Why do people insist AA is not religious?/Efficacy of AA & other treatment programs

[elbe]

I don't think this has been proven, anywhere. I honestly don't think there's been enough scientific study to say one way or the other.

While looking at the website for another group, SMART Recovery, for any sort of numbers, they had this in their FAQ:

Q. Is SMART Recovery® as effective as AA?

A. From a scientific perspective, the effectiveness of all support groups for addictive behavior is unproven. The only way to answer that question is to attend meetings from all available groups, and reach a personal conclusion about the best approach to recovery.

 

[Mr.D]

I know some former alcoholics. Some of them do drink socially, some don't. It can be done.

I would suggest they were heavy or problem drinkers, not alcoholics.

Alternately, I can point out that even in the very early days of AA, it was recognized that some people can change on their own.

"If anyone who is showing inability to control his drinking can do the right-about-face and drink like a gentleman, our hats are off to him." - Ch. 3 Alcoholics Anonymous.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

It has been quoted in other threads where you have posted in favour of A.A. That you have a short memory is your problem. The success rate for A.A. is no better, and probably worse, than for those who go it alone.

Really? You are going to have to show me where I said that, and then point out why (on the basis of discussions here) I can't change my mind.

I guess you could try looking through some of the groups in this list; check their websites to see if they make any success claims.

I could, I know about SMART and a few others. I thougt our posters here might have actually been able to support their nonsensical claims. Aparently not.

btw. And for the umpteenth time. I do not think AA is the only way, but it is a way.

 

[ArchieGoodwin]

While looking at the website for another group, SMART Recovery, for any sort of numbers, they had this in their FAQ:

Q. Is SMART Recovery® as effective as AA?

A. From a scientific perspective, the effectiveness of all support groups for addictive behavior is unproven. The only way to answer that question is to attend meetings from all available groups, and reach a personal conclusion about the best approach to recovery.

This is my thinking exactly..

What my advice is when people ask: Try everything. Try AA, therapy, cold turkey, anything and everything in whatever order you want. There's no tried and true way to quit. Different methods work for different people and none of them work all that well. But the more you try the better chance you'll find one that works.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

yep.

 

[qayak]

I don't think this has been proven, anywhere. I honestly don't think there's been enough scientific study to say one way or the other.

http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html#Vaillant

The Harvard Medical School reported that in the long run, the rate of spontaneous remission in alcoholics is slightly over 50 percent. That means that the annual rate of spontaneous remission is around 5 percent.
What Professor Vaillant, a Trustee of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc. — in other words, one of the highest-ranking A.A. leaders — is candidly, clearly describing is a zero-percent success rate for his A.A.-based treatment program.

Look at the "Abstinent or social drinking" and "Improved" columns of Table 8. You have to add the numbers together to get the over-all improvement rate for that item. So, for "A.A.", "no treatment", and "other treatment", we get 33%, 32%, and 37% over-all improvement rates, respectively. Those numbers are basically the same. There is no statistically significant difference between 33 and 32 percent, and hardly any between 33 and 37 percent. So A.A. treatment was no better than either "other treatment" or no treatment at all, and conversely, "other treatment" wasn't a whole lot better than either A.A. or "no treatment", either. After two years of A.A. treatment, "other treatment", or "no treatment", roughly two-thirds of the patients in all of those groups were still abusing alcohol. That's a dismal result.

Look at the "Abstinent or social drinking" and "Improved" columns of Table 8.2. Again, you have to add the numbers together to get the over-all improvement rate for that item. The A.A. "Clinic sample" scored 45 percent improved over-all, while the other programs ranged from 35 to 47 percent. Two of the programs, those in the Bratfos and Voetglin-Broz studies, seem to have been much worse than average, but all of the rest of the programs, including A.A., show approximately the same results. (The Voetglin-Broz study used something called "Conditioned Reflex Treatment". What caused the poor results in the Norwegian Bratfos study is unknown.)

Look at the "Dead" column of Table 8.2. The A.A.-treated group, the "Clinic sample", with the death rate of 29%, had the highest death rate of any kind of program, significantly higher than all of the other programs.

And those five people out of the hundred in the A.A.-treated "Clinic sample" who successfully stayed sober for 8 years are just the result of that same old five percent spontaneous remission rate at work, again.

As Professor Vaillant reported, the A.A. treatment program did not alter the natural history (the usual course) of alcoholism, except for yielding a higher death rate than doing nothing. A.A. did not save the alcoholics; it didn't even help them; it just killed them.

Remember that these terrible numbers were reported by a Trustee of Alcoholics Anonymous World Services, Inc., by a real true believer in A.A., by one of the highest-ranking A.A. insiders, by someone who loves A.A. and was trying hard to make it look good, not by some harsh critic of A.A. who might be suspected of bias, or of fudging the numbers to make A.A. look bad...

 

[elbe]

This is my thinking exactly..

What my advice is when people ask: Try everything. Try AA, therapy, cold turkey, anything and everything in whatever order you want. There's no tried and true way to quit. Different methods work for different people and none of them work all that well. But the more you try the better chance you'll find one that works.

Since it's my opinion that, in the end, it's all up to the willpower of the person to go sober (unless you have someone physically interfering with your ability to buy a drink, I guess) then the more you try then, perhaps, it helps build up your own willpower.

 

[qayak]

This is my thinking exactly..

What my advice is when people ask: Try everything. Try AA, therapy, cold turkey, anything and everything in whatever order you want. There's no tried and true way to quit. Different methods work for different people and none of them work all that well. But the more you try the better chance you'll find one that works.

You forgot to mention that no treatment is just as effective as any treatment. That piece of advice saves them time, money and chairs that make your ass numb.

 

[Mr.D]

It might be interesting to note that there are 2 AA groups in this town (pop. 25,000) and this was the one that didn't meet in a church (the other one did). I suspect that the two groups were greatly different.

I'll note anecdotally, most churches that lend or rent out space for AA meetings have no idea what is said or done in those AA meetings. They offer the space as an extension of the 'public works' facet of their religion and not because they approve of what is said theologically.

 

[Tinyal]

Gayak you've hit the nail on the head - AAAlfie's statement is just the kind of

How very condescending of you. Perhaps you are not an alcoholic just an attention whore whose claimed alcoholism needs to be worse than anyone elses.

So there really is only one way to sobriety and it is your way. You've got the deity, you've got the blind faith and you've got the one true path. How is this not a religion?

AAAlfie's statement is just the thing I'd expect from a dedicated cult member, things like "It's not the AA programs fault it's not working, it's because you don't have enough faith in your Higher Power", or because the member isn't capable of rigorous honesty, or as AA dogma puts it "Rarely have we seen a person fail if they have thoroughly followed our path" (that is, get Bill W's particular kind of religion, develop a personal relationship with your Creator, reinforce this relationship with inventory taking, prayer, and meditation - then go out and get more cult recruits) - this is what the AA program 'suggests' the alcoholic do; a "suggestion" they call it, of course, right before they state that if you use your own thinking, your own willpower (or try to learn how to effectively deploy these personal resources) and don't follow their suggestions you'll end up worse then before in either an insane asylum, jail - or dead.

Rather effective 'suggestion' eh ? to give to someone who's on their last mental and physical legs, beaten down to an emotional pulp and made ready to accept and do whatever the book, the program, the group, or their sponsor tells them to do. All throughout the AA writings one is constantly asked if they are willing to do whatever is necessary - George Valiant spoke about this in one of his studies, about the 'value' (his phrasing) of fully enabling the placebo effect through group (read 'cult') persuasion.

And I'll say this again (and again, until either AAAlfie hears it & it finally registers, or my fingers fall off) - if the groups you've been to have all demoted the god of bill's understanding to the point where it's rarely if ever mentioned - if the groups he's attending do not have many members who feel the be all and end all of solutions to every human problem (not just drinking) is contained in the first 164 pages - if the groups he attends do not claim 'rarely have we seen a person fail etc etc' - then the groups AAAlfie is attending are AA groups only in name - in essence, they are not AA at all.. When mentioning of god and higher power, dependence on faith in this power, turning one's life and will completely - without reservation - over to the care of this power - when these things are removed from AA you basically have a SMART or SOS (save our selves) self help group recovery meeting.

That is - you no longer have AA once you remove the religious content - you have a secular meeting (SOS meetings are short for Secular Organizations for Sobriety, as well as Save Our Selves).
This means the groups AAAlfie is talking about have gotten rid of AA's insistent ceaseless claim that the only way to sobriety is through faith in a Higher Power - a Power the newcomer will soon call God.
This is a good thing, what with AA's dismal failure rate (95%+ failure in getting people sober and keeping them that way for a year)

Concluding this short post, let me add I am very pleased AAAlfie is sober without falling for the AA dogma of needing god to solve his alcoholism, without turning his life & will completely over to a non-existent spiritually based Higher Power . AAAlfie appears to have not used AA much -if any - at all! and seems like he's sober. Not only that - it seems like he's found an SOS group, has been attending, and didn't even know it!

Lastly, I'll answer again whoever is asking (am repeating myself alot, as the AA supporters seem to be mostly ignoring my posts and links to data) why I keep repeating the 'old' AA literature (like, doh, the Big Book and 12x12)since he says "the program has evolved, and AA has evolved, etc.."

My answer? Well sir, the AA program has not evolved - hardly a word or sentence has altered since Bill W composed it back in the 30's. That's one of the main problems I've been trying to get across!! Sure, some groups have evolved - they evolved away from AA!! Not only that, but (according to AAAlfie in any case) these non-AA groups are at least just as effective as AA (5% cure/95% failure rate - who knows , maybe even higher) - and both are just as effective as doing minimal treatment.

So, with that in mind - why spend the massive $$ on treatment centers all over the globe, why bankrupt families with tremendous medical bills for non-medical treatment modalities, why bother reading the big book god nonsense - when doing nothing or short doctor-based intervention/minimal treatment is just as effective in getting & maintaining soberiety - and the AA way has been shown (in studies at the links I previously posted in this thread) to actually cause an increased level of dangerous binge drinking??

My suggestion : find an SoS, or SMART, or WFS (all secular non-12 step alternatives with a proven track record) and give any of those a shot, if you're an alcoholic who is ready to quit but isn't sure how.

Why bother with AA at all?

 

[Tinyal]

I don't think this has been proven, anywhere. I honestly don't think there's been enough scientific study to say one way or the other.

Wrong: yes, it has been studied and proven to the point where many multiple studies, using different methods, have come to the same conclusion. If you'd read the links I repeatedly have been providing and actually read them all the way through, this would be clear to you as well. Perhaps go back and look at my links? Who knows, you might find it enlightening - if not, well at least it's a free educational experience.

 

[Mr.D]

Irony was my intention. Missed by that ll much.

I thought it was funny, actually.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

How very condescending of you. Perhaps you are not an alcoholic just an attention whore whose claimed alcoholism needs to be worse than anyone elses.

Geez, it was only a "suggestion".
Reported by the way

So there really is only one way to sobriety and it is your way. You've got the deity, you've got the blind faith and you've got the one true path.

Right.

I have manitained that all the way through.
Um, hang on, no I haven't.

You forgot to mention that no treatment is just as effective as any treatment. That piece of advice saves them time, money and chairs that make your ass numb.

So the alcoholic should just abandon all hope, keep treating himself and those around him like ***** and make no effort at recovery at all.
Great idea.

snip

Why bother with AA at all?

And yet you still go there, got sober there, and are the walking personification of why AA is not religious.

 

[elbe]

So the alcoholic should just abandon all hope, keep treating himself and those around him like ***** and make no effort at recovery at all.
Great idea.

Saying no one treatment is better than another is not the same as saying treatment is no better than no treatment.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Saying no one treatment is better than another is not the same as saying treatment is no better than no treatment.

I agree with that Elbe - and I might even agree with the underlying thrust, but that is not what was said:

"no treatment is just as effective as any treatment"

In other words, doing nothing is the same as doing something.
Treatment by way of detox, rehab and maintenance (or a combination) will always be better than just stopping or continuing to drink.

 

[elbe]

I agree with that Elbe - and I might even agree with the underlying thrust, but that is not what was said:



this is patently untrue and there is zero data to back it up.
Treatment by way of detox, rehab and maintenance (or a combination) will always be better than just stopping or continuing to drink.

Ah, I think I might have had a reading mix-up. Right now I'm reading qayak's "no treatment" to mean cold turkey, which obviously isn't the same as giving up completely. I'm listing cold turkey as a treatment, even if it's not the same as any sort of program.

Trying anything to stop is, obviously, more effective than not trying anything to stop - even if you fail.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Yep.
No probs.

 

[Dancing David]

What it actually says is:
- "Here are the steps we took, which are suggested as a program of recovery:"
then step 1, 2 etc etc

How would you read that?

Well AA Alfie, the members take them a little more seriously than that, it is one of the fanatic things about the members, along with "You will be in AA your whole life" and "Thou shalt seek no other help", "Thou shalt take no psychotropics", it is not official AA policy but it is just one of those consistent fanaticisms of many group members.

"You have to work the steps", "Without the inventory you can't stop", now again I know that is not official policy but it is a very strong cultural value of the members of AA and one I find to be a barrier, just like the religious aspects. It is why I like DFD groups.

 

[Dancing David]

There is another approach -- from the backside. Instead of thinking about what AA proposes and tells its membership, what would it take to get thrown out of AA? What would constitute heresy?

If you are an atheist, I don't think that would do it. What I'm getting at is what AA would view as a sin, or a action so counter to its purpose that expulsion would be the only remedy?

being drunk or distruptive will get you asked to leave many groups.

 

[Hallo Alfie]

Well AA Alfie, the members take them a little more seriously than that, it is one of the fanatic things about the members, along with "You will be in AA your whole life" and "Thou shalt seek no other help", "Thou shalt take no psychotropics", it is not official AA policy but it is just one of those consistent fanaticisms of many group members.

"You have to work the steps", "Without the inventory you can't stop", now again I know that is not official policy but it is a very strong cultural value of the members of AA and one I find to be a barrier, just like the religious aspects. It is why I like DFD groups.

Yep, some people are fanatical, but that doesn't make it 'policy'.

being drunk or distruptive will get you asked to leave many groups.

That is true too - but I would always hope with the offer of "keep coming back".
They have not been expelled from the fellowship, just the meeting.