on Monday even though I'm stressed then I can make myself eat on Tuesday too. If I can go a day without chocolate I can go two days. And that's what I'll be doing with the cigs when this pouch runs out; if I can not smoke on Monday I can certainly not smoke on Tuesday, and I'll take it day by day until I can't remember the last time I smoked.

If I may write my first four steps:
- I admitted to myself that I had allowed my attitude to food to control my life.
- I decided that I needed to regain this control for myself.
- I formulated a plan by which to retrain myself and so regain control.
- I confided in someone I trusted and asked for their support.

sopretty · 21-02-2014 10:11pm

kylith wrote: »

The first one was a trip to near-anorexia when I was 16. I lost my appetite due to stress in school (exams and bullying) and lived on polo mints for months. The first step was realising that what I was doing was unhealthy and that I was on the way to damaging myself. So I sat down with a bowl of porridge and made myself eat it. I must have chewed the first spoonful for 15 minutes; even the thought of swallowing it made me want to vomit but I said to myself 'If you don't do this you will die. You will be one of those skeletal girls being fed through a tube. You will ruin your fertility and your life.' After I swallowed it it was so hard to keep down, but I did. Then I ate another spoonful. Every day was a little easier. I relapsed in my mid twenties after a break up and didn't get over it until I met current OH. I knew him as a friend and basically ran away to where he was living to hide from life. He noticed that I never ate more than a bite or two and when I explained that eating made me want to puke and I only ate at all because he was there he didn't judge me or try to force me to eat or tell me to cop myself on, he supported me silently and, again, each day I ate a little more. Even today any form of stress shuts down my appetite and the thought of food makes me want to puke. I think it's a control thing, I've never felt very in control of my life but I can control food. Luckily both times I recognised what I was doing to myself before it went to far but every time I'm stressed and don't want to eat I think back to how hard it was to force down that first spoonful of porridge, how just one spoon seemed to grow in my mouth until I thought I'd choke on it.

When I was stuffing myself it was as hard to fix. I spent so long in shops and supermarkets staring at food. "Am I hungry? Am I actually hungry or do I just want crisps? If I'm really hungry I should buy a banana. If I'm not hungry I should turn around and walk out now". Then I'd mentally frog-march myself either to the fruit section or out of the shop. The poor shop assistants must have thought I was mental; walking in, staring at the chocolate for ten minutes while angrily muttering to myself, then storming out again. I stopped buying chocolate and biscuits completely. I stopped buying beer too, and started walking more; I even adopted dogs to make sure I stuck with it. I'm at the stage now where I can have a bar of chocolate in the fridge for weeks and only eat a square or two now and then. Sometimes I pig out and scoff the whole thing but it's important for me not to think of that as a failure, it's a setback. I am not powerless around chocolate, I've just had a moment of weakness, and tomorrow I won't.

I know that I can do it because I have done it. If I can make myself eat on Monday even though I'm stressed then I can make myself eat on Tuesday too. If I can go a day without chocolate I can go two days. And that's what I'll be doing with the cigs when this pouch runs out; if I can not smoke on Monday I can certainly not smoke on Tuesday, and I'll take it day by day until I can't remember the last time I smoked.

If I may write my first four steps:
- I admitted to myself that I had allowed my attitude to food to control my life.
- I decided that I needed to regain this control for myself.
- I formulated a plan by which to retrain myself and so regain control.
- I confided in someone I trusted and asked for their support.

Thank you for sharing your very personal journey. I wish you a very happy future!

sopretty · 21-02-2014 10:34pm

I am sick of people who have never attended a meeting of aa, trying to disparage it.
By their understanding, a priest goes into a hospital, to find the resident alcoholic who is just coming out of the dt's.
The priest tells the patient to get off all the auld medication them auld doctors have him on, as they're bad for him.
This priest brings an AA member in to collect said unfortunate from hospital.
Said AA member hauls said unfortunate to an aa meeting. Depending on what meeting he has been hauled to he could be told that God will save him, that he doesn't need to believe in God , that God is the universe, that the 12 steps are just nonsense, that only the 12 steps will cure him, that there is no cure, that God is the cure, that he can cure himself.
Or such an unfortunate might be told, here's a biscuit, have three. Today is almost over, that's one day of sobriety almost over. Have a few more biscuits. Just try to not drink tonight and we'll see you tomorrow.

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 10:07am

sopretty wrote: »

I am sick of people who have never attended a meeting of aa, trying to disparage it.
By their understanding, a priest goes into a hospital, to find the resident alcoholic who is just coming out of the dt's.
The priest tells the patient to get off all the auld medication them auld doctors have him on, as they're bad for him.
This priest brings an AA member in to collect said unfortunate from hospital.
Said AA member hauls said unfortunate to an aa meeting. Depending on what meeting he has been hauled to he could be told that God will save him, that he doesn't need to believe in God , that God is the universe, that the 12 steps are just nonsense, that only the 12 steps will cure him, that there is no cure, that God is the cure, that he can cure himself.
Or such an unfortunate might be told, here's a biscuit, have three. Today is almost over, that's one day of sobriety almost over. Have a few more biscuits. Just try to not drink tonight and we'll see you tomorrow.

Nice strawman. :rolleyes:

To me it seems that the group dynamic in AA helps more than the 12 steps do.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 11:04am

gaynorvader wrote: »

Nice strawman. :rolleyes:

To me it seems that the group dynamic in AA helps more than the 12 steps do.

Why can't it be both ?

sopretty · 24-02-2014 11:09am

marienbad wrote: »

Why can't it be both ?

I have often felt that AA was more than the sum of its parts.

nozzferrahhtoo · 24-02-2014 11:47am

marienbad wrote: »

Nozze mentions meetings being a kind of free for all and the 12 steps not being used at all or even shown to new members. May I ask where is the evidence for that ?

You may, though it might be more polite to ask me rather than talk about me in the third person in a post to someone else.

But it is not actually my claims. I am merely relaying what I have been told anecdotally by other users on this thread and on the thread about the same topic over on the City Data forum.

On such threads when I complain about certain aspects of the 12 steps I am pretty much told "Ah we do not really bother with them anyway". Or that they are mentioned on day 1 and never again. Or stuck on the wall but never referred to.

It has led me to ask such people what actually makes an AA meeting.... except for the name on the door.... if not the steps and tenets of AA. I have not had an answer to that question that actually makes a shred of sense from those people however.

I have been to 1000's of meetings in dozens of cities and countries and never,not once have I seen such a thing . But yet that will be dismissed as anecdotal - but that cuts both ways does it not ?

As for creating a system that is easily abusable - is there any evidence that this is any more an issue in AA than in any other organisation dealing with vulnerable people . AA is subject to the same rules and regulations as anyone else ,be they Vincent de Paul or the local camera club or the boy scouts for that matter.

It is listed by many secular outlets as a viable method in fighting alcoholism ,granted not the only one. But it is an endorsement nonetheless. And there are many more such references easily available.
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/support_groups_alcohol.htm

Might I ask do you and nozze think it should be banned ,have a health warning , what ?

And also could I ask ,( I might be out of line here so no probs if you don't) do you know any chronic alcoholics or drug addicts ?[/QUOTE]

gaynorvader wrote: »

To me it seems that the group dynamic in AA helps more than the 12 steps do.

No doubt.

At the end of the day there are 2 things that help people with addiction more than anything else. 1) A social support group/network to assist in the journey and 2) something to invest your time, energy and thoughts in to fill in the gap that the removal of your personal addiction from your life is likely to leave.

Any group.... including AA..... will offer the above. I have known people who have given up their addiction (again mainly alcohol) by joining a football club. The team offered the social support and the sport itself offered the vacuum filler to fill the gap in their lives.

marienbad wrote: »

Why can't it be both ?

It _could_ be. The question is _is it_? And as I say above about the football club.... there is no sign whatsoever to me that it is both. AA is just offering the two things that I think are actually helpful to over come addiction. The rest is just filler and theistic marketing.

I think any proponent of AA and 12 steps will be hard pushed to find anything of any efficacy in AA or the 12 steps that it actually offers alcoholics that a football club (for example) could not offer just as well.

sopretty wrote: »

I am sick of people who have never attended a meeting of aa, trying to disparage it.

Then perhaps a good first step to get over your feeling of nausea is to stop over reacting to what people here are saying. Much, if not most, of what is being said here is not "disparaging" at all. No, it is more a call to have programmes like AA evaluated in the same way(s) and methodologies as we evaluate any treatment or support plan.

The rest of your "By their understanding" rant in what follows in the rest of your post is a straw man that does not seem to match what people on the thread are ACTUALLY saying or espousing. Rather than address anything being said you appear to have made the choice to misrepresent it instead.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 12:10pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You may, though it might be more polite to ask me rather than talk about me in the third person in a post to someone else.

But it is not actually my claims. I am merely relaying what I have been told anecdotally by other users on this thread and on the thread about the same topic over on the City Data forum.

On such threads when I complain about certain aspects of the 12 steps I am pretty much told "Ah we do not really bother with them anyway". Or that they are mentioned on day 1 and never again. Or stuck on the wall but never referred to.

It has led me to ask such people what actually makes an AA meeting.... except for the name on the door.... if not the steps and tenets of AA. I have not had an answer to that question that actually makes a shred of sense from those people however.

I have been to 1000's of meetings in dozens of cities and countries and never,not once have I seen such a thing . But yet that will be dismissed as anecdotal - but that cuts both ways does it not ?

As for creating a system that is easily abusable - is there any evidence that this is any more an issue in AA than in any other organisation dealing with vulnerable people . AA is subject to the same rules and regulations as anyone else ,be they Vincent de Paul or the local camera club or the boy scouts for that matter.

It is listed by many secular outlets as a viable method in fighting alcoholism ,granted not the only one. But it is an endorsement nonetheless. And there are many more such references easily available.
http://www.helpguide.org/mental/support_groups_alcohol.htm

Might I ask do you and nozze think it should be banned ,have a health warning , what ?

And also could I ask ,( I might be out of line here so no probs if you don't) do you know any chronic alcoholics or drug addicts ?

No doubt.

At the end of the day there are 2 things that help people with addiction more than anything else. 1) A social support group/network to assist in the journey and 2) something to invest your time, energy and thoughts in to fill in the gap that the removal of your personal addiction from your life is likely to leave.

Any group.... including AA..... will offer the above. I have known people who have given up their addiction (again mainly alcohol) by joining a football club. The team offered the social support and the sport itself offered the vacuum filler to fill the gap in their lives.

It _could_ be. The question is _is it_? And as I say above about the football club.... there is no sign whatsoever to me that it is both. AA is just offering the two things that I think are actually helpful to over come addiction. The rest is just filler and theistic marketing.

I think any proponent of AA and 12 steps will be hard pushed to find anything of any efficacy in AA or the 12 steps that it actually offers alcoholics that a football club (for example) could not offer just as well.

Then perhaps a good first step to get over your feeling of nausea is to stop over reacting to what people here are saying. Much, if not most, of what is being said here is not "disparaging" at all. No, it is more a call to have programmes like AA evaluated in the same way(s) and methodologies as we evaluate any treatment or support plan.

The rest of your "By their understanding" rant in what follows in the rest of your post is a straw man that does not seem to match what people on the thread are ACTUALLY saying or espousing. Rather than address anything being said you appear to have made the choice to misrepresent it instead.[/QUOTE]

No offence meant by questioning you in that post (In fact I am a bit surprised you see it as you did).

Anyway back to the above - if I had posted what you have just posted ,just in reverse, you would tear it to shreds.

You are posting a lot of anecdotal second hand reports and expect them to carry credibility, yet you would not accept the reverse.

I will repeat I have never seen such practices in all my years attending AA.

As for the football club , if it was as easy as that we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Again may I ask do you know any chronic alcoholics or addicts ? And if you do , do you think the local football club or chess club is going to help them ?

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 12:16pm

marienbad wrote: »

No doubt.
{...}And if you do , do you think the local football club or chess club is going to help them ?

Yes, but probably not by themselves.

sopretty · 24-02-2014 12:24pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

Yes, but probably not by themselves.

Ah, so that's where I've been going wrong!
I joined a tag rugby group from work. I used to go straight from work to the pub, have 2 pints, then go to 'training', then try to find some randomer to go for a few more pints with, or hook up with anyone else who happened to be out. If no-one was out, I'd go into a pub on my own.
I should have joined a football club instead!

marienbad · 24-02-2014 12:30pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

Yes, but probably not by themselves.

Well if you had a friend who is a chronic alcoholic which would you prefer - the local football club and all that camaraderie or AA and all that 'religion'

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 12:31pm

sopretty wrote: »

Ah, so that's where I've been going wrong!
I joined a tag rugby group from work. I used to go straight from work to the pub, have 2 pints, then go to 'training', then try to find some randomer to go for a few more pints with, or hook up with anyone else who happened to be out. If no-one was out, I'd go into a pub on my own.
I should have joined a football club instead!

What?! How did you infer that from what I said? I was saying combining your tag rugby and AA would be best and that tag rugby/football/etc are not enough by themselves, but need additional treatment.

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 12:32pm

marienbad wrote: »

Well if you had a friend who is a chronic alcoholic which would you prefer - the local football club and all that camaraderie or AA and all that 'religion'

Both. Or, if AA is not for them, Counselling and the local football club.

nozzferrahhtoo · 24-02-2014 1:12pm

I will try to reply to everything you wrote here, but given you have made a mess of the QUOTE function I will ask forgiveness if I miss anything.

marienbad wrote: »

I have been to 1000's of meetings in dozens of cities and countries and never,not once have I seen such a thing . But yet that will be dismissed as anecdotal - but that cuts both ways does it not ?

Its one anecdote against a group of them really, but I do not put much stock in anecdote either way. As I said, all I am doing is relaying what I have been told. I am not citing it as fact.

1000s of meetings however? That sounds like hyperbole and exaggeration to me. How many 1000s are we talking here? 2? 4? 6? 8? Even at two meetings a week it would take 20 years to go to 2000 meetings. Do you do anything BUT go to meetings in your life? Little wonder you have no time for drink. Perhaps it is not AA that is the cure, but investing so much time in something else that you simply have no more time to drink.

marienbad wrote: »

It is listed by many secular outlets as a viable method in fighting alcoholism ,granted not the only one. But it is an endorsement nonetheless.

Argument from authority fallacy. So what if such places have it listed. WHO has it listed is of no interest to me. It is WHY they have it listed. Do they justify or explain their listing of it in any way?

Citing mere endorsement of it tells me literally nothing. I know people list it. I know some doctors and psychologist refer people on to it. The question is WHY. Do they do so for good reason, or because it simply is the go-to name in their heads?

marienbad wrote: »

And also could I ask ,( I might be out of line here so no probs if you don't) do you know any chronic alcoholics or drug addicts ?

I do not tend to answer irrelevancies or personal questions about me. The above is both. Whether I know such people directly, or not, is simply irrelevant to the points I am making.

marienbad wrote: »

(In fact I am a bit surprised you see it as you did).

Or that I saw it at all perhaps.

marienbad wrote: »

As for the football club , if it was as easy as that we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Why not? I see nothing to preclude such a discussion. Sometimes people do over complicate things that are easy and straight forward. The fact is I can not see a single thing, much less from anyone on this thread, that suggests AA has anything to offer _but_ the two things I have listed. And as I said there are many ways to obtain those two things.

If there is any difference you can discern really, I am all ears to hear it. Do you think AA offer anything at all, that you can show is actually effective or useful, EXCEPT for the two things I have already listed?

And I do not mean simply declaring something is important or useful.... like imagining some kind of "higher power" and submitting to it..... I mean mention something AND show that it is useful or effective or important somehow.

I do not believe you can because to do so you will have to start asking the kinds of questions that the vast majority of my posts on this thread have been lamenting the lack of anyone actually asking, let alone getting answered.

sopretty · 24-02-2014 1:12pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

What?! How did you infer that from what I said? I was saying combining your tag rugby and AA would be best and that tag rugby/football/etc are not enough by themselves, but need additional treatment.

Apologies, I was in fact responding to nozz's claim that she knows people who gave up alcohol by joining a football club. Hadn't intended to quote you!

marienbad · 24-02-2014 1:48pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I will try to reply to everything you wrote here, but given you have made a mess of the QUOTE function I will ask forgiveness if I miss anything.

Its one anecdote against a group of them really, but I do not put much stock in anecdote either way. As I said, all I am doing is relaying what I have been told. I am not citing it as fact.

1000s of meetings however? That sounds like hyperbole and exaggeration to me. How many 1000s are we talking here? 2? 4? 6? 8? Even at two meetings a week it would take 20 years to go to 2000 meetings. Do you do anything BUT go to meetings in your life? Little wonder you have no time for drink. Perhaps it is not AA that is the cure, but investing so much time in something else that you simply have no more time to drink.

Argument from authority fallacy. So what if such places have it listed. WHO has it listed is of no interest to me. It is WHY they have it listed. Do they justify or explain their listing of it in any way?

Citing mere endorsement of it tells me literally nothing. I know people list it. I know some doctors and psychologist refer people on to it. The question is WHY. Do they do so for good reason, or because it simply is the go-to name in their heads?

I do not tend to answer irrelevancies or personal questions about me. The above is both. Whether I know such people directly, or not, is simply irrelevant to the points I am making.

Or that I saw it at all perhaps.

Why not? I see nothing to preclude such a discussion. Sometimes people do over complicate things that are easy and straight forward. The fact is I can not see a single thing, much less from anyone on this thread, that suggests AA has anything to offer _but_ the two things I have listed. And as I said there are many ways to obtain those two things.

If there is any difference you can discern really, I am all ears to hear it. Do you think AA offer anything at all, that you can show is actually effective or useful, EXCEPT for the two things I have already listed?

And I do not mean simply declaring something is important or useful.... like imagining some kind of "higher power" and submitting to it..... I mean mention something AND show that it is useful or effective or important somehow.

I do not believe you can because to do so you will have to start asking the kinds of questions that the vast majority of my posts on this thread have been lamenting the lack of anyone actually asking, let alone getting answered.

I think the quote function is kaput as I am seeing the same on your posts, but no matter the sense is coming through.

I am 35 five years sober so I can assure you I have been to that many meetings, In the early years sometimes every day ,even occasionally twice a day. Much ,much less these days.It is really not that hard as they start at 8.30 and one is home by 10. A lot less time that it takes to get pissed .

And no I did not hope you would miss that comment, a bit surprised you would even think that. For two reasons - for anyone that follows your posts it is obvious you read every post, and secondly I have been open and honest all along so why would I deviate now ? But no matter.

On the personal experience being irrelevant - at some level it all comes down to such experience, all that data collected and aggregated and analysed is just the summation of individual testimony. I am not saying one individual account have any relevance to public policy but you cannot be blind to it either . The same would apply to the Simon Community or Shelter - some knowledge or experience of those needing those services must be useful.It is no coincidence that large numbers working in this field are ex alcoholic/addicts

I have provided data showing the efficacy of AA and now you ask why doctors etc list it, and you suggest maybe it is their go to name- have you anything to support that.

Again I would reiterate I am not saying AA is the only way , or cannot be used in conjunction with other methods- as is usually the case.

But I don't think we will agree on this , we are just coming at it from such different lived experience.

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 2:05pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

{...}
If there is any difference you can discern really, I am all ears to hear it. Do you think AA offer anything at all, that you can show is actually effective or useful, EXCEPT for the two things I have already listed?
{...}

The main differences, as I see them, are that AA is religious and AA is focused on not drinking, whereas in your local sports club, you're quite likely to come under a bit of peer pressure to head to the pub after a game/training session. The second one definitely being the more important difference.
I do think that other activities help immensely though, and I'm basing this purely on my own experiences and a small pinch of reasoning/logic.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 2:48pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

The main differences, as I see them, are that AA is religious and AA is focused on not drinking, whereas in your local sports club, you're quite likely to come under a bit of peer pressure to head to the pub after a game/training session. The second one definitely being the more important difference.
I do think that other activities help immensely though, and I'm basing this purely on my own experiences and a small pinch of reasoning/logic.

This shows the huge gap in understanding each others views - AA is religious to those that are religious, and is not to those that are not. I can only say that so many times.

And AA has no interest in not drinking per se, it is about understanding why a person drank and counteracting those issues. Drink is just the symptom of deeper issues.

It is not just about stopping drinking, it is about understanding why a person feels the need to drink, providing the support and tools to help overcome those needs and providing a methodology to live a sober life content in that choice.

Who wants to live a life where drink or drugs dominates your life whether you are on them or off them ?

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 2:58pm

marienbad wrote: »

This shows the huge gap in understanding each others views - AA is religious to those that are religious, and is not to those that are not. I can only say that so many times.

Putting faith into a higher power is religious or at the very least spiritual.

marienbad wrote: »

And AA has no interest in not drinking per se, it is about understanding why a person drank and counteracting those issues. Drink is just the symptom of deeper issues.

It is not just about stopping drinking, it is about understanding why a person feels the need to drink, providing the support and tools to help overcome those needs and providing a methodology to live a sober life content in that choice.

Who wants to live a life where drink or drugs dominates your life whether you are on them or off them ?

Fair enough, poor choice of words on my part. I thought I'd clarified what I meant by it with the rest of my post though. In AA, you're surrounded by people fighting addiction too, as opposed to a football team where you are likely to encounter peer pressure to go clubbing/drinking/whatever.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 3:07pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

Putting faith into a higher power is religious or at the very least spiritual.

Fair enough, poor choice of words on my part. I thought I'd clarified what I meant by it with the rest of my post though. In AA, you're surrounded by people fighting addiction too, as opposed to a football team where you are likely to encounter peer pressure to go clubbing/drinking/whatever.

How do you square that I am sober,in AA,and an atheist and I am not alone ? Or am I just lying to myself ?

If you quote the literature at me you must quote all of it, there is provision for non believers .Do you accept that ?

No you are not surrounded by people fighting addiction ,that is the essence of the programme. Newcomers may be, the rest of us are keeping an eye on the character traits that made us drink and living happy productive lives where the thought of drink rarely enters our heads .

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 3:23pm

marienbad wrote: »

How do you square that I am sober,in AA,and an atheist and I am not alone ? Or am I just lying to myself ?

If you quote the literature at me you must quote all of it, there is provision for non believers .Do you accept that ?

No you are not surrounded by people fighting addiction ,that is the essence of the programme. Newcomers may be, the rest of us are keeping an eye on the character traits that made us drink and living happy productive lives where the thought of drink rarely enters our heads .

From the OED

oed.com wrote:

Religion
3. Action or conduct indicating belief in, obedience to, and reverence for a god, gods, or similar superhuman power

5. Belief in or acknowledgement of some superhuman power or powers (esp. a god or gods) which is typically manifested in obedience, reverence, and worship; such a belief as part of a system defining a code of living, esp. as a means of achieving spiritual or material improvement.

I don't see how the AA's 12 steps doesn't fall under this definition. The fact that they claim not to be a religion is meaningless.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 3:31pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

From the OED

I don't see how the AA's 12 steps doesn't fall under this definition. The fact that they claim not to be a religion is meaningless.

Indeed that is correct if you believe in a god, but provision is made if you don't .

I would say we are in an extreme minority and probably some in AA might even say we have got it all wrong . But the fact is the literature does make provision for us and we are there.

This discussion feels a bit like the Russian mayor that says there are no gays in Russia. Well I am an alcoholic,I am an atheist and I am sober , so can we agree there is at least one in AA:)

There are a large number of specifically atheist/Agnostic groups springing up in the USA but to my knowledge none as yet here in Ireland. I would have no problem going to such groups just as I have no problem going to AA.

The key to recovery is identification and not comparison

gaynorvader · 24-02-2014 3:54pm

marienbad wrote: »

Indeed that is correct if you believe in a god, but provision is made if you don't .

I would say we are in an extreme minority and probably some in AA might even say we have got it all wrong . But the fact is the literature does make provision for us and we are there.

This discussion feels a bit like the Russian mayor that says there are no gays in Russia. Well I am an alcoholic,I am an atheist and I am sober , so can we agree there is at least one in AA:)

There are a large number of specifically atheist/Agnostic groups springing up in the USA but to my knowledge none as yet here in Ireland. I would have no problem going to such groups just as I have no problem going to AA.

The key to recovery is identification and not comparison

I'm not talking about God/gods though, I'm referring to the higher power. Belief in a higher power is religious. Pretty sure you can still be atheist as theism is not the same as religion (theism dealing with a deity as opposed to a more abstract higher power).
I have no problem with AA. I just see it as a religious/spiritual group based on the 12 steps.

Brian Shanahan · 24-02-2014 4:44pm

marienbad wrote: »

Not so Brian.

I have posted links showing the success rates are much higher and there are many more available if anyone cares to look.

<snip>

And also could I ask ,( I might be out of line here so no probs if you don't) do you know any chronic alcoholics or drug addicts ?

On the first point, not true. You linked to an article in SciAm Mind which referred to some very bad studies to which I responded by quoting from responses to said article showing that the studies in question are in fact useless (and if anything show a success rate worse {at 4%} than what AA is being given credit for in this thread). And there aren't many more availabe, mainly because the AA flat out refuses to either carry out proper testing of its claims with the corresponding release of data, or release unedited what little data it keeps. Given that the organisation is so secretive about analysing what it does it is nigh on impossible for anyone outside to carry out an unbiased study of the effects of its activities.

On the second point I used to know quite a few alcaholics, as my father's family had an acahol problem. Most of his uncles on his mother's side were raging alcaholics. And there are a number of people I know now who I'd be worried about. Drug addicts I'm not sure about.

marienbad · 24-02-2014 5:04pm

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

On the first point, not true. You linked to an article in SciAm Mind which referred to some very bad studies to which I responded by quoting from responses to said article showing that the studies in question are in fact useless (and if anything show a success rate worse {at 4%} than what AA is being given credit for in this thread). And there aren't many more availabe, mainly because the AA flat out refuses to either carry out proper testing of its claims with the corresponding release of data, or release unedited what little data it keeps. Given that the organisation is so secretive about analysing what it does it is nigh on impossible for anyone outside to carry out an unbiased study of the effects of its activities.

On the second point I used to know quite a few alcaholics, as my father's family had an acahol problem. Most of his uncles on his mother's side were raging alcaholics. And there are a number of people I know now who I'd be worried about. Drug addicts I'm not sure about.

Can you link me to those studies showing the poor rates of AA. I have given a links showing otherwise, if the comments say differently so be it. But there is no denying independant sources support them. Otherwise it is just a dick measuring contest

On the secretativeness of AA, I have never heard of that before this thread. Are there studies by Shelter,Simon,St,V de P showing the effective of their organisations ?

Is it not usually that academia conducts studies on such organisations and with their co-operation ?

AA does not proselytise, it is self supportive and receives no assistance from outside agencies .All it does is offer help to those who come to it voluntarily . And they can leave, not attend ,whatever as they please.

No one comes to AA by untrammelled choice , it is usually a last resort.

Most people coming to AA today come from treatment centres and I would completely recommend that to anyone as a first step .They just weren't available in my day so we had to make the best of what was available.

Why do you think AA is still going strong if it is so ineffective ? we don't go looking for 'members' .At the most we try to show by our our lives that there is a way out of a dreadful situation.

sopretty · 24-02-2014 5:06pm

Nozz - to answer your question in relation to how AA is somehow different to any other support group, I will try to articulate my opinion on this.

1. I have always felt different to other people. I have always tried to mimic behaviours of others, in order to fit in. I am the typical chameleon. Whatever I perceive you want me to be, I will be. But never myself. When I am among AA members, I can be entirely myself. I don't have to pretend anymore. I can be wholly honest. I feel like I actually DO belong.
2. I can understand 99.9% of things fellow AA members state.
3. I can identify with behaviours, past and present of other AA members.
4. I can identify with thoughts and feelings, past and present, of other AA members.
5. I can talk about things that are happening in life, and be understood, unlike in the real world, where my drinking is blamed on my lack of self-control, my weak will, my selfishness. When not drinking, I can talk about real feelings, feelings that I can't talk about in life, and be heard, listened to and understood.
6. I can get little nuggets of information on how other members managed to stay sober in their early days.
7. I experience a compassion and an understanding which I have never ever experienced in any other setting in all of my life.
8. I have explained on this thread, how Step 1 helps me.
9. I have explained on this thread, how Step 3 helps me.
10. When you share at a meeting that you are struggling, be that on day 1, or day 90, you will have members who will come over to you after a meeting to listen or offer their own experience of similar situations.
11. Yes, I have somewhere to look forward to going to, to fill the void alcohol did.
12. I am given a message of hope.
13. I am offered an unconditional helping hand, in the form of members offering me their phone numbers, and the invitation to ring, no matter how trivial my issues might be. This is normally coupled with the statement that when one alcoholic helps another, both are helped. I have found this to be true myself when on occasion a new member might ring me.
14. I am spoon-fed the steps in the early days, with lovely little slogans such as 'Keep it simple', 'A day at a time', 'Live & let Live' etc.
15. I am confident that I can say my piece, uninterrupted, for the 1 minute or 5 minutes or 0 minutes that I wish to speak.
16. I can come out of a meeting with a sense of peace and calm in my mind, having gone into said meeting, in a complete and utter mess emotionally and mentally.
17. None of it makes sense. As my old buddy with the Beethoven-appreciation says, 'I couldn't figure out how going in and talking about drinking and being sober was going to help me stop, but it did!'. That is why I feel that AA is much more than the sum of its parts.

That's all I can think of for now. But neither the tag-rugby team, nor the football team can offer me anything like what AA offers.
That said, a lot of AA's, will have come through an addiction service such as CADS, probably ended up in a psychiatric hospital or jail or hospital or rehabilitation facility for a period, will likely have been detoxed on Librium, some are likely to be on anti-depressants anyway due to the depressant nature of alcohol. Most will continue with all those treatments until discharged from such services.
I have never ever ever had it suggested to me to go on medication/go off medication/attend additional services/cease attending such services. That simply goes against the relevant AA tradition.
Some are coming in now, before their entire lives have gone completely ass up and that is good. They are saved the disastrous end stages (hopefully).

sopretty · 24-02-2014 5:12pm

marienbad wrote: »

Can you link me to those studies showing the poor rates of AA. I have given a links showing otherwise, if the comments say differently so be it. But there is no denying independant sources support them. Otherwise it is just a dick measuring contest

On the secretativeness of AA, I have never heard of that before this thread. Are there studies by Shelter,Simon,St,V de P showing the effective of their organisations ?

Is it not usually that academia conducts studies on such organisations and with their co-operation ?

AA does not proselytise, it is self supportive and receives no assistance from outside agencies .All it does is offer help to those who come to it voluntarily . And they can leave, not attend ,whatever as they please.

No one comes to AA by untrammelled choice , it is usually a last resort.

Most people coming to AA today come from treatment centres and I would completely recommend that to anyone as a first step .They just weren't available in my day so we had to make the best of what was available.

Why do you think AA is still going strong if it is so ineffective ? we don't go looking for 'members' .At the most we try to show by our our lives that there is a way out of a dreadful situation.

I have asked Nozz where she got the notion that AA was secretive from, she did not reply. I asked her had she ever tried to contact AA, she did not reply.

Brian Shanahan · 24-02-2014 5:28pm

marienbad wrote: »

Can you link me to those studies showing the poor rates of AA. I have given a links showing otherwise, if the comments say differently so be it. But there is no denying independant sources support them. Otherwise it is just a dick measuring contest

The last bit of proper data, showing the 5%, was released by the AA itself all the way back in 1989. It is referenced in the Penn & Teller article above.

I'll also point out that everything released by the AA since then has been irrelevant, unmeasurable (hence wild guesses) and/or heavily massaged to show the AA in a good light.
Frankly without the AA doing proper quantitative data capture and releasing it to qaulified independent persons for analysis we can't even begin to guess at what the true success rate is. But given that every other time that a party has held onto studies, or massaged data in its favour to conceal massive problems in what its shilling (big tobacco & big oil in particular I'm looking at you) does set a very chilling precedent for the problems with AA.

sopretty · 24-02-2014 5:30pm

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

The last bit of proper data, showing the 5%, was released by the AA itself all the way back in 1989. It is referenced in the Penn & Teller article above.

I'll also point out that everything released by the AA since then has been irrelevant, unmeasurable (hence wild guesses) and/or heavily massaged to show the AA in a good light.
Frankly without the AA doing proper quantitative data capture and releasing it to qaulified independent persons for analysis we can't even begin to guess at what the true success rate is. But given that every other time that a party has held onto studies, or massaged data in its favour to conceal massive problems in what its shilling (big tobacco & big oil in particular I'm looking at you) does set a very chilling precedent for the problems with AA.

Brian - I think we discussed the difficulties in publishing data way back in this thread, where you determined that the only measurable thing was length of abstinence. A useless statistic. Agreed?

marienbad · 24-02-2014 6:57pm

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

The last bit of proper data, showing the 5%, was released by the AA itself all the way back in 1989. It is referenced in the Penn & Teller article above.

I'll also point out that everything released by the AA since then has been irrelevant, unmeasurable (hence wild guesses) and/or heavily massaged to show the AA in a good light.
Frankly without the AA doing proper quantitative data capture and releasing it to qaulified independent persons for analysis we can't even begin to guess at what the true success rate is. But given that every other time that a party has held onto studies, or massaged data in its favour to conceal massive problems in what its shilling (big tobacco & big oil in particular I'm looking at you) does set a very chilling precedent for the problems with AA.

No the link I gave cited a number of studies showing better rates. I am not even aware of studies by AA itself.

Where is your links for its non-effectiveness ? Have you any evidence that AA has held onto studies or massaged data . And I don't consider Penn & Teller evidence .

To equate AA with tobacco and oil is just conspiracy theory stuff .If there was not a perceived religious dimension to AA would we be even having this discussion ?

Do you thing St Vincent de Paul has a religious bias in its output ?

sopretty · 24-02-2014 7:09pm

Furthermore Nozz, I asked you whether you had watched the youtube video I linked here? You have refused to answer that question twice also! Yet, you're the one accusing some posters of talking 'at' you and not engaging in a discussion. It's a little bit pointless answering your questions, then having the one little thing you find fault with plucked out of a post, quoted (beautifully), then picked apart. I can only assume that anything you choose not to pick apart, is something you agree with. Or at least, that it's something you can't refute.

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 7:34am

marienbad wrote: »

I think the quote function is kaput as I am seeing the same on your posts

Everyone elses posts, including my own, look fine to me. Perhaps approach the mods or something. You might have a technical issue on your end.

marienbad wrote: »

In the early years sometimes every day ,even occasionally twice a day.

Then as I said it is questionable whether anything about AA at all actually helped you. You certainly have not pointed to anything that might have. Rather you simply found a way to invest your time and energies to fill the gap in your life left by alcohol. As I say in the post to so pretty here too.

marienbad wrote: »

On the personal experience being irrelevant - at some level it all comes down to such experience, all that data collected and aggregated and analysed is just the summation of individual testimony.

I repeat my recommendation to read the book "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre for a glimpse into how we do things in areas like Epidemiology. You will learn having read this book that the kind of data we collate, and HOW we collate and interpret it, makes it a lot more than simply a group of individual testimony. As I said before, if I had status of world leader for just 20 minutes in my life, putting that book on the school curriculum for 15 year olds would be one of the changes I would make.

marienbad wrote: »

I have provided data showing the efficacy of AA

Errrr no you did not. Where did you?

marienbad wrote: »

This shows the huge gap in understanding each others views - AA is religious to those that are religious, and is not to those that are not. I can only say that so many times.

I am not sure how many times you saying it will help. Repetition does not make fact. Again read the 12 steps. The text is blatantly religious and the attributes assigned to this "god" are instantly recognizable to anyone with even a passing familiarity with religions such as Christianity.

marienbad wrote: »

Drink is just the symptom of deeper issues.

Sometimes yes. But not always. Some people can simply come to drink without issues and get addicted to it. It is an addictive substance. Sometimes addiction to alcohol IS the issue. For others it is only a symptom of the real issue(s). A broad stroke generalization across the board that it is one or the other is not helpful.

marienbad wrote: »

Who wants to live a life where drink or drugs dominates your life whether you are on them or off them ?

Pop over and read the "You can have fun without drink" thread that is currently active on After Hours. Some people there genuinely do seem to give the impression that they very much do want drink to be a large part of their life and simply do not want to live a life without it. And are horror struck at the idea of attempting to be sociable or have fun without it.

It is one of those threads that will leave you depressed for our species.

marienbad wrote: »

How do you square that I am sober,in AA,and an atheist and I am not alone ? Or am I just lying to myself ?

Quite easily. As I said there are two things AA actually does offer and I think it is _those_ that help people get off drink. The nonsense religion and 12 steps and the like built up AROUND those two things are just superfluous nonsense designed to separate out a product.

I have compared this, with good reason, more than once on the thread to fad diet plans or life style plans which are concocted by self styled and self proclaimed "Nutrtion experts" who usually have mail order phds. Without exception the successful programs of this sort are a plethora of nonsense built around a core of 3 or 4 simply good ideas, like "Avoid processed food" "Drink more water" "Consume more fresh organic produce" and the like. Around this core they build all sorts of nonsense.... like consuming large amounts of Cayenne Pepper.... or more often than not by purchasing over priced diet and vitamin pills.

And people genuinely testify to the efficacy and power of these programs. But usually assigning the credit to the pills, or the cayenne pepper, and so forth. There was a user here on boards who was once defending Cayenne Pepper with a zealotry that would make the most fundamentalist Muslim blush. Yet what was likely ACTUALLY making this user feel good in life was the basic core changes I listed above.

Similarly.... AA gives a social support group, and a time and energy outlet to dedicate oneself to. These two things, more than anything else, are likely what helps people like yourself attending AA. Nothing to do with AA or their "steps" or tenets at all.

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 7:34am

sopretty wrote: »

Apologies, I was in fact responding to nozz's claim that she knows people who gave up alcohol by joining a football club. Hadn't intended to quote you!

I am not sure what is wrong with the claim that you feel needs to be replied to. Nor why you are spending hours writing a long sequence of posts to me periodically. You appear to be getting more interested in me personally than the thread itself, coming back every couple of hours to post another and yet another post at me. Or at someone else about me.

The simple fact is that if you remove alcohol from your life then this will leave a hole that needs to be filled. As another user put it on another thread.... alcohol is what normally pours back into that hole. Which is why many people fail to stop drinking.

But some people find other things to plug the hole with. Things to dedicate their time and money and energies to. For some people it is a social support group like AA. For others it is not however. They might take up a trade, a language, go back to college or training, start playing football.

The key to giving up alcohol is not just to stop drinking in other words, but to find something to fill the gap in ones life that has been left by the removal of alcohol. If you simply sit at home twiddling your thumbs trying not to drink.... then you will most likely fail.

sopretty wrote: »

Nozz - to answer your question in relation to how AA is somehow different to any other support group, I will try to articulate my opinion on this.

Your point 1 does not show AA to be different at all, but feeds into EXACTLY what my point was about it. It is also more a comment about you than AA.

The same is true of points 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15.... and so on. They are statements about you and not about AA. And they are statements about AA as a social support group. Which again: Was my point exactly.

Point 11 is EXACTLY what I already said and have been saying.

So nothing you are saying here is distinguishing AA from other support groups at all. Rather you are making my point for me that at the end of the day AA is just a social support group, and an outlet. Nothing about the 12 steps or the tenets of AA appear to be relevant, or have anything to do with what you are saying.

So you appear to intend to differentiate it from other groups, yet everything you say makes it sound like the opposite.

sopretty wrote: »

I have never ever ever had it suggested to me to go on medication/go off medication/attend additional services/cease attending such services. That simply goes against the relevant AA tradition.

And yet a significant % of people report exactly that.

marienbad · 25-02-2014 11:54am

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Everyone elses posts, including my own, look fine to me. Perhaps approach the mods or something. You might have a technical issue on your end.

Then as I said it is questionable whether anything about AA at all actually helped you. You certainly have not pointed to anything that might have. Rather you simply found a way to invest your time and energies to fill the gap in your life left by alcohol. As I say in the post to so pretty here too.

I repeat my recommendation to read the book "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre for a glimpse into how we do things in areas like Epidemiology. You will learn having read this book that the kind of data we collate, and HOW we collate and interpret it, makes it a lot more than simply a group of individual testimony. As I said before, if I had status of world leader for just 20 minutes in my life, putting that book on the school curriculum for 15 year olds would be one of the changes I would make.

Errrr no you did not. Where did you?

I am not sure how many times you saying it will help. Repetition does not make fact. Again read the 12 steps. The text is blatantly religious and the attributes assigned to this "god" are instantly recognizable to anyone with even a passing familiarity with religions such as Christianity.

Sometimes yes. But not always. Some people can simply come to drink without issues and get addicted to it. It is an addictive substance. Sometimes addiction to alcohol IS the issue. For others it is only a symptom of the real issue(s). A broad stroke generalization across the board that it is one or the other is not helpful.

Pop over and read the "You can have fun without drink" thread that is currently active on After Hours. Some people there genuinely do seem to give the impression that they very much do want drink to be a large part of their life and simply do not want to live a life without it. And are horror struck at the idea of attempting to be sociable or have fun without it.

It is one of those threads that will leave you depressed for our species.

Quite easily. As I said there are two things AA actually does offer and I think it is _those_ that help people get off drink. The nonsense religion and 12 steps and the like built up AROUND those two things are just superfluous nonsense designed to separate out a product.

I have compared this, with good reason, more than once on the thread to fad diet plans or life style plans which are concocted by self styled and self proclaimed "Nutrtion experts" who usually have mail order phds. Without exception the successful programs of this sort are a plethora of nonsense built around a core of 3 or 4 simply good ideas, like "Avoid processed food" "Drink more water" "Consume more fresh organic produce" and the like. Around this core they build all sorts of nonsense.... like consuming large amounts of Cayenne Pepper.... or more often than not by purchasing over priced diet and vitamin pills.

And people genuinely testify to the efficacy and power of these programs. But usually assigning the credit to the pills, or the cayenne pepper, and so forth. There was a user here on boards who was once defending Cayenne Pepper with a zealotry that would make the most fundamentalist Muslim blush. Yet what was likely ACTUALLY making this user feel good in life was the basic core changes I listed above.

Similarly.... AA gives a social support group, and a time and energy outlet to dedicate oneself to. These two things, more than anything else, are likely what helps people like yourself attending AA. Nothing to do with AA or their "steps" or tenets at all.

.

You have never been to any meetings, have only anecdotal evidence of what they are like and all from people who dislike AA and only accept in the literature what suits your argument and produced no stats of your own and what you keep repeating does not make it correct either and yes I am familiar with Bad Science and would highly recommend it.

And might I recommend you read Moby Dick but I should warn you it is not about a whale .

I am not talking about heavy drinkers or social drinkers - there is a difference .

I don't think you actually know that much about addiction if you believe some of what you have posted here.

Why do you think AA continues to thrive ?

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 12:52pm

marienbad wrote: »

You have never been to any meetings, have only anecdotal evidence of what they are like and all from people who dislike AA

The last part of this quote is a falsehood. You simply made it up out of nowhere. I never indicated any such thing at all. Please reply to what I have actually said and reign in your imagination and your need to put words in my mouth I never once uttered. Thanks.

Nor do I need to go to meetings to comment on AA. In much the same way as I do not need to have had cancer to comment on and evaluate the treatments used for it.

marienbad wrote: »

I don't think you actually know that much about addiction if you believe some of what you have posted here.

Then rebut directly what I have said. Throw away "you do not know that much" comments are just ad hominem nonsense that you are putting in as filler to avoid actually replying to the things I have said.

marienbad wrote: »

Why do you think AA continues to thrive ?

Are you even bothering to read my posts before replying to them, or are you too busy making up things I have not said to bother? I have explained at great length why I think it is as widespread as it is, and what I think it actually does offer.

marienbad · 25-02-2014 1:05pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The last part of this quote is a falsehood. You simply made it up out of nowhere. I never indicated any such thing at all. Please reply to what I have actually said and reign in your imagination and your need to put words in my mouth I never once uttered. Thanks.

Nor do I need to go to meetings to comment on AA. In much the same way as I do not need to have had cancer to comment on and evaluate the treatments used for it.

Then rebut directly what I have said. Throw away "you do not know that much" comments are just ad hominem nonsense that you are putting in as filler to avoid actually replying to the things I have said.

Are you even bothering to read my posts before replying to them, or are you too busy making up things I have not said to bother? I have explained at great length why I think it is as widespread as it is, and what I think it actually does offer.

Not really Nozze - if it was a failure as you believe it would just wither away. Why dos'nt it

And of course you don't need to have cancer to study it, but it would help if you spoke to some cancer sufferers. But a better comparison would be depression - would you just study that remotely or would you talk to some afflicted with it ?

And please stop with the falsehood/you made it up stuff it is beneath you and adds nothing to the conversation.

And I do read your posts so I must have missed it and the thread is so long at this stage , so indulge me - why do you think it continues to thrive ?

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 3:37pm

marienbad wrote: »

Not really Nozze - if it was a failure as you believe it would just wither away. Why dos'nt it

Not an assumption I share. The world is spilling over with useless tripe which does not just "die away". Take a look at X Factor. A TV programme with no recognisable merit or use. Yet the masses subscribe to it so it survives.

As I said I already went into at great length the things I think cause AA to surive and be as well known as it is. That you have skipped over those posts does not mean they do not exist. I urge you simply to re-read my posts.

marienbad wrote: »

And of course you don't need to have cancer to study it, but it would help if you spoke to some cancer sufferers. But a better comparison would be depression - would you just study that remotely or would you talk to some afflicted with it ?

A perfect example to highlight my points. We do study it remotely AND talk to people with it. And when we trial a treatment or drug for it we do so using the EXACT methodologies and study types I have been waxing lyrical about for numerous pages of this thread now. We do not just implement ad hoc religious based treatment plans that people threw together subjectively for no discernible reason. We study both the condition, and the treatments, closely using all the methodologies of statistical analysis and epidemiology.

It is that these types of questions are not being asked, and these types of studies are not being performed, that is my issue on the thread. So you essentially are now making my point for me.

marienbad wrote: »

And please stop with the falsehood/you made it up stuff it is beneath you and adds nothing to the conversation.

Then stop doing it. If you put words in my mouth I never said then I will be compelled to point them out. I neither intend to stop doing this, nor do I apologize for it. Nor do I see it as being "beneath me". It is a crass tactic to claim people said things they did not.

If you misrepresent something I say.... make up things I did not say.... or engage in falsehood then I will point it out, and quite stringently and vehemently too. I have little patience for having people misrepresent my views or put words in my mouth I never said.

What "adds nothing to the conversation" is you engaging in this in the first place. Desist. Then I will not have to point it out.

marienbad wrote: »

And I do read your posts so I must have missed it and the thread is so long at this stage , so indulge me - why do you think it continues to thrive ?

Then it is an attention span problem because it was not so long ago in the thread I mentioned these things. I think it survives because it does actually offer two things people with addictions need. Social Support. And an outlet for time and energies.

It survives because it has also become a household name. When someone comes forward with an addiction to alcohol, "AA" is the first thing that pops off peoples lips. In much the same way as if you ask people generally where to buy a PC they almost invariably point you to "Dell" despite there being much cheaper and more reliable options out there. It is a marketing success.

But I am not interested in marketing. I am not interested in whether AA manages to get bums on seats and continues to do so. I AM interested in whether their program and approach displays and efficacy and whether it helps or hinders peoples recovery overall.

marienbad · 25-02-2014 4:20pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Not an assumption I share. The world is spilling over with useless tripe which does not just "die away". Take a look at X Factor. A TV programme with no recognisable merit or use. Yet the masses subscribe to it so it survives.

As I said I already went into at great length the things I think cause AA to surive and be as well known as it is. That you have skipped over those posts does not mean they do not exist. I urge you simply to re-read my posts.

A perfect example to highlight my points. We do study it remotely AND talk to people with it. And when we trial a treatment or drug for it we do so using the EXACT methodologies and study types I have been waxing lyrical about for numerous pages of this thread now. We do not just implement ad hoc religious based treatment plans that people threw together subjectively for no discernible reason. We study both the condition, and the treatments, closely using all the methodologies of statistical analysis and epidemiology.

It is that these types of questions are not being asked, and these types of studies are not being performed, that is my issue on the thread. So you essentially are now making my point for me.

Then stop doing it. If you put words in my mouth I never said then I will be compelled to point them out. I neither intend to stop doing this, nor do I apologize for it. Nor do I see it as being "beneath me". It is a crass tactic to claim people said things they did not.

If you misrepresent something I say.... make up things I did not say.... or engage in falsehood then I will point it out, and quite stringently and vehemently too. I have little patience for having people misrepresent my views or put words in my mouth I never said.

What "adds nothing to the conversation" is you engaging in this in the first place. Desist. Then I will not have to point it out.

Then it is an attention span problem because it was not so long ago in the thread I mentioned these things. I think it survives because it does actually offer two things people with addictions need. Social Support. And an outlet for time and energies.

It survives because it has also become a household name. When someone comes forward with an addiction to alcohol, "AA" is the first thing that pops off peoples lips. In much the same way as if you ask people generally where to buy a PC they almost invariably point you to "Dell" despite there being much cheaper and more reliable options out there. It is a marketing success.

But I am not interested in marketing. I am not interested in whether AA manages to get bums on seats and continues to do so. I AM interested in whether their program and approach displays and efficacy and whether it helps or hinders peoples recovery overall.

Do you believe this of all 12 step Programmes or just AA ?

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 4:56pm

Way to ignore my entire post and deflect and subject change....

marienbad wrote: »

Do you believe this of all 12 step Programmes or just AA ?

This is a thread about AA so I am mostly limiting my commentary to that. I believe what I am saying about evaluating the efficacy and effect of a treatment plan or support plan should however apply pretty much across the board however.... be it to other 12 step programmes or any other program the purports to cure or assist with an ailment or condition.

sopretty · 25-02-2014 4:59pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Way to ignore my entire post and deflect and subject change....

This is a thread about AA so I am mostly limiting my commentary to that. I believe what I am saying about evaluating the efficacy and effect of a treatment plan or support plan should however apply pretty much across the board however.... be it to other 12 step programmes or any other program the purports to cure or assist with an ailment or condition.

Well, who is in charge of evaluating these treatment plans, and why are they not doing it? Or have they already done it and found AA to be lacking? It's not really a prescribed medication or anything...

nozzferrahhtoo · 25-02-2014 5:04pm

sopretty wrote: »

Well, who is in charge of evaluating these treatment plans, and why are they not doing it? Or have they already done it and found AA to be lacking? It's not really a prescribed medication or anything...

Nor does it have to be. The methodologies of epidemiology and statistical analysis are not limited in their application to just drugs. They can be applied to anything at all. For example I was recently reading and posting on a thread with great interest in relation to acupuncture where a few users were set right in their false thinking that epidemiological methods could not be brought to bear on the subject. For example they could not envision how you could administer a double blind placebo acupuncture session. They were quickly shown that this was merely due to a lack of imagination on their part and you certainly could find ways to do so.

As for who should be doing it and why they are not doing it? Well search me. My comments are limited to my belief we SHOULD be doing it. I leave it to better people than I to decide how and when and where. But the resistance of cults to open themselves up to the kinds of questions I want asked of them is pretty clear. We have had people on this thread harp on about the meaning of the second A in AA, and that this second A somehow puts them beyond having to be studied in any way.... or puts them beyond even being capable of being studied in any way. I rather expect this is just a similar lack of imagination as was demonstrated on the acupuncture discussion.

sopretty · 25-02-2014 5:12pm

Oh, so AA is a cult now is it? Lol. I suppose we have a stash of guns at meetings to keep any nosey non-alco's out too?
I have asked you several times, whether you had ever contacted AA or whether you had any evidence that AA was in fact resistant to scrutiny. You have out and out REFUSED POINT BLANK to respond to either of these simple questions, preferring instead to bleat about religion, definitions of religion, notions about how meetings are conducted, ill-informed notions about how the programme works, and other outlandish, unfounded, lavish, SUBJECTIVE CLAIMS. For a self-confessed lover of facts and statistics, you're pretty short on anything meaningful in terms of facts and figures to support your own personal opinions yourself! As for your loathing of anecdotes, all I'm reading here to support your opinions again, are more anecdotes!

marienbad · 25-02-2014 5:21pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Way to ignore my entire post and deflect and subject change....

This is a thread about AA so I am mostly limiting my commentary to that. I believe what I am saying about evaluating the efficacy and effect of a treatment plan or support plan should however apply pretty much across the board however.... be it to other 12 step programmes or any other program the purports to cure or assist with an ailment or condition.

Stop being so defensive and dare I say it paranoid - I will get to the rest of your post in a little while .

marienbad · 25-02-2014 5:47pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Not an assumption I share. The world is spilling over with useless tripe which does not just "die away". Take a look at X Factor. A TV programme with no recognisable merit or use. Yet the masses subscribe to it so it survives.

As I said I already went into at great length the things I think cause AA to surive and be as well known as it is. That you have skipped over those posts does not mean they do not exist. I urge you simply to re-read my posts.

A perfect example to highlight my points. We do study it remotely AND talk to people with it. And when we trial a treatment or drug for it we do so using the EXACT methodologies and study types I have been waxing lyrical about for numerous pages of this thread now. We do not just implement ad hoc religious based treatment plans that people threw together subjectively for no discernible reason. We study both the condition, and the treatments, closely using all the methodologies of statistical analysis and epidemiology.

It is that these types of questions are not being asked, and these types of studies are not being performed, that is my issue on the thread. So you essentially are now making my point for me.

Then stop doing it. If you put words in my mouth I never said then I will be compelled to point them out. I neither intend to stop doing this, nor do I apologize for it. Nor do I see it as being "beneath me". It is a crass tactic to claim people said things they did not.

If you misrepresent something I say.... make up things I did not say.... or engage in falsehood then I will point it out, and quite stringently and vehemently too. I have little patience for having people misrepresent my views or put words in my mouth I never said.

What "adds nothing to the conversation" is you engaging in this in the first place. Desist. Then I will not have to point it out.

Then it is an attention span problem because it was not so long ago in the thread I mentioned these things. I think it survives because it does actually offer two things people with addictions need. Social Support. And an outlet for time and energies.

It survives because it has also become a household name. When someone comes forward with an addiction to alcohol, "AA" is the first thing that pops off peoples lips. In much the same way as if you ask people generally where to buy a PC they almost invariably point you to "Dell" despite there being much cheaper and more reliable options out there. It is a marketing success.

But I am not interested in marketing. I am not interested in whether AA manages to get bums on seats and continues to do so. I AM interested in whether their program and approach displays and efficacy and whether it helps or hinders peoples recovery overall.

As to why it is popular - you keeping repeating why you think it is so, but offer no evidence for that . But no matter , it is not the crux of the discussion.

You have absolutely nothing to offer to alcoholics/addicts that might offer a better solution , but again would I be correct in saying that is not your concern here ?

All you are saying here is that you don't accept AA as there are no independently validated studies showing it is any more or less effective than
a do-it-yourself approach . Would that be a fair assessment ?

And your opposition is particularly vehement to these type programs because of a religious dimension , Correct ?

ppars · 25-02-2014 9:29pm

gaynorvader wrote: »

I'm not talking about God/gods though, I'm referring to the higher power. Belief in a higher power is religious.

Is it though ?

Could you also believe in the higher power and knowledge of sociology, psychology, counseling, or shared experiences and support of a group of supportive understanding people, the years of other peoples experience of what worked and what didn't work for them etc. ?

gaynorvader · 25-02-2014 11:11pm

ppars wrote: »

Is it though ?

Could you also believe in the higher power and knowledge of sociology, psychology, counseling, or shared experiences and support of a group of supportive understanding people, the years of other peoples experience of what worked and what didn't work for them etc. ?

I don't think I've ever heard of "higher power" being used in that context. I have a feeling you're being deliberately disingenuous.

Brian Shanahan · 25-02-2014 11:15pm

ppars wrote: »

Is it though ?

Yes it is.

Could you also believe in the higher power and knowledge of sociology, psychology, counseling, or shared experiences and support of a group of supportive understanding people, the years of other peoples experience of what worked and what didn't work for them etc. ?

They are not higher powers, a) they are tools, and b) they are human creations. Nothing high about them, nor are they sentient (as being called a higher power would assert).

Oh and regarding belief and sociology and psychology (of which counselling is a tool) if you believe in either you're doing it wrong.

nozzferrahhtoo · 26-02-2014 7:58am

sopretty wrote: »

Oh, so AA is a cult now is it?

It certainly has many of the hallmarks of one which raise my suspicions and concerns yes. It is a religiously based organisation that jealously guards its secrets, has zealot followers who get irate if you even begin to question the efficacy or effects of the program, and will not open itself up to study or evaluation.

sopretty wrote: »

I suppose we have a stash of guns at meetings to keep any nosey non-alco's out too?

Fatuous sarcasm in this regard is neither big, nor clever.

sopretty wrote: »

preferring instead to bleat about religion

Perhaps you need to keep up on the thread topic. The reason I discuss religion on this thread is because the thread title is "AA meetings religious?". And the question is being asked on the "Religion and Spirituality" section of the forum.

So I am not sure why you are implying without any subtlety whatsoever that I need to be justifying my discussion of religion. Or were you just desperate to find a way to put the word "bleat" into a post that you simply had to ignore the actual topic of the thread and my reason for discussion on it?

sopretty wrote: »

As for your loathing of anecdotes

I do not recall expressing any such thing. Are you simply intent on making things up about me now in order to fill out your posts?

A.A(Alcoholics Anonymous) meetings religious?

Comments