The discussion is getting a bit confounded.

The discussion is getting a bit confounded.

Joined: January 13th, 2010, 2:50 pm

January 6th, 2012, 10:32 pm #1

Seems a little clarification would help.

#1 The idea of forcing religious doctrine on a person is wrong. No one should do that, the government, AA, or religious people. Those that do are violating some basic human rights.

#2 Using AA as a vehicle to promote, preach, and advocate any religion is wrong. I've always believed that there was a "separation of principles of the 12 steps and religion", and I'm working on verifying that. I'm not sure when/how the religious spin was added. Maybe it was always there and I just missed it.

#3 Trading one addiction for another is the most common method/approach for treating addiction. This has good & bad ramifications. I'm also discouraged to see folks trade any addiction for an addiction to strict adherence to religion.


That being said...
I believe that the principles of the 12-steps are enormously helpful for anyone that would like to break the chains of an addiction. The failure rate for the "institution" is rather high. For individuals that commit to recovery and follow the principles of the program, I believe the success rate is substantial.

It's rather clear to me that addiction is a disease (drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, food, whatever). A disease that is preventable and treatable, but not curable - once an addict, always an addict. Read material on brain chemistry, addiction, the amygdala, the hippocampus, etc. The logic as to why it would not be consider a disease has not been presented.

From wikipedia...
"In 2001, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine jointly issued "Definitions Related to the Use of Opioids for the Treatment of Pain", which defined the following terms:[3]

Addiction is a primary, chronic, neurobiologic disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

Physical dependence is a state of being that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

Tolerance is the body's physical adaptation to a drug: greater amounts of the drug are required over time to achieve the initial effect as the body "gets used to" and adapts to the intake.

Pseudo addiction is a term which has been used to describe patient behaviors that may occur when pain is undertreated. Patients with unrelieved pain may become focused on obtaining medications, may "clock watch," and may otherwise seem inappropriately "drug seeking." Even such behaviors as illicit drug use and deception can occur in the patient's efforts to obtain relief. Pseudoaddiction can be distinguished from true addiction in that the behaviors resolve when pain is effectively treated."
Last edited by ever-a-newbie on January 6th, 2012, 10:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Seoc Colla
Seoc Colla

January 6th, 2012, 10:49 pm #2

The impact of pain varies with individual expectation. The placebo points to the truth of this. Of course, pain is natures way of alerting the recipient that something is wrong.
Quote
Share

Iceman
Iceman

January 6th, 2012, 11:14 pm #3

Seems a little clarification would help.

#1 The idea of forcing religious doctrine on a person is wrong. No one should do that, the government, AA, or religious people. Those that do are violating some basic human rights.

#2 Using AA as a vehicle to promote, preach, and advocate any religion is wrong. I've always believed that there was a "separation of principles of the 12 steps and religion", and I'm working on verifying that. I'm not sure when/how the religious spin was added. Maybe it was always there and I just missed it.

#3 Trading one addiction for another is the most common method/approach for treating addiction. This has good & bad ramifications. I'm also discouraged to see folks trade any addiction for an addiction to strict adherence to religion.


That being said...
I believe that the principles of the 12-steps are enormously helpful for anyone that would like to break the chains of an addiction. The failure rate for the "institution" is rather high. For individuals that commit to recovery and follow the principles of the program, I believe the success rate is substantial.

It's rather clear to me that addiction is a disease (drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, food, whatever). A disease that is preventable and treatable, but not curable - once an addict, always an addict. Read material on brain chemistry, addiction, the amygdala, the hippocampus, etc. The logic as to why it would not be consider a disease has not been presented.

From wikipedia...
"In 2001, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine jointly issued "Definitions Related to the Use of Opioids for the Treatment of Pain", which defined the following terms:[3]

Addiction is a primary, chronic, neurobiologic disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

Physical dependence is a state of being that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

Tolerance is the body's physical adaptation to a drug: greater amounts of the drug are required over time to achieve the initial effect as the body "gets used to" and adapts to the intake.

Pseudo addiction is a term which has been used to describe patient behaviors that may occur when pain is undertreated. Patients with unrelieved pain may become focused on obtaining medications, may "clock watch," and may otherwise seem inappropriately "drug seeking." Even such behaviors as illicit drug use and deception can occur in the patient's efforts to obtain relief. Pseudoaddiction can be distinguished from true addiction in that the behaviors resolve when pain is effectively treated."
http://www.baldwinresearch.com/alcoholism.cfm http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1545723

http://www.glencoenews.com/main.asp?Sea ... onID=8&S=1

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb190602.htm.

And this is just a very few. The ASAM is not a AMA approved organization. It's whole purpose is the treatment of alcoholics and is a multi-billion dollar scam for recoveryism. It is not a legitimate medical society. Recoveryism doesn't work.

There are many courts, both federal and State that have determined that AA is a religion.

If you can find anything factual about the twelve steps curing, or treating alcoholism, I'd sure like to see the evidence.
Quote
Share

Joined: December 8th, 2003, 1:16 am

January 6th, 2012, 11:34 pm #4

Seems a little clarification would help.

#1 The idea of forcing religious doctrine on a person is wrong. No one should do that, the government, AA, or religious people. Those that do are violating some basic human rights.

#2 Using AA as a vehicle to promote, preach, and advocate any religion is wrong. I've always believed that there was a "separation of principles of the 12 steps and religion", and I'm working on verifying that. I'm not sure when/how the religious spin was added. Maybe it was always there and I just missed it.

#3 Trading one addiction for another is the most common method/approach for treating addiction. This has good & bad ramifications. I'm also discouraged to see folks trade any addiction for an addiction to strict adherence to religion.


That being said...
I believe that the principles of the 12-steps are enormously helpful for anyone that would like to break the chains of an addiction. The failure rate for the "institution" is rather high. For individuals that commit to recovery and follow the principles of the program, I believe the success rate is substantial.

It's rather clear to me that addiction is a disease (drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, food, whatever). A disease that is preventable and treatable, but not curable - once an addict, always an addict. Read material on brain chemistry, addiction, the amygdala, the hippocampus, etc. The logic as to why it would not be consider a disease has not been presented.

From wikipedia...
"In 2001, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine jointly issued "Definitions Related to the Use of Opioids for the Treatment of Pain", which defined the following terms:[3]

Addiction is a primary, chronic, neurobiologic disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

Physical dependence is a state of being that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

Tolerance is the body's physical adaptation to a drug: greater amounts of the drug are required over time to achieve the initial effect as the body "gets used to" and adapts to the intake.

Pseudo addiction is a term which has been used to describe patient behaviors that may occur when pain is undertreated. Patients with unrelieved pain may become focused on obtaining medications, may "clock watch," and may otherwise seem inappropriately "drug seeking." Even such behaviors as illicit drug use and deception can occur in the patient's efforts to obtain relief. Pseudoaddiction can be distinguished from true addiction in that the behaviors resolve when pain is effectively treated."
-watch and observe and digest- exactly HOW something is being used.

I see the pattern all over the place. Someone comes up with a really good, powerful idea. Almost immediately that idea is hijacked by people with totally nefarious and evil motives.

Just because something good has been stolen and perverted into something evil ... doesn't automatically mean that the entire thing should be condemned.

People continually get into heated emotional arguments over issues because of personal experience or because of idealistic brain-washed ideas they've impounded into their minds and fail to analyze the issues objectively.

Should drugs be "legalized" ... for example.

Should prostitution be "legalized"?

Should universal health care be implemented?

Should health food practitioners be banned from operating?

Is AA just a money-grabbing operation?

The problem is institutionalization. Whenever something is turned into a legal institution or forced on people, it is immediately subject to corruption and exploitation by those who are empowered to control the institution. THAT is the problem.

Doc Strange claims that AA is just a scam for extorting money ... because of his personal experience. A few others claim that AA has HELPED them (but of course, they weren't FORCED into anything).

Is AA a good or bad thing? Well, essentially, it's just a psychological tool to enable "victims" to gain an understanding of their condition ... to offer group support for helping them get control of their lives ... and to get them to understand THEMSELVES better.

I can see nothing wrong whatsoever, with the AA "solution" ... as long as it's totally hands off and arm's length from trying to force something on anyone. Take it or leave it. If you don't like the AA idea then leave it alone! It's really just that simple ... or should be.

People want to believe in God? Why not "let" them? Heck, belief in God is really not that much different from belief in AA. The principles are the same.

People have a propensity or need to believe in SOMETHING. A person who believes in nothing is what -a dormant person? We all operate on an idea that our lives are meaningful in some way to persons other than ourselves ... right? If our lives don't mean anything to anyone else ... can our minds accept the idea that there is ANY meaning at all ... even to ourselves?

So basically, we ALL believe that there is something greater than just ourselves and that ... we want to connect and be part of that greater thing.

AA might call it "God". Christians and other religious people call it "God". A spiritually awakened atheist would call it something else but would STILL perceive that this "entity" was something greater than him/herself.

A person who is totally self-absorbed and myopic to any other feelings than his own ... will be a very miserable person and will have to find some way -chemical or hypnotic- to escape from his miserable reality.

And ... I think that's precisely what the AA program intends to do: get such self-absorbed people woken up to the realization of the greater world around them.

-Vince
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: November 4th, 2006, 5:18 pm

January 6th, 2012, 11:36 pm #5

Seems a little clarification would help.

#1 The idea of forcing religious doctrine on a person is wrong. No one should do that, the government, AA, or religious people. Those that do are violating some basic human rights.

#2 Using AA as a vehicle to promote, preach, and advocate any religion is wrong. I've always believed that there was a "separation of principles of the 12 steps and religion", and I'm working on verifying that. I'm not sure when/how the religious spin was added. Maybe it was always there and I just missed it.

#3 Trading one addiction for another is the most common method/approach for treating addiction. This has good & bad ramifications. I'm also discouraged to see folks trade any addiction for an addiction to strict adherence to religion.


That being said...
I believe that the principles of the 12-steps are enormously helpful for anyone that would like to break the chains of an addiction. The failure rate for the "institution" is rather high. For individuals that commit to recovery and follow the principles of the program, I believe the success rate is substantial.

It's rather clear to me that addiction is a disease (drugs, alcohol, sex, gambling, food, whatever). A disease that is preventable and treatable, but not curable - once an addict, always an addict. Read material on brain chemistry, addiction, the amygdala, the hippocampus, etc. The logic as to why it would not be consider a disease has not been presented.

From wikipedia...
"In 2001, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the American Pain Society, and the American Society of Addiction Medicine jointly issued "Definitions Related to the Use of Opioids for the Treatment of Pain", which defined the following terms:[3]

Addiction is a primary, chronic, neurobiologic disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations. It is characterized by behaviors that include one or more of the following: impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving.

Physical dependence is a state of being that is manifested by a drug class specific withdrawal syndrome that can be produced by abrupt cessation, rapid dose reduction, decreasing blood level of the drug, and/or administration of an antagonist.

Tolerance is the body's physical adaptation to a drug: greater amounts of the drug are required over time to achieve the initial effect as the body "gets used to" and adapts to the intake.

Pseudo addiction is a term which has been used to describe patient behaviors that may occur when pain is undertreated. Patients with unrelieved pain may become focused on obtaining medications, may "clock watch," and may otherwise seem inappropriately "drug seeking." Even such behaviors as illicit drug use and deception can occur in the patient's efforts to obtain relief. Pseudoaddiction can be distinguished from true addiction in that the behaviors resolve when pain is effectively treated."
As an active member of AA for 34 years I could offer much enlightenment on the topic.

However there are uninformed and misinformed people here who are only into arguing and I just can't be bothered.







"Error does not become Truth because it is widely accepted; Truth does not become error, even when it stands alone"
(Thanks Kristy)
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2010, 2:50 pm

January 6th, 2012, 11:50 pm #6


I appreciate your efforts.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2010, 2:50 pm

January 6th, 2012, 11:58 pm #7

http://www.baldwinresearch.com/alcoholism.cfm http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1545723

http://www.glencoenews.com/main.asp?Sea ... onID=8&S=1

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb190602.htm.

And this is just a very few. The ASAM is not a AMA approved organization. It's whole purpose is the treatment of alcoholics and is a multi-billion dollar scam for recoveryism. It is not a legitimate medical society. Recoveryism doesn't work.

There are many courts, both federal and State that have determined that AA is a religion.

If you can find anything factual about the twelve steps curing, or treating alcoholism, I'd sure like to see the evidence.
There's pretty much consensus on that. I know 4 family members that have been successfully treated by AA and the 12-step program.

I get your point on the "institutional judicial system creating ailments for legal convenience". And I agree that is a problem, especially with things like ADHD or "Free Thinking".

However, defining "disease" as a condition that disrupts normal/healthy body functions caused by forces uncontrollable by the person suffering, then I see it as a disease. I wonder in your definition are migraine headaches a disease? Is mental illness a disease? The impassioned disagreement that you have might simply the use of the word "disease".
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 13th, 2010, 2:50 pm

January 7th, 2012, 12:01 am #8

-watch and observe and digest- exactly HOW something is being used.

I see the pattern all over the place. Someone comes up with a really good, powerful idea. Almost immediately that idea is hijacked by people with totally nefarious and evil motives.

Just because something good has been stolen and perverted into something evil ... doesn't automatically mean that the entire thing should be condemned.

People continually get into heated emotional arguments over issues because of personal experience or because of idealistic brain-washed ideas they've impounded into their minds and fail to analyze the issues objectively.

Should drugs be "legalized" ... for example.

Should prostitution be "legalized"?

Should universal health care be implemented?

Should health food practitioners be banned from operating?

Is AA just a money-grabbing operation?

The problem is institutionalization. Whenever something is turned into a legal institution or forced on people, it is immediately subject to corruption and exploitation by those who are empowered to control the institution. THAT is the problem.

Doc Strange claims that AA is just a scam for extorting money ... because of his personal experience. A few others claim that AA has HELPED them (but of course, they weren't FORCED into anything).

Is AA a good or bad thing? Well, essentially, it's just a psychological tool to enable "victims" to gain an understanding of their condition ... to offer group support for helping them get control of their lives ... and to get them to understand THEMSELVES better.

I can see nothing wrong whatsoever, with the AA "solution" ... as long as it's totally hands off and arm's length from trying to force something on anyone. Take it or leave it. If you don't like the AA idea then leave it alone! It's really just that simple ... or should be.

People want to believe in God? Why not "let" them? Heck, belief in God is really not that much different from belief in AA. The principles are the same.

People have a propensity or need to believe in SOMETHING. A person who believes in nothing is what -a dormant person? We all operate on an idea that our lives are meaningful in some way to persons other than ourselves ... right? If our lives don't mean anything to anyone else ... can our minds accept the idea that there is ANY meaning at all ... even to ourselves?

So basically, we ALL believe that there is something greater than just ourselves and that ... we want to connect and be part of that greater thing.

AA might call it "God". Christians and other religious people call it "God". A spiritually awakened atheist would call it something else but would STILL perceive that this "entity" was something greater than him/herself.

A person who is totally self-absorbed and myopic to any other feelings than his own ... will be a very miserable person and will have to find some way -chemical or hypnotic- to escape from his miserable reality.

And ... I think that's precisely what the AA program intends to do: get such self-absorbed people woken up to the realization of the greater world around them.

-Vince
And to a large degree, I agree that large institutions (government, religion, and companies) introduce their own self-serving agendas that often are departures from the original principles.

My point is about the core principles, not about the institutional part. However, I'm not convinced that everyone is arguing on the same subject material.

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 4th, 2005, 1:31 pm

January 7th, 2012, 1:39 am #9

http://www.baldwinresearch.com/alcoholism.cfm http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1545723

http://www.glencoenews.com/main.asp?Sea ... onID=8&S=1

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2004/12/prweb190602.htm.

And this is just a very few. The ASAM is not a AMA approved organization. It's whole purpose is the treatment of alcoholics and is a multi-billion dollar scam for recoveryism. It is not a legitimate medical society. Recoveryism doesn't work.

There are many courts, both federal and State that have determined that AA is a religion.

If you can find anything factual about the twelve steps curing, or treating alcoholism, I'd sure like to see the evidence.
If not a disease, then what? Moral failure?

I don't have a strong opinion, or a dog in this fight. But I did find this link quite insightful, and convincing (at least to me):
http://www.alcoholism-and-drug-addictio ... sease.html

...

Alcoholism as a Disease ... Can it be Classified as One?

There are four words that the medical profession use to characterise a disease or illness ...
<blockquote>
Primary

Progressive

Chronic

Fatal
Now alcoholism for those that support this view, see it as likewise in that alcoholism can also be regarded as primary, progressive, chronic and fatal.

...
</blockquote>
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: May 4th, 2005, 1:31 pm

January 7th, 2012, 1:48 am #10

-watch and observe and digest- exactly HOW something is being used.

I see the pattern all over the place. Someone comes up with a really good, powerful idea. Almost immediately that idea is hijacked by people with totally nefarious and evil motives.

Just because something good has been stolen and perverted into something evil ... doesn't automatically mean that the entire thing should be condemned.

People continually get into heated emotional arguments over issues because of personal experience or because of idealistic brain-washed ideas they've impounded into their minds and fail to analyze the issues objectively.

Should drugs be "legalized" ... for example.

Should prostitution be "legalized"?

Should universal health care be implemented?

Should health food practitioners be banned from operating?

Is AA just a money-grabbing operation?

The problem is institutionalization. Whenever something is turned into a legal institution or forced on people, it is immediately subject to corruption and exploitation by those who are empowered to control the institution. THAT is the problem.

Doc Strange claims that AA is just a scam for extorting money ... because of his personal experience. A few others claim that AA has HELPED them (but of course, they weren't FORCED into anything).

Is AA a good or bad thing? Well, essentially, it's just a psychological tool to enable "victims" to gain an understanding of their condition ... to offer group support for helping them get control of their lives ... and to get them to understand THEMSELVES better.

I can see nothing wrong whatsoever, with the AA "solution" ... as long as it's totally hands off and arm's length from trying to force something on anyone. Take it or leave it. If you don't like the AA idea then leave it alone! It's really just that simple ... or should be.

People want to believe in God? Why not "let" them? Heck, belief in God is really not that much different from belief in AA. The principles are the same.

People have a propensity or need to believe in SOMETHING. A person who believes in nothing is what -a dormant person? We all operate on an idea that our lives are meaningful in some way to persons other than ourselves ... right? If our lives don't mean anything to anyone else ... can our minds accept the idea that there is ANY meaning at all ... even to ourselves?

So basically, we ALL believe that there is something greater than just ourselves and that ... we want to connect and be part of that greater thing.

AA might call it "God". Christians and other religious people call it "God". A spiritually awakened atheist would call it something else but would STILL perceive that this "entity" was something greater than him/herself.

A person who is totally self-absorbed and myopic to any other feelings than his own ... will be a very miserable person and will have to find some way -chemical or hypnotic- to escape from his miserable reality.

And ... I think that's precisely what the AA program intends to do: get such self-absorbed people woken up to the realization of the greater world around them.

-Vince
What is wonderful is theorizing. "Can you imagine if drugs were legalized, all the crime?" "Can you imagine all the kids taking drugs?" and so on ...

Well, Portugal did it.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article ... 46,00.html

...

The paper, published by Cato in April, found that in the five years after personal possession was decriminalized, illegal drug use among teens in Portugal declined and rates of new HIV infections caused by sharing of dirty needles dropped, while the number of people seeking treatment for drug addiction more than doubled.

"Judging by every metric, decriminalization in Portugal has been a resounding success," says Glenn Greenwald, an attorney, author and fluent Portuguese speaker, who conducted the research. "It has enabled the Portuguese government to manage and control the drug problem far better than virtually every other Western country does."

Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.

...
Quote
Like
Share