Live data from Hacker News

Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

abc.net.au

61–70 of 201 posts

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep - its pretty commonly accepted that a bottle of wine is ~3 glasses.

No it's not? A typical bottle should be about 5 glasses + or - one depending on how you pour.

This. I pour 5-6 glasses of wine from a bottle, and I don't feel that they're "small" in any way. Putting a third of a bottle at once in the glass is far too much - at that quantity, swirling the wine becomes nearly impossible. And anyway, holding a wine glass should be effortless, you should be able to talk & do mild gestures with the glass in your hand.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#62

For something supposedly so good on it's own, religion really does try it's best to target vulnerable people. Naive children, desperate people, people who have lost someone, people sick with addiction (referencing the submitting to the higher power step). Whatever helps during trying times I guess. It just seems to me if religion was so great on its own, it would be approached in a calm rational manner targeted at ma…

Religion is just something that lays the groundwork for individuals' ideology. Looking back on elementary school I now realize that a large part of it served basically the same function and learning reading/writing/math was a parallel objective.

I'm quite salty over how I went to public school and they skipped everything that was politically inconvenient. I switched states in high school and I realized that "social studies" in my old state was basically "history" in my new state sans whatever could lead to people questioning the ideology/narrative of the ruling party (effectively single party state). My girlfriend went to religious grade school and they did the same thing. Evolution was inconvenient so they just skipped it and covered more chemistry/geology/space stuff in science.

When you teach a kid (or any vulnerable person) the same things over and over again there becomes a point where it tends to stick with them even when they later learn it's wrong.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#63
post #11

After years and years of struggling with alcoholism and AA, I got sober with naltrexone using the "Sinclair Method". I followed the treatment plan for a few weeks and at the end quitting drinking was easy and obvious. That was just over ten years ago and I haven't had a drink or gone to any meetings since. I'm only one person and I'm fully aware that the plural of anecdote isn't data. However, the experience was so d…

What margin of error did you have with the sinclair method, like if you were off an hour or two with taking the naltrexone would that matter? Also - did you have any withdrawal symptoms?

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#64
post #51
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> caffeine There's little evidence that drinking coffee or tea is bad for you overall. In contrast, anything beyond very moderate alcohol consumption is almost certainly bad for you.

Ingesting too large amounts of caffeine is almost certainly bad for you. It's a stimulant that increases your blood pressure and heart rate. You don't want to overdo that. It's also diuretic, if you substitute water for coffee (which some people do) it can actually lead to dehydration. But yes, I agree to your larger point that coffee is less dangerous than alcohol.

Of course too much of anything is bad. People also die from drinking too much water. But the reality is that billions of people a day use caffeine and there are not widespread problems.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It used to be much more ingrained. Factory or construction workers used to drink during work, and if those old movies are to believe men would pour themselves drinks all the times. These days it is mostly acceptable to decline alcohol.

It's interesting that you cite factory or construction workers. I'm a first-generation college graduate, who grew up around skilled (and unskilled) labor. I've never heard of this being prevalent, even from old-timers discussing how things used to be way back when. Quitting time is one thing... but the last environment on earth in which you'd want to drink alcohol is around power tools or heavy machinery! My own firs…

Same here, my company has a keg on tap and they love showing it off. I've had one beer in the two years I've worked there. Just not that interested in alcohol.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#66
post #40
post #11

After years and years of struggling with alcoholism and AA, I got sober with naltrexone using the "Sinclair Method". I followed the treatment plan for a few weeks and at the end quitting drinking was easy and obvious. That was just over ten years ago and I haven't had a drink or gone to any meetings since. I'm only one person and I'm fully aware that the plural of anecdote isn't data. However, the experience was so d…

First congrats on finding something that works for you and making it stick! From that perspective, I can see why you would not like folks that insist on AA being a monopoly, but I'm curious about that position. I've seen a lot of people that hate AA and a lot of people that think it saved their lives, but I've never seen anyone say that AA must be the only way to sobriety. What's the angle?

I can't speak from first hand experience or actual knowledge, but I've seen several articles over the years about AA being the only US court approved treatment, leaving some people with the choice of accepting only AA or jail. Atheists in particular have commented on this, but also people that take issues with certain other AA stances (such as "you will forever be an alcoholic").

I have no idea if this was federal, state, or local courts.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#67
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you detail this more?

You really naltrexone when you drink, and only when you drink. They also advise drinking somewhat frequently at the start so your brain can quickly break the connection between alcohol and having a really good time. Once it is broken you do need to continue using naltrexone every time you want a drink or over time you will go back to being addicted. But it is generic and not expensive to get.

Where did you get it generic and cheaply from? My primary won't prescribe it.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#68

For something supposedly so good on it's own, religion really does try it's best to target vulnerable people. Naive children, desperate people, people who have lost someone, people sick with addiction (referencing the submitting to the higher power step). Whatever helps during trying times I guess. It just seems to me if religion was so great on its own, it would be approached in a calm rational manner targeted at ma…

As a person of Christian faith willing to share my faith, I'm not sure I "target" vulnerable people. I don't discriminate for who receives my sharing. I'm spoiled to live in a society and social circle that doesn't have a lot of suffering. Even when people pass away, those still living are often rational and emotionally mature enough to understand that their grief is temporary, and that they can move on with life after grieving. We should support them in the manner that they'd find most helpful, and it's not complicated. In fact, if me sharing at that moment would cause them to seethe with hate, I probably should back off; they should be able to feel love from me, not hate, and if they feel hate, I'm doing it wrong.

Correspondingly, I'd need to go out of my way to share with vulnerable people, like to a homeless shelter or an orphanage or the like, as I don't run into many vulnerable people in everyday life. I am sure you would have no issue with my volunteering and donations. You'd only have issue with my sharing my thoughts to these vulnerable people. But again, I'm not targeting them, and I'm not discriminating towards them. I say the same things to people who are mature, successful, and solid. My faith just happens to power my actions, and my actions hopefully reflect my faith. As written in James ch2 v18: "But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.” Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds."

If I run into a vulnerable person and my sharing helps them, that's great. That's happened before. If I run into a nonvulnerable person and my sharing helps them, that's also great. That's also happened before. If either of them want to reject me, I feel sad about it, but I imagine it's similar to how a nutritionist feels sad when someone refuses to eat healthy food. If they reject me or my sharing, not much I can do about that, and everyone makes their own decisions. If they don't agree with my decisions, well, despite believing in the Judeo-Christian God, I am not God to make them think the way I want them to think.

I am not sure how to live out my faith and volunteer without sharing what drives my actions. You may find that in poor taste because you do not agree with my faith. But it is not sensible to do some action and at the same time reject or suppress the reason why I perform that action. I posit that it's simply a coincidence that my faith delivers a message that can appeal to vulnerable people. You find it to be malicious and disingenuous. I find it to be logical, as this is what Jesus' sermon on the mount was all about. Blessed are the poor, the weak, the meek, etc.

I'll concede that there are people of faith who seem to care about getting the message out while forgetting what the message actually means. I'm sorry those people exist. But I hope you'll be willing to consider it's not supposed to be like that. The above quoted James ch2 v18 is what it's supposed to look like.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#69
post #51
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> caffeine There's little evidence that drinking coffee or tea is bad for you overall. In contrast, anything beyond very moderate alcohol consumption is almost certainly bad for you.

Ingesting too large amounts of caffeine is almost certainly bad for you. It's a stimulant that increases your blood pressure and heart rate. You don't want to overdo that. It's also diuretic, if you substitute water for coffee (which some people do) it can actually lead to dehydration. But yes, I agree to your larger point that coffee is less dangerous than alcohol.

Isn’t that duretic problem a myth? The water in coffee more than compensates for it. It is actually funny to see atricles about the coffee. One week it’s how it is bad for you, another week how it’s good. There is a song by one old Lithuanian band “Doctors”, basically lamenting how this and that is bad for you, acorrding to doctors. And it has the line “but if you think about it, the most harmul thing is the living itself”.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#70

For something supposedly so good on it's own, religion really does try it's best to target vulnerable people. Naive children, desperate people, people who have lost someone, people sick with addiction (referencing the submitting to the higher power step). Whatever helps during trying times I guess. It just seems to me if religion was so great on its own, it would be approached in a calm rational manner targeted at ma…

Alternatively, religion is trying to help those that need it the most. The set of people who need help the most also tend to be the most vulnerable.
Post reply on HN