Live data from Hacker News

Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

nytimes.com

281–290 of 366 posts

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#281

Little known fact: Bill Wilson[1], co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous, believed LSD could help alcoholics achieve a "spiritual experience" that was crucial to them attaining sobriety[2] (incidentally, that a spiritual experience could help alcoholics was an idea he got from Carl Jung[3]). Wilson's own experiences with LSD are discussed in detail here: [4] In the 50's and 60's there was research in to using LSD to tre…

A year ago, for two weeks, I binged on five grams of some drug. It seems it saturated the NMDA receptors (my own uninformed explanation) so for six months alcohol was same as water to me. Cannabis and benzos were also useless.

Now alcohol does make its effect again, but I just drink some beer occasionaly, no more hard liquors. I haven't had any mj in a year, the best part. Oh, and the drug in question... I tried it again a month ago and found it unpleasant, and keeps building that crappy cross-tolerance.

I won't name the drug because I wouldn't like to encourage anyone to try this kind of "treatment", I'm pretty sure my reaction is not typical at all. But it would be nice if there was research about this.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is, but even if the review is done really well garbage in/garbage out.

The 2006 Cochrane Collaboration review was based on just eight studies, and ended with a call for more research to assess the program’s efficacy. In the intervening years, researchers answered the call. The newer review also applied standards that weeded out some weaker studies that drove earlier findings. In the last decade or so, researchers have published a number of very high-quality randomized trials and quasi-e…

Thanks, you're right I didn't look into this enough.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And for "rates of continuous abstinence" they found a positive effect. It’s been a while since I reviewed the literature for substance abuse disorder, but if I remember correctly it was highly disputed whether complete abstinence was necessary (or even beneficial) for treatment. Has this changed? The argument was that by focusing on abstinence you are setting a significant part of your patience up for failure with…

I'm a recovering information addict, food addict, sex addict, and love addict. Doing the same behaviors in a mindful way instead of out of a desire to mask/numb/avoid matters. Also, I stopped counting my various abstinence stretches because it's not actionable information. I don't assess my recovery that way. I take a look at my needs and identify how I'm doing meeting them.

Love addict? Care to elaborate?

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I moved, the meetings I encountered were extremely hostile to atheists. In my experience there are two types of atheists who go to AA: those for whom religion “isn’t their thing” and those who are actively hostile to religion. I think the latter group should find an alternative to AA.

Nice. Blaming the victim and implying I was the hostile one. I'm respectful of others' religions. It's a private matter. I made friends, ostensibly, until they found out I was an atheist. So fuck right off with your pseudo-righteous bullshit, okay?

Judging from how hostile your response is you are probably in the later category.

I’m an atheist and I’ve been going to AA meetings for years in a very religious area and I’ve had no problems at all.

If you are in the former category you are welcome and should try a different AA group.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I moved, the meetings I encountered were extremely hostile to atheists. In my experience there are two types of atheists who go to AA: those for whom religion “isn’t their thing” and those who are actively hostile to religion. I think the latter group should find an alternative to AA.

If religion just "isn't your thing" I'm pretty sure that makes you an agnostic not an atheist. However the majority of atheists in my exerience are a bit more mellow. You can fully believe there is no grand deity without being "hostile" to the belief. As an example (that maybe is more generally relatable): I believe the world is round. I don't think I am hostile to the flat earthers. I think they are wrong based on e…

> I don't think I am hostile to the flat earthers.

Good example - the average person is hostile to flat earthers. They would make certain negative character and intellectual judgements about them.

And they wouldn’t for example want them as a science teacher or textbook writer.

In fact the average person probably wouldn’t want to hear about flat earth theory at all!

That you would liken the religious to flat earthers is not a great sign...

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#287
post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry for going on a rant here, but I dislike the framing implicit in "spontaneous remission". Addiction does vanish spontaneously with a wave of a wand. These are people of flesh and blood and free will that managed to overcome their addiction. They are making attempts at treating themselves. They might be reading blog posts with advice. They may avoid buying alcohol for fear they'll drink it all. They be taking det…

It's spontaneous because it is not caused by the external treatment. It's not a misnomer so much as a difference in usage. When you say a person did something spontaneously, it means it was impulsive, not caused by anything, and has connotations of being a sudden or easy action. When you say an event was spontaneous, there is no reference to meaning or intensity of the event - it simply means that there was no extern…

Still, if my physiotherapist tells me to strengthen my core muscles with daily bodyweight exercises and I instead strengthen my core muscles with weekly free weights exercises, if I am cured it would seem odd to call it spontaneous.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#288
Its possible cultivating those beliefs, even if false, is a powerful tool in overcoming addiction. It may actually be the case that cultivating some belief in a higher reason / order to the universe is beneficial in recovery. There are dedicated circuits in the brain for religious / spiritual thinking and feeling, and when activated may play a role.

As a counter-point, its possible to imagine a scientific discovery that while true, would cause mass suicide and depression upon discovery (e.g. an asteroid will hit the planet in 10 days). While implausible, suppose that we "found scientific proof" the god exists and is the christian god, and eternal life / punishment awaits us after death. This knowledge / belief would probably radically alter the behaviors of society (lower crime, suicide, depression, etc).

Another good example is a healthy self confidence. For most people, this is incredibly beneficial (stave off depression, get a stable life, eat right, avoid addiction), but could be seen as a false belief. Most people's contributions don't "matter" in any real cosmic sense, their lives won't be remarkable, and they aren't more talented / qualified than most people. The insignificant experience we gain in a few years on this tiny dust speck isn't enough to make confident opinions on life or the universe. Most people are cogs in the machine, generating waste heat, and their death would hardly be noticed, and soon forgotten. But embracing those facts as "true" would have a markedly negative effect for most people, so perhaps its better to falsely believe the opposites of these (and we have dedicated circuitry to help us do just that, ignore all evidence to the contrary).

My basic takeaway is that this entire AA thing is an experiment to ask that very question: does cultivating this set of thought patterns prove effective? Is it more effective than the thought patterns of other approaches? Even if the beliefs are "forced" or "false", are they effective?

EDIT: wording.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a recovering information addict, food addict, sex addict, and love addict. Doing the same behaviors in a mindful way instead of out of a desire to mask/numb/avoid matters. Also, I stopped counting my various abstinence stretches because it's not actionable information. I don't assess my recovery that way. I take a look at my needs and identify how I'm doing meeting them.

Love addict? Care to elaborate?

Addicted to relationships/falling in love.

It’s a thing.

That initial honeymoon period? It’s like it fixes everything. I’m a whole different person.

Then the honeymoon period ends and I get bored and irritated and nasty. I need to find another one to fix me. Because the current relationship is clearly where the problem lies.

Repeat ad infinitum.

That’s my experience of it. Others may have a different experience.

Re: Alcoholics Anonymous vs. other approaches: the evidence is now in

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had other experiences. The friendships I had in AA were superficial. Once, when I was struggling and needed help and people to talk to, I was completely ignored by the people around me. They didn't want to help the struggling - just to have this toxic positivity that nothing is wrong. I later moved out of state. I came back to visit family, and went back to a meeting to find out that there were rumors that I had re…

> When I moved, the meetings I encountered were extremely hostile to atheists. In my experience there are two types of atheists who go to AA: those for whom religion “isn’t their thing” and those who are actively hostile to religion. I think the latter group should find an alternative to AA.

So I replied and then deleted my comment. But considering the parent’s reply I’m going to weigh in here.

I was actively hostile towards religion. In many ways I still am.

I’m still in A.A./N.A. I’m still working the steps. I’ve just got a year clean.

Absolutely nowhere in the big book does it say religion is required. In fact, it makes a purposeful effort to try to say the opposite.

That is literally the whole point of the “we agnostics” chapter.

AA/NA are not about religion. They’re about a spiritual solution to the disease of alcoholism/addiction.

Religion is not necessarily the same as spirituality. Religion is not required.

Post reply on HN