Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 201 posts

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#91

Post by DanBC »

virgilp wrote: post #61
ancientworldnow wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

250ml isn't some unusual serving size. It's a standard "large" when eating out in the UK.

https://www.askitalian.co.uk/menu/menu/drinks/

https://www.jamieoliver.com/italian/restaurants/birmingham/m...

https://www.nandos.co.uk/food/menu

https://www.zizzi.co.uk/drinks#white

etc etc.

And these large glasses are used in many homes. I have no problem believing that people are drinking glasses of wine this big, mostly because I see them do it.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#92

Post by stephenhuey »

tdb7893 wrote: post #58
rsyring wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty broad brush to paint all of religion with. There are plenty of rational arguments for Christianity for those willing to do due diligence: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/countering-a-dist...

Do you have an example of those types of arguments? The linked article doesn't actually go into any of then and just referenced books I couldn't find. I'm very curious about this subject because in high school I took theology classes and the monks taught about the logical arguments but the arguments were always a little lackluster (the teacher's knew this going into it). The teacher's point during that section was th…

Peruse the short arguments section on Peter Kreeft's website:

http://www.peterkreeft.com/featured-writing.htm

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#93

Post by chasil »

markab21 wrote: post #90
Quequau wrote: 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…

From your short message, it seems our experience with alcohol is similar. I've been struggling with my level of alcohol consumption, about 7-8 months ago I read an article on the Atlantic[1] that detailed the effectiveness of naltrexone. I've included it as others might find it helpful. [1] - https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/04/the-irr...

These are useful references for Naltrexone.

Roy Eskapa, the Cure for Alcoholism [book] https://www.benbellabooks.com/shop/the-cure-for-alcoholism-s...

One Little Pill [documentary film] https://www.onelittlepillmovie.com/

These wikipedia pages are also helpful:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naltrexone

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nalmefene

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#94

Post by jki275 »

driverdan wrote: post #86
rsyring wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a pretty broad brush to paint all of religion with. There are plenty of rational arguments for Christianity for those willing to do due diligence: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/countering-a-dist...

> There are plenty of rational arguments for Christianity No there aren't. Faith, by its very definition, is irrational.

Faith is not by definition irrational, any more than hope is irrational. It's not provable, but that's different from irrational.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#95

Post by mdhen »

kuhhk wrote: post #78
mdhen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I’m confused. When I googled Naltrexone, it warns: “Alcohol: Avoid. Very serious interactions can occur”. So are you supposed to take it hours before drinking or something else?

It is Definitely safe to take with alcohol. Not sure where your seeing that it's not.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#96

Post by mdhen »

PenguinCoder wrote: post #67
mdhen wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can either get a new doctor or buy from India.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#97

Post by 50656E6973 »

stronglikedan wrote: post #87
PakG1 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate thing is how much people actually buy into it. I remember once in university, I was at a national entrepreneurship conference for student entrepreneurs. One night, there was a party at a club type of venue. I was sitting with a pretty female friend from my university when she asked me to get her water. So I went and got her a bottle of water. This jerk from another university walks up to us and incred…

> how much did that guy...and how much was that guy... Neither. It's a common joke used when people get water when there's a bar close by. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't have to be believed, and one does not have to be a "scared kid inside" to say it. I think you just read way too much into it, perhaps since it was your first encounter with said joke.

Indeed, I've experienced this joke many times while drinking water at bars/alcohol events and I just laugh it off. On the inside I think about how much better I'm going to feel than everyone else the next day.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#98

Post by PakG1 »

stronglikedan wrote: post #87
PakG1 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The unfortunate thing is how much people actually buy into it. I remember once in university, I was at a national entrepreneurship conference for student entrepreneurs. One night, there was a party at a club type of venue. I was sitting with a pretty female friend from my university when she asked me to get her water. So I went and got her a bottle of water. This jerk from another university walks up to us and incred…

> how much did that guy...and how much was that guy... Neither. It's a common joke used when people get water when there's a bar close by. Nothing more, nothing less. It doesn't have to be believed, and one does not have to be a "scared kid inside" to say it. I think you just read way too much into it, perhaps since it was your first encounter with said joke.

I can get that, but if true, the fact that this joke is considered funny and acceptable makes parent's point about the imagery bombardment and how culturally ingrained drinking is:

>> It’s actually crazy how lightly we treat this addictive, toxic substance that we joke about despite how many people it kills every year and harms directly and indirectly.

As a personal aside, I find jokes that put down others to be distasteful. You don't need to denigrate to be funny. Unless the target is in on the joke. Laughing at oneself is OK. Laughing at others when the target is not laughing is not OK.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#99

Post by zwww »

Throwaway12step wrote: post #25
walrus01 wrote: post #9

The christian part is a barrier for atheists and agnostics that would otherwise be OK with participating in Alcoholics Anonymous. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Alcoholics_Anonymou...

Speaking as an individual here, not on behalf of NA... As an openly Atheist member of Narcotics Anonymous, with 23 years clean time, I'm here to say Christianity as a barrier to recovery is a matter of personal choice. Yes, I'm an Atheist with a higher power, it's my [G]roup [O]f [D]rug addicts. I kibitz with them about how to stop using, losing the desire to use and finding a new way to live. The Third Tradition of…

While I'm certain AA might not work for everyone, in cases where there's some sort of emotional trauma or personality disorder involved, it's probably the way to go.

The religious aspects some people get so self-righteous about I think aren't really as much about religion or god, as they are about the feeling of belonging to something greater and faith in intrinsic good of the world. I assume this is not something everyone lacks, but for those who do, this seemingly religious language is one way to communicate it. Also when people propose ibogaine or LSD, I'd guess the aim of those therapies is a very similar form of healing and effective in similar cases as AA would be, but requiring less commitment from the patient. If you are a psychologically healthy individual and don't perceive the world around you as hostile, then this kind of healing isn't necessary and other options might be far more suitable (or you'll most likely just stop drinking by yourself).

I also think it's a shame people are forced to go to these meetings by the judical system, because I think the system was never intended as such and it probably completely defeats its purpose.

Re: Sobriety startups shaking up the 12-step model

#100

Post by throwaway101022 »

virgilp wrote: post #45
joekrill wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess it depends what you define as "not ok". I mean, why is smoking 4-5 times a week not ok? Why is shooting up heroin 4-5 times a week not ok? In the end, we're simply willfully poisoning ourselves. For some reason we, as a society, have decided that it's OK to poison ourselves with certain substances (caffeine, cigarette smoke) but not others (heroin, methamphetamines). We've made this socially acceptable. So if…

I don't know enough about smoking or heroin to know whether they produce actual damage to your health, if done in small enough dosages. I guess 5 cigarettes per week (one per day) might not be that bad? But maybe I'm wrong. Anyway, smoking bothers others too (unlike drinking), and heroin is much more addictive (I suspect 5 doses a week would definitely end up hurting you). By "not ok" I mean "actually harmful to your…

> smoking bothers others too (unlike drinking)

As the spouse of an alcoholic I can't begin to tell you how wrong you are. My spouse's drinking has driven me close to suicide on many occasions, left me mentally drained and likely had a similar effect on our children.

Post reply on HN