On 8/29/13 3:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:16:40 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 3:11 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:23:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 1:12 PM, wrote:

I believe that is because of the support component that Harry
dismisses in such a cavalier way.

I don't dismiss support programs for substance abusers. Once again,
apparently, you cannot comprehend what you read. What I did say is that
the religious-osity, as it were, of 12-step programs, is offputting to a
substantial percentage of substance abusers. There is significant
published criticism for various reasons of 12-step programs.


The hard choices an addict needs to make is the main thing that puts
them off. They just use "religious-osity" as one more excuse.


Gee, I'm glad you have so much experience dealing with the huge variety
of substance abusers and therefore feel qualified to state that those
who disdain the 12 steps approach because of religious reasons do so as
an excuse. Obviously, whatever your profession was, you chose
poorly...since you could have been a first-rate therapist.


What is your experience?


I'm married to a first-rate psychotherapist who has seen and
successfully treated a great number of substance abusers in several
settings over her two decades as a licensed practitioner. She sometimes
talks about what works and what doesn't for various folks who remain
anonymous. Her doctoral dissertation was on a significant aspect of
substance abuse, and she has written other papers that also have been
published. She consults with NiMH professionals on substance abuse topics.

Additionally, I've read "the lit" that comes to the house (professional
papers and journals) and I know thought my union work a lot of
construction workers in many trades who at some point in their careers
suffered severe injuries, were prescribed heavy duty meds, got hooked,
and then got clean and stayed clean.

As a result, I wouldn't make the sweeping statements you make about
substance abusers, or that, as you implied, a large number of those who
disdain the 12 step programs because of their religious-osity just do so
so they can remain outside of a therapeutic or support service.

In article , says...

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 07:05:36 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/28/13 11:57 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:40:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/28/13 5:35 PM, wrote:

OK your turn. Show me some peer reviewed studies about the 10 year
success of "rehab".


I'm sure you can do your own lit search. Have at it.

I have not found any reliable study that says any significant number
of substance abusers come out of rehab, therapy or any or any other
program with a 10 year success rate. There are a few people selling
rehab who say they have amazing success rates but they are selling
something, not doing research.

It was your contention I was wrong. Prove it.

I would accept 25% as a win for you if it was a real study that
actually tracked patients for any significant amount of time.
(not just people who stopped coming back)

I only have to look at the half million or more addicted homeless to
see all is not going well in paradise. That does not include those dis
functionals who are living with friends or family.

Then you have the addicts who are working at some level of
functionality and the high functioning addicts.




Once again, you are exhibiting an inability to think abstractly. Drug
addiction is not an illness like, oh, the usual childhood diseases that
can be prevented by an inoculation or that caught once, tend not to
haunt you again. Drug addiction treatment, once administered, does not
mean the individual who receives it has lifetime or even 10-year
protection from a relapse.

Drug addiction is a chronic disease, and it can be managed properly and
successfully. But relapses are more than possible, as they are with
other chronic medical illnesses, such as asthma or hypertension. And
because there are strong possibilities of relapses with drug addiction
doesn't mean treatment is a failure. As with other chronic illnesses,
treatment for drug addiction necessitates lifetime evaluation and
perhaps modifications when necessary. If you suffer from diabetes,
proper treatment can help you get it under control and most of the
symptoms will disappear, and the treatment is successful.

What happens if you discontinue treatment for your chronic disease? It
probably returns and you have a relapse. When a drug addict relapses, it
doesn't necessarily mean the treatment he is receiving (or ignoring) has
failed. It may just mean the treatment needs to be re-started or changed.

Many people with certain mental/emotional illnesses get relief with a
combination of medications and therapy that help them feel better and
regain control of their lives. Some of those illnesses will require
patients to take medications for the rest of their lives. After a while
on meds, though, some patients talk themselves into believing they are
"cured," so they stop the medications. So, what happens? In many cases
the symptoms of the mental/emotional illness returns.

Oh, and once again, 12-step programs are not treatment?they provide support.




At a certain point "support" is really the only thing that works, long
term.

BTW in my search for long term success rates I paged through about 100
studies by NIH on drug treatment. I found one interesting in regard to
Methadone. They found using long term drug replacement therapy was no
more effective than not using drug therapy although that was not what
they wanted to say.
They tracked at the 6 month 12 month 18 month and 24 month intervals
testing for unauthorized drug use. The results were virtually the
same. The drug abuse peaked at 18 months and included over 50% of the
patients.

http://www.drugabuse.gov/sites/defau...methadone3.jpg

The hilarious thing is that in true government double talk they are
trying to say the methadone therapy is better when their own
statistics say the opposite.

It's all about a three letter word "JOBS", see Joe Biden if you want to discuss whether jobs
is a three letter word.

In article , says...

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 08:51:15 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

He's an alcoholic and drug abuser. It culminated in a boating
accident where he was found partially responsible in another person's
death due to operating a boat while intoxicated. He didn't serve any
jail time but entered rehab. I've seen him off an on since and he
had remained totally sober. Until 3 months ago. After seven years
of not drinking, he was at a party and someone started making Mimosas.
All it took was one and he's back to drinking again. Sad.

And cigarettes are just as bad. Recently I ran into a friend of mine and
he was smoking, he hadn't smoked in at least 10 years. Asked him what
happened, he had a lot of stressful things going on in his life, and
"reached for an old, calming friend".

Nicotine is a common replacement drug. The Friends of Bill W tend to
be heavy smokers. That may be the only place I have ever been overcome
by second hand smoke (escorting my brother in law to a few meetings)

Don't forget caffine.

In article , says...

On 8/29/13 2:35 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 28 Aug 2013 21:31:08 -0400, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:



"Tim" wrote in message
...

On Wednesday, August 28, 2013 11:12:24 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 8/28/13 11:22 AM, wrote:

The religious underpinnings and overlay of 12-step programs are
off-putting for many addicts. A lot of people simply don't want
religion
shoved down their throats.


There's a lot of substance/alcohol abusers who while in the `12-step'
programs , follow the religious overtones closely.

---------------------

Last year when I was involved with a family member's rehab and first
steps with recovery I got a copy of the "Big Book" to read what the
12 step thing was all about. I had never heard of the "Big Book" and
had only heard about the "12 step program" in the form of jokes. I
had no clue what they actually were. Pretty naïve I guess for a guy
my age.

I confess that I didn't read the Big Book cover to cover, but I read
enough to get the history, ideas and concepts. I didn't think it
overly pushes religion at all, and certainly doesn't push any
particular theology. I got the it really doesn't care what you
believe in as long as you acknowledge that there are bigger things in
the universe than yourselves.

I was also fortunate to have several people who I had met (mostly
through the guitar shop) who confided their status as recovering
addicts to me. Prior to that I had no idea. They helped me and my
wife deal with my family member's addiction and explained their
respective adaptations of and implementation of the 12 step program as
it applied to them . Some took it more literally than others, but
it seemed to benefit them all.

I certainly don't think it "shoves" religion down anyone's throats.


AA pushes the concept of a 'higher power', which may be different for different folks. The higher
power may be God, for those who believe, or it may be peer pressure from the group, or maybe just a
'big brother'.

One thing is for sure, the success of AA groups does not put a lot of money into the pockets of
psychologists. However, many hospitals for those needing psychological treatment also have an AA
group on the premises. (That is also true for many military hospitals.)

John (Gun Nut) H.

Okay, Bill W.


I wonder if Herring still attends AA meetings.

Why did you get rid of your firearms? Was it a prior criminal conviciton or was it because
you are an adjuticated nut job.

In article , says...

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 08:55:14 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

I don't believe calling someone who is having success at controlling a
substance abuse problem a "junkie" adds anything to the discussion.



It is n accurate depiction.

You are certainly not the one who should be criticizing the use of
pejorative terms for people you disagree with either.

It is interesting that Harry doesn't like descriptive definitions of people. Once a tax cheat
always a tax cheat, once a dead-beat always a dead-beat.

In article , says...

On 8/29/13 1:12 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 09:24:04 -0400, BAR wrote:

In article , says...

Oh, and once again, 12-step programs are not treatment?they provide support.

The interesting thing is that the 12 step programs have a higher "success" rate than the
institutional or non 12 step programs. I know several people who have been in 12 step
programs and they have been sober for 15 and 20 years. They were never institutionalized,
they never received "professional" help with their addiction. People have to want to change
and forceing them to change or trying to modify their behavior isn't going to succeed.


I believe that is because of the support component that Harry
dismisses in such a cavalier way.

I don't dismiss support programs for substance abusers. Once again,
apparently, you cannot comprehend what you read. What I did say is that
the religious-osity, as it were, of 12-step programs, is offputting to a
substantial percentage of substance abusers. There is significant
published criticism for various reasons of 12-step programs.

You don't have the slightest idea of how a 12 step program works and why it is the most
successful at keeping the participants clean and sober. When you believe that you are at the
apex of the universe then you believe you are in control or can be in control of anything.

In article , says...

On 8/29/13 3:11 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:23:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 1:12 PM, wrote:

I believe that is because of the support component that Harry
dismisses in such a cavalier way.

I don't dismiss support programs for substance abusers. Once again,
apparently, you cannot comprehend what you read. What I did say is that
the religious-osity, as it were, of 12-step programs, is offputting to a
substantial percentage of substance abusers. There is significant
published criticism for various reasons of 12-step programs.


The hard choices an addict needs to make is the main thing that puts
them off. They just use "religious-osity" as one more excuse.


Gee, I'm glad you have so much experience dealing with the huge variety
of substance abusers and therefore feel qualified to state that those
who disdain the 12 steps approach because of religious reasons do so as
an excuse. Obviously, whatever your profession was, you chose
poorly...since you could have been a first-rate therapist.

Your experience is all second hand and hersay. Why should anyone believe that you are telling
the truth? You have edited articles that you obtained from other sources. You are a known tax
cheat and you are a deadbeat. Why would anyone believe anything you have to say regardless as
to whether it is first hand, second hand, or any hand?

In article , says...

On 8/29/13 3:55 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:16:40 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 3:11 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:23:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 1:12 PM, wrote:

I believe that is because of the support component that Harry
dismisses in such a cavalier way.

I don't dismiss support programs for substance abusers. Once again,
apparently, you cannot comprehend what you read. What I did say is that
the religious-osity, as it were, of 12-step programs, is offputting to a
substantial percentage of substance abusers. There is significant
published criticism for various reasons of 12-step programs.


The hard choices an addict needs to make is the main thing that puts
them off. They just use "religious-osity" as one more excuse.


Gee, I'm glad you have so much experience dealing with the huge variety
of substance abusers and therefore feel qualified to state that those
who disdain the 12 steps approach because of religious reasons do so as
an excuse. Obviously, whatever your profession was, you chose
poorly...since you could have been a first-rate therapist.


What is your experience?


I'm married to a first-rate psychotherapist who has seen and
successfully treated a great number of substance abusers in several
settings over her two decades as a licensed practitioner. She sometimes
talks about what works and what doesn't for various folks who remain
anonymous. Her doctoral dissertation was on a significant aspect of
substance abuse, and she has written other papers that also have been
published. She consults with NiMH professionals on substance abuse topics.

Additionally, I've read "the lit" that comes to the house (professional
papers and journals) and I know thought my union work a lot of
construction workers in many trades who at some point in their careers
suffered severe injuries, were prescribed heavy duty meds, got hooked,
and then got clean and stayed clean.

As a result, I wouldn't make the sweeping statements you make about
substance abusers, or that, as you implied, a large number of those who
disdain the 12 step programs because of their religious-osity just do so
so they can remain outside of a therapeutic or support service.

Meaning you have no first hand experience.

My wife is a battery expert, she can build them, analyze them and tell you why they are not
performing well. I am just a battery user.

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:42:15 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 09:44:00 -0400, iBoaterer
wrote:

In article ,
says...

The interesting thing is that the 12 step programs have a higher "success" rate than the
institutional or non 12 step programs. I know several people who have been in 12 step
programs and they have been sober for 15 and 20 years. They were never institutionalized,
they never received "professional" help with their addiction. People have to want to change
and forceing them to change or trying to modify their behavior isn't going to succeed.

Cite?

It is going to be hard. I looked at this for about 4 hours last night.
I can find hundreds of articles saying THEIR program works "X"% of the
time (with questionable stats) but it is very hard to find any actual
studies that track the people in a verifiable case study.
Places like CDC and NIH where you would expect this to happen don't
seem to be doing it. The studies where they are actually looking at
particular therapies seen to show pretty dismal results and the
longest term study I saw was that methadone deal. They tried to polish
that turd but the numbers expose the truth. Over half the patients
were using illegal drugs 18 months in, while still in therapy.

12 step, particularly AA, does seem to work as long as the person
stays in the program but a lot of people simply walk away and they
still may fall off the wagon occasionally. The question is whether
they try to get back on.

I have been to a few meetings as a visitor and it is an interesting
process. There is a certain religious component but it is far from the
main driver of the program. They are really trying to say this is YOUR
problem and YOU have to fix it. Then they give you some tools.
They don't seem to care which god you want to use if that is the tool
you decide on.
I think the sponsor relationship might be the best tool.



Some of the biggest AA meetings, believe it or not, happen in prison.
People there are remorseful, and also they get coffee and cigarettes!
So, they go, until they get out, then it's same old same old.

Cite? Or personal experience?

John (Gun Nut) H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 15:11:50 -0400, wrote:

On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 13:23:31 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 8/29/13 1:12 PM, wrote:

I believe that is because of the support component that Harry
dismisses in such a cavalier way.

I don't dismiss support programs for substance abusers. Once again,
apparently, you cannot comprehend what you read. What I did say is that
the religious-osity, as it were, of 12-step programs, is offputting to a
substantial percentage of substance abusers. There is significant
published criticism for various reasons of 12-step programs.


The hard choices an addict needs to make is the main thing that puts
them off. They just use "religious-osity" as one more excuse. If they
were sent to a government facility, they would blame the government
and psychological therapists have their own class of slurs.
In the 60s in SE DC calling someone's mother a "social worker" was
worse than any of the other witty "Yo Momma" things that were going
around. The "souf'esse steal" was usually next.

Until an addict hits his/her bottom, they will continue to come up with excuses. The shame is that
some ruin themselves and their families before they hit that bottom. And, for some, the bottom is
death.

John (Gun Nut) H.
--

Hope you're having a great day!