Misconceptions On Recovery Vs Treatment Vs Aa

[Pattayatony]

Interesting article, Neeranam.

Question: Are these changes in the brain permanent?

If someoone manages to quit the addiction, what happens to the brain? Does it revert back to the state it used to be in, or does it at least partially 'repair' itself?

And if the brain dos not repair itself, what about the cravings? Do they eventually go away? And if so, why, if the brain remains permanently damaged?

Any ideas? Theories?

Mobi, If I may answer your questions.

A lot depends on how long and how much one drank as to the amount of damage caused to the body and brain.

The human body repairs itself very quickly, depending on the persons age.

The Brain can have permanent damage but with time some of this can be repaired excess alcohol intake will case short term memory loss and this can be permanent.

When I quit drinking I had the craving to drink for about 3 months and this was every hour of every day. This slowly went away but on the odd occasion I would get the urge to want just to have that one drink. I fought it for a long time until I surrenderd and realised that Alcohol was poison to my system and I could no longer drink in safety. Some people are affected in different ways I can only put my experience here.

I would not have been able to stay off alcohol without the help of other sober alcoholics.

You must walk the walk to talk the talk not just read it from some book.

I hope this has been a help to you Mobi.

Please note some people on this forum that I have not mentioned AA. (oops)

Cheers Tony

[sabaijai]

Just bringing the thread back on topic. I don't recall the agreement you're referring to, could you provide a link?

Such zeal is surely commendable - oh that it were applied to every thread.

Sabaijjai I give up - the agreement I was referring to was more of the spiritual kind - but I guess you'd never understand.

Back to the anti AA diatribe

Go find another thread on whatever topic it is you're interested in. This one's titled 'Replying to Misconceptions On Recovery Vs Treatment Vs Aa'.

[sabaijai]

Neeranam's latest post, one month since the last on this thread, makes no mention of the AA and is carrying the debate forward in different directions.

He makes no claims, good or bad about the AA, but is merely posting a paper which debates the theory of addiction.

Exactly. This is not about AA

Mr Sabajai has AA on the brain!

OK I see, no discussion of the original topic, efficacy of AA or how the theory you quoted clashes with the basic philosophy of an organisation that says the only way to end alcohol addiction is to surrender to a higher power. Or how it clashes with your stated personal philosophy that alcohol addiction is not like other substance addiction. Inconvenient truths?

[ProThaiExpat]

I have been monitoring both threads mentioned herein and would like to point out that while it is convenient to lump drug addiction and alcohol addiction together, they are very much different in their affect.

The physical craving for alcohol in the alcoholic is relatively benign compared to drug addiction and many alcoholics are free of the physical cravings after a little as three days. What remains is a mental condition, ie. a compulsion/obsession complex that must be addressed through counseling, whether in a group such as AA or other treatment options or on an individual basis. One spoke of three months but he spoke of thinking about alcohol, not actually feeling withdrawal symptoms.

Drug addicts can suffer from physical withdrawal for as much as a year before they are free of the physical addiction and then get on with the mental help.

Getting clean and sober is the easy part in the recovery from alcoholism. The hard part is the mental changes that must be made and that can take years.

Another point is trying to pin down success rates. Many alcoholics get sober and stay sober for their lifetimes while others are in and out of programs for some time before they "get it". Others are constant slippers their whole life.

How does one measure success. Many alcoholics who go through AA and return to a normal productive life without alcohol and they stop going to AA and therefore can never be counted since they are not a member of a group to be counted.

It seems to me, as many have posted, it really makes no difference what the success rate is, whether the organization is a cult or not, or what science it is based on, as long as people are helped. There are enough testimonies of success for almost any legitimate alcohol treatment group to justify their existence, in my view. Trying to determine which one is more sucessful than another is like dancing on the head of a pin, useless and unproductive activity.

[sabaijai]

I have been monitoring both threads mentioned herein and would like to point out that while it is convenient to lump drug addiction and alcohol addiction together, they are very much different in their affect.

The physical craving for alcohol in the alcoholic is relatively benign compared to drug addiction and many alcoholics are free of the physical cravings after a little as three days. What remains is a mental condition, ie. a compulsion/obsession complex that must be addressed through counseling, whether in a group such as AA or other treatment options or on an individual basis. One spoke of three months but he spoke of thinking about alcohol, not actually feeling withdrawal symptoms.

Drug addicts can suffer from physical withdrawal for as much as a year before they are free of the physical addiction and then get on with the mental help.

Getting clean and sober is the easy part in the recovery from alcoholism. The hard part is the mental changes that must be made and that can take years.

Another point is trying to pin down success rates. Many alcoholics get sober and stay sober for their lifetimes while others are in and out of programs for some time before they "get it". Others are constant slippers their whole life.

How does one measure success. Many alcoholics who go through AA and return to a normal productive life without alcohol and they stop going to AA and therefore can never be counted since they are not a member of a group to be counted.

It seems to me, as many have posted, it really makes no difference what the success rate is, whether the organization is a cult or not, or what science it is based on, as long as people are helped. There are enough testimonies of success for almost any legitimate alcohol treatment group to justify their existence, in my view. Trying to determine which one is more sucessful than another is like dancing on the head of a pin, useless and unproductive activity.

So all the research into alcohol addiction might as well be put to a halt, and the public should disregard any scientific findings (or stop discussing them in public forums) and just muddle through by trial and error?

BTW Mobi, you posted this in another thread in this subforum:

I have never previously seen adverse criticism of the AA until I read about it on this thread. I had only ever heard about how helpful and necessary the AA is to alcoholics wishing to stop drinking.

When I announced my intention to quit drinking on a "how much do you drink?" thread, some 4 months ago, I didn't recveive many comments, but the few I did recieve all urged me to go to the AA.

Well, I looked it up on the web, and I have to say that I was immediately put off by all the references to the "good book" and the general religious undertones. All the stories about reformed alcoholics were linked to religion, and acknowledging God and being 'saved'.

Reading the supporters of AA on this forum, it seems that I may have recieved a distorted picture, but if that is indeed the case, then someone in the AA needs to do something urgently to update their image.

I'm not knocking the AA - I am sure it can work for many people, but from what I've seen and read, it certainly isn't for me. I'll soldier on alone, and try the 'drinker's diary' method.

Thread Link

Did you manage to stop drinking? If so what method did you find worked for you (or failed you) in the end?

[Mobi]

Just bringing the thread back on topic. I don't recall the agreement you're referring to, could you provide a link?

Such zeal is surely commendable - oh that it were applied to every thread.

Sabaijjai I give up - the agreement I was referring to was more of the spiritual kind - but I guess you'd never understand.

Back to the anti AA diatribe

Go find another thread on whatever topic it is you're interested in. This one's titled 'Replying to Misconceptions On Recovery Vs Treatment Vs Aa'.

Equally :D

You'll never know how much.

I guess you must enjoy it.

Did you ever wonder why no less than 3 threads on this subject had to be closed? (Not by you I may add.)

It certainly wasn't for want of intelligent, balanced debate.

[jumnien]

www.liberationpark.org

Buddhism, the 12 Steps, & the 12 Traditions

12 Steps audio | 12 Traditions audio

Santikaro writes, "There are numerous parallels and congruencies between the Buddha's teaching & the 12 Step path that has benefited millions of people with addictions. In a sense, the Buddhist exploration of how clinging to “I” and “mine” generates selfishness & suffering is a matter of addiction. This provides one meeting place for dialogue among followers of these two not-separate paths. Our group has been meeting for two years to discuss the parallels between Buddhist practice and working the 12 Steps."

Santikaro continues, "The Twelve Traditions

In 2006, we will continue our dialogue by exploring the 12 Traditions, which have much wisdom to offer spiritual and service groups wishing to stay true to their values and not ossify as institutions. We believe this will be relevant to the development of Buddhist Sanghas in America and Liberation Park in particular."

[ProThaiExpat]

sabaijai: My point is that alcoholism is such an indiviual condition varying so widely among alchoholics, that it does not necessarily follow that the most successful program statistically will be the most successful for any given individual.

Even within AA, there are varying approaches to recovery and the character of meetings vary so widely, that most alcoholics shop around among meetings, when a variety is available, to find one that "fits" them best.

There are many stories of recovering alcoholics that were completely turned off by one AA meeting group but later found another more suitable to that individuals perception and attitudes.

Many in AA, as do many Catholics, for that matter, look at AA as a smorgesbord, taking what they need from what is offered and leaving the rest. There are so many recovering alcoholics in AA that do not believe in God, as that concept is preached in Christianity, that I question any assertion that AA is a religious organization.

There is even groups in AA that identify and lable their groups as "AA for Athiests".

[Pattayatony]

sabaijai: My point is that alcoholism is such an indiviual condition varying so widely among alchoholics, that it does not necessarily follow that the most successful program statistically will be the most successful for any given individual.

Even within AA, there are varying approaches to recovery and the character of meetings vary so widely, that most alcoholics shop around among meetings, when a variety is available, to find one that "fits" them best.

There are many stories of recovering alcoholics that were completely turned off by one AA meeting group but later found another more suitable to that individuals perception and attitudes.

Many in AA, as do many Catholics, for that matter, look at AA as a smorgesbord, taking what they need from what is offered and leaving the rest. There are so many recovering alcoholics in AA that do not believe in God, as that concept is preached in Christianity, that I question any assertion that AA is a religious organization.

There is even groups in AA that identify and lable their groups as "AA for Athiests".

Yes I always tell people to go to the meetings where they feel comfortable I do and it works for me.

Now be carefull guys sabaijai is a Super Moderator.

Cheers Tony

[Mobi]

BTW Mobi, you posted this in another thread in this subforum:

I have never previously seen adverse criticism of the AA until I read about it on this thread. I had only ever heard about how helpful and necessary the AA is to alcoholics wishing to stop drinking.

When I announced my intention to quit drinking on a "how much do you drink?" thread, some 4 months ago, I didn't recveive many comments, but the few I did recieve all urged me to go to the AA.

Well, I looked it up on the web, and I have to say that I was immediately put off by all the references to the "good book" and the general religious undertones. All the stories about reformed alcoholics were linked to religion, and acknowledging God and being 'saved'.

Reading the supporters of AA on this forum, it seems that I may have recieved a distorted picture, but if that is indeed the case, then someone in the AA needs to do something urgently to update their image.

I'm not knocking the AA - I am sure it can work for many people, but from what I've seen and read, it certainly isn't for me. I'll soldier on alone, and try the 'drinker's diary' method.

Thread Link

Did you manage to stop drinking? If so what method did you find worked for you (or failed you) in the end?

I will answer your question.

I did stop for 4 months last year and then started again. However, apart from a few bad binges, my consumption went way down, and I continue to go long periods without taking a single drop. Things got a little out of hand during the festive period (I had a succession of friends and family visiting), so I quit completely for a month in early January, then drank for a week, and am now into another 4 week booze- free period.

I am planning that this time it's for good. Only time will tell, but whatever happens, my drinking habits are much more controlled than they were previously, and I feel much better for it.

For me, I have not used the AA, but have been supported very ably by the good folks in DD.

As far as the AA is concerned, I will say this for the final time.

It doesn't appeal to me personally, but I would never rule it out, if, at some time in the future I was desperate for help. There is clearly a dearth of support organizations for alcoholics in Thailand – especially for farangs- and the AA may one day be my only hope. The same would go for countless other sufferers in this country.

Yes, it is true that I had never previously heard any criticism of the AA, but you and Robitusson sure as heck corrected that in no uncertain terms. The two of you went on; page after page, in thread after thread, cutting and pasting from the internet, like there was no tomorrow. Sometimes you would do 2 or 3 posts in a row, and woe betide any poor soul who dared put his head above the parapet to suggest that there may be some good in the AA.

Poster after poster came on this forum to relate personal experiences of how the AA helped them, or helped people that they knew to quite the booze; but all posts were rubbished by you and your henchman as being 'anecdotal', not the result of a scientific survey, and therefore not worthy of consideration.

(Incidentally that's akin to having dozens of members posting on this forum about bad experiences with BG's, only to be told that their experiences are just anecdotal, and not to be taken seriously. If people can't post their personal experiences on a forum as part of a balanced argument - then what on earth is the point of a forum? Just to cut and post scientific papers from other internet sites?)

What got my goat - and countless others - and which resulted in 3 threads being closed - was your incessant, crusading determination to rubbish the AA, when any fool can see that in many cases it does a lot of good, and there have been dozens of testimonies on this forum from people, who with AA's help, have kept sober for years, if not forever.

Clearly the AA has its faults, and in some respects may be making inaccurate statements and assertions about the causes and nature of alcoholism – but who cares? The bottom line is that for some it works and saves lives.

We have heard all your arguments over and over again. Isn’t it time to give it a rest?

[garro]

I was a bit reluctant to post on this thread but decided to anyway out of concern that my post may be misinterpreted. I have a lot of respect for AA and know that it does work for a lot of people. I don't think that their adoption of the disease model of alcoholism is a problem as it does seem to work for many. Right or wrong is not important so long as it works. Cult or brainwashed members, doesn't matter if their life is improved.

The one criticism I have of AA is the view of many of its members (who I have met) that their way is the only way and if you don't follow it you will be damned to an alcoholic hel_l. I have experience of AA from the age of twenty, the longest being two years at twenty-five when I attended at least one meeting almost every day for the 2 years. During that time I too was convinced that AA had all the answers and that anybody who didn't follow this path was doomed. I told quite a few people who were sober without AA that if they didn't join they would soon be drinking again. Funny thing was that it wasn't them who drank again but me. While that period of sobriety was a great period in my life it was also a time of great fear - fear that my 'disease' would make me pick up again. I felt seperated from my friends and family because they didn't understand my 'disease'. I would put every negative aspect of my life down to me being a 'recovering alcoholic'.

While many in AA claim that their's is the only answer to addiction I am not sure that this was the intention of the original members. The book claims 'there is a solution' not 'there is only one solution'. The book also talks about in the story of Dr Bob (if I am not mistaken as it is quite a while since reading it) he was told that people did recover by themselves via a spiritual transformation. This had occured throughout time without the help of AA. There is now many organisations which can help problem drinkers and are probably just as effective as AA. There is also many people who finally quit without any help.

I got sober for the last time at Wat Tamkrabok nearly nine months ago. When I left there the compulsion to drink had completely disappeared for the first time in my life. I no longer consider myself an alcoholic with a disease and so personally do not need any support. This is just my story however. Some people will find their way through AA, others through RR. Who cares as long as they work?

I know that I am likely to meet AA members again and I am sure that some of them will be concerned and want to save me. This is 'up to them' as they are not causing me any harm just trying to help in their way.

[sabaijai]

www.liberationpark.org

Buddhism, the 12 Steps, & the 12 Traditions

12 Steps audio | 12 Traditions audio

Santikaro writes, "There are numerous parallels and congruencies between the Buddha's teaching & the 12 Step path that has benefited millions of people with addictions. In a sense, the Buddhist exploration of how clinging to “I” and “mine” generates selfishness & suffering is a matter of addiction. This provides one meeting place for dialogue among followers of these two not-separate paths. Our group has been meeting for two years to discuss the parallels between Buddhist practice and working the 12 Steps."

Santikaro continues, "The Twelve Traditions

In 2006, we will continue our dialogue by exploring the 12 Traditions, which have much wisdom to offer spiritual and service groups wishing to stay true to their values and not ossify as institutions. We believe this will be relevant to the development of Buddhist Sanghas in America and Liberation Park in particular."

I'm familiar with Santikaro's interpretation's of Ven Buddhadasa's teachings and in fact I worked with Ven Buddhadasa as a translator in the early 80s.

That this philosopy is being applied to 12-step programs may introduce Buddhadharma to people with alcohol-related disorders, and that's fine. That goes for Christian-based 12-step programs, spirituality is a good thing. Or atheist approaches, etc, one size doesn't fit all.

However applying Buddhadharma/atheism/Catholicism/xxx doesn't make the basic 12-step approach any more valid as the structural problems to that approach remain.

ProThaiExpat, of course one methodology doesn't work for everyone. However I should think the community would always point people to programs with the highest predictive power first, then move down the list, even while realising that outcomes will vary with the individual. If antibiotic A works best for most people with a throat infection, why start with antibiotic B even if B works better for some people? Not a perfect analogy since addiction is more complex than an infection (unless the THIQ hypothesis is correct, in which case pharma treatment may be the quick solution of the future).

I also find the science of addiction interesting in of itself, so where Mobi concludes that I enjoy the back and forth on this topic, well he's quite right. It looks like I'm the only one left here interested in contemporary addiction treatment methodologies.

Mobi, thanks for your progress report, sounds like you're doing pretty well. I regret that any of my posts have offended you or anyone else.

[ProThaiExpat]

sabaijai: You would be well served in your quest for a statistically supported ranking of sucess rates in addiction treatment programs to start a new thread, as most realize that "lying through statistics" is a complex game based on varying criteria.

I doubt you will find any statistically reliable information to rank sucess rates since the definition of what is a sucess is so broad in its interpretation, as I pointed out by example in my previous post.

To remind, sobriety for one year, three years, ten years, twenty years. Most treatment programs don't follow up for twenty years, certainly AA doesn't. Many move on to a normal life without drinking after a sucessful treatmet program and they can never be measured as they have no more connection to the original cure facility, as do failures who may never go back and die drunk.

[Neeranam]

Regarding alcohol being similar to other drugs -

When I quit drinking I felt physically normal after a few weeks. When I gave up benzodiazepines, it took years to get rid of physical/psychological/emotional problems.

Methadone is the worst.

Alcohol with me is totally different from other drugs.

Anecdotal I know, but as someone said, it's good to share our experiences about stopping drinking.

Maybe we should have a thread only for people who have experienced recovery from alcoholism, or want to quit.

What do you all think?

[Mobi]

Regarding alcohol being similar to other drugs -

When I quit drinking I felt physically normal after a few weeks. When I gave up benzodiazepines, it took years to get rid of physical/psychological/emotional problems.

Methadone is the worst.

Alcohol with me is totally different from other drugs.

Anecdotal I know, but as someone said, it's good to share our experiences about stopping drinking.

Maybe we should have a thread only for people who have experienced recovery from alcoholism, or want to quit.

What do you all think?

There is one already - Drinkers Diary.

It's been going for about a year now, and only the original members, including me, are in it. No new ones have been admitted, so I'm not sure how anyone would go about joining at this stage.

If you are interested, I for one would support your entry, but I guess you would have to approach admin in the first instance.

I have found DD of great benefit - as I believe other DD members have. I could never have cut down to where I am today without the support I receive in DD.

It has become part of my daily life.

[Mobi]

Mobi, thanks for your progress report, sounds like you're doing pretty well. I regret that any of my posts have offended you or anyone else.

[Pattayatony]

Regarding alcohol being similar to other drugs -

When I quit drinking I felt physically normal after a few weeks. When I gave up benzodiazepines, it took years to get rid of physical/psychological/emotional problems.

Methadone is the worst.

Alcohol with me is totally different from other drugs.

Anecdotal I know, but as someone said, it's good to share our experiences about stopping drinking.

Maybe we should have a thread only for people who have experienced recovery from alcoholism, or want to quit.

What do you all think?

Neeranam, I will PM you.

Cheers Tony

[ProThaiExpat]

I couldn't agree more.

Even within AA, they recognize the difference and that is why there is a NA and many AA meetings are closed to all except alcoholics.

[strawberry]

interesting topic

years ago a woman scientists was doing experiments on dead bodies . These bodies were drunks from skid row. In all of them she found a drug in the brain, this drug was called tetrohydrosoqinaline ( excuss my spelling) This is formedin the brain of alki's.As I understand the alki drinks alcohol and the alcohol is digested slower than that of normal person so that it mixes with the digestive juices. Because it is slow it goes into the blood stream and into the brain where it mixes with another drug to make a drug called tetrohydrosoquinaline. This drug stays in the brain and is said to cause the alki to be addicted. Once in the brain it does not leave probably because the alki continues to abuse alcohol. That is, when the alki picks up the first drink within a very short time his body calls out for more of the same in usually about 20 minutes.

I was a drunk for 36 years, and I have now been sober for 21 years. I had a friend who took to a detox on Sydney

That was almost 21 years ago. I woke up lying on a bed and anold guy who went by the nick name Dero Dave said to me '' the purpose of AA is to get you back into the main stream of live without the necessity of picking up a drink''

AA has done that for me. I'm a loner now that is I live outside of AA meetings and probably get to one or two meetings a year. I've been a loner for 13 years now and I don't have any compulsion to drink or drug in fact I feel free.

Don't knock AA it does help people and sure it has its fanatics But not all people in AA are fanatics and the ones that aren't make real good friends.

regards Joe

[Austhaied]

I couldn't agree more.

Even within AA, they recognize the difference and that is why there is a NA and many AA meetings are closed to all except alcoholics.

<deleted>. My father has been in AA for 28 years and i have been to many a meeting with him. They do have certain days when they are closed to AA members only, but most of the time anyone is welcome.

[ProThaiExpat]

<deleted>. My father has been in AA for 28 years and i have been to many a meeting with him. They do have certain days when they are closed to AA members only, but most of the time anyone is welcome.

Since you agree that AA meetings "are closed to AA members only", your bullocks must refer to the existence of NA.

Anyone who would like to learn more about NA, just search google or call your local central office of AA and you can learn not only about AA and its closed meetings but NA as well.

Your credentials to speak authoritatively about AA based on occasional attendance at meetings with a member does raise questions, not only in your home country, but worldwide.

[Sheryl]

OK you two, tone it down.

No need for nasty retorts

Actually looks to me like you are just misunderstanding each other

I think what was went by "closed to all but alcoholics"was that they discourage people with other addicition problems (i.e. drugs) from joinging, not that the meetings cannot be attended by non-alcoholics who want to observe, whether in order to understand/suppoirt a family member or for any other reason.

And I think the "Bullocks" was the result of interpreting what had been said as meaning that the meetings are all closed, which of course some are and some are not.

And even if I'm wrong on either or both points...I defionitiely think we should all try to be civil here. This is a sub-forum for people in need fo help and frayed tempers never help anyone.....

[Mobi]

Sheryl, do you realise that the two people were having this spat exactly one year ago

You're a bit late in your admonishment

[Sheryl]

Sheryl, do you realise that the two people were having this spat exactly one year ago

You're a bit late in your admonishment

Mea culpa

For some reason this thread got bumped up and I thought it was current

That's what I get for moderating in a hurry.....

Kindly disregard

[garro]

Well done Sheryl. You obviously think a lot before offering criticism - a year does seem a bit OTT though.