Posted on 07/25/2006 10:52:10 PM PDT by neverdem
When Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs are examined in controlled studies, a new review reports, scientists find no proof that they are superior to any other intervention in reducing alcohol dependence or alcohol-related problems.
The researchers, led by Marica Ferri of the Italian Agency for Public Health in Rome, found little to suggest that 12-step programs reduced the severity of addiction any more than any other intervention. And no data showed that 12-step interventions were any more — or any less — successful in increasing the number of people who stayed in treatment or reducing the number who relapsed after being sober.
Alcoholics Anonymous is a self-help group that offers emotional support for alcohol abstinence and holds that alcoholism is a spiritual and a medical disease.
In some of the studies reviewed, A.A. was compared with other psychological treatments including cognitive-behavioral therapy, which encourages the conscious identification of high-risk situations for alcohol use; motivational enhancement therapy, based on principles of social and cognitive psychology; and relapse prevention therapy, a variation on the cognitive-behavioral approach. It was also compared with other spiritual and nonspiritual 12-step programs.
One study compared brief advice to attend A.A. meetings to motivational methods for encouraging 12-step involvement. Another evaluated the effectiveness of hospital-based 12-step programs, compared with community-based 12-step efforts.
The paper was published last week in The Cochrane Library, a journal devoted to systematic reviews of health care interventions. In all, the researchers examined eight trials involving 3,417 men and women ages 18 and older.
None of the studies compared A.A. with no treatment at all, and the researchers said that made it more difficult to draw conclusions about effectiveness. About one-fifth of alcoholics achieve long-term sobriety without treatment.
There is no single known cause of alcoholism, but the researchers wrote that...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Been to a meeting? Bet ya haven't. I have, many many times. Have you ever even read the 12 steps? Bet ya haven't. It works IF you want it to.
I think our responses show the difference in our thinking: I consider having a drink to be an activity; you consider it to be a disease. I've found that nobody yields in that discussion.
Realizing you are powerlessness, and surrendering, is the most powerful act a person can do.
How much power do you have over me? Over the Middle East? Over your boss? Over gravity?
None. You are powerless.
You can only control your REACTIONS to such things.
Also in my brother-in-law's case, he was taught by AA to blame everyone in his life that he's an alcoholic rather than to take responsibility for it himself.
Tina07, I'm gonna call B.S. on that. I have worked with the Liver Transplant Program at my Medical Center for years. We have a close relationship with AA and they teach just the opposite. They make the individual take responsibility for their actions. If he isn't taking responsibility, he ain't doing the steps.
When one first drinks or drugs, it is an activity.
Over time your brain chemistry changes. Your physical reactions to these substances is greatly altered. You have an allergic reaction that comes out in obsession and compulsion. I know from a fact. When I first started out with cocaine, it was pleasurable. Eventually, my brain changed. It became instant misery. Yet I was compelled to do it, and obsessed over it.
If that is not a disease, then there are no diseases.
I think someone is pulling your leg here.
"Odd to hear criticism here of a program that's main purpose is to
help the individual seek God."
I remember years ago being surpised by what I heard Joseph Califano say after
spending a lot of time working on government programs for drug/alcohol abuse.
(Califano was a functionary in the Johnson and Carter administrations.)
He said that he was suprised, as a progressive, modern Democrat to find
that the only programs that really worked were the ones that included a
heavy dose of religional content.
And that the secular, G-d-free treatments just didn't have the same
success rates.
He's now running an institute (link below)
http://www.nationalfamilies.org/prevention/jcalifano.html
Without AA, I would be dead or in prison. This article was written by someone as clueless as John Kerry..
Did I say that?
No.
Absolutely. If take one drink, Im finished. Period.
Thanks, Rob! My husband is still doing well. Over three years now, clean and sober. :)
He actually went through rehab, but did attend some AA meetings. I attended a few for families, but they didn't appeal to me as the family members seemed more messed up than the drinkers, LOL! I got counselling on my own to change the way his drinking effected me, and to shed my anger over it all and we had joint counselling for a while, too.
Life is really good now, and a lot of our old drinking buddies are now on the wagon, too. Sometimes getting sober comes with maturity, too. You start to get a clue about how short life can really be, and you don't want to miss any more of it because you've already p*ssed so much of it away. :)
The reality is, it doesn't matter if it's a disease or an activity. If the act of doing it causes one problems, then the sane thing is to not do it. If you're not allergic to "peanut butter", then it's a non-issue for you and your opinions can only be based on observation and hearsay, which makes them interesting to you, but useless to the one with the "allergy". Much like a man trying to tell a woman how she really feels during childbirth - the man only has his own experiences to go by and they do not include the particular one he is opining about.
Not meant as a cut down, just an observation.
Good post-I took something from it...
It makes no more sense to keep trying to exert power over alcohol (or heroin, etc.) than it would make to "take control of one's life" by insisting on holding out one's arm in an attempt to stop the train. Another way to keep things in perspective is the fact that alcohol is not necessary for any aspect of a healthy and happy life, so "taking control" is not an imperative.
Whether this was the best approach for my problems, I couldn't say, but I can't say that it has worked for me very well, and that's why I continue to be active in AA.
I enjoy the meetings, I enjoy the people I meet there, and I enjoy living a life free from alcohol. And most of all, when I meet a newcomer who is having a problem, I am excited that I can offer my own successful experience. But I am under no illusion that AA is the only way out, or the best way out of the alcoholic hell. I'll let them decide.
The focus changed when the courts began ordering offenders to attend.
As a voluntary program, the very fact that one was not coerced guaranteed an implication of commitment.
The fact that it is free compared to the rest studied is enough to recommend it, IMO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.