As a firm believer that addiction as a "spiritual sickness" or "disease" is just a big pile of steaming horseapples, and that 12-Step programs are downright dangerous, I am waiting, waiting, waiting for someone in the scientific community to grow enough balls to say so.
That being said, I read the Time cover story, then followed the blog here and here, then this Slate article, I have a few questions that I want to explore further, but in short, they are:
1) Are there any other "diseases" in the medical canon besides addiction that can be self-diagnosed? The conventional wisdom is that you're an alcoholic if you say you are. Can I walk into my doctor's office and say, hey, doc, I've decided that I have cancer, hand over the Oxycontin! Or go to a shrink and say, I have anxiety, hand over the Xanax. Oh wait, I can do that last one.
2) I had a discussion with a pal who is a member of the cult -- er, I mean, a devoted AA (and I have never met an angrier group of people) -- and when I told him I did 90 days but decided it wasn't for me, his response was, "Then you're not really an alcoholic." But the logic doesn't follow. If I stayed, and became a devotee of the AA Way, would that mean that I was just an alcoholic with a high bottom?
See what I mean about a load of crap? Why is no one in the medical community willing to step out and really test and study the efficacy of 12-step programs, when the evidence is right there in front of them that THEY DON'T WORK. I've heard 5% success rate. Most diseases have a spontaneous remission rate of about... oh... 5%.
Sadder still, I've sat and listened to people who have been in and out of AA something like 20 or 30 times say "It Works." Oh, really? I'd say, looking at you, that it doesn't. And everyone who "fails" out of AA takes all the blame on themselves. They say they failed the program. WHY DOESN'T ANYONE EVER SAY, THE PROGRAM FAILED ME.
2 comments:
I dunno. I think it's a very individual thing -- for some people, AA is a lifesaver. I know some of those people. AA truly saved their lives. But the idea that everyone who has a drinking problem needs the same remedy is ridiculous. So absolutely, for some people AA would fail them because they don't inherently respond to that sort of treatment. I do agree that addiction is not a "disease," and I get angered when i hear it referred to in that way. You can't catch addiction from someone else.
As a firm believer that addiction as a "spiritual sickness" or "disease" is just a big pile of steaming horseapples, and that 12-Step programs are downright dangerous, I am waiting, waiting, waiting for someone in the scientific community to grow enough balls to say so.
South Park did it, at least. Also, about 3 gazillion articles in Reason magazine.
And everyone who "fails" out of AA takes all the blame on themselves. They say they failed the program. WHY DOESN'T ANYONE EVER SAY, THE PROGRAM FAILED ME.
I think there are plenty of former AA-ers who are willing to talk about how it's a scary cult.
Post a Comment