3 ms·

Your mention of the dismal US healthcare system is ad hominem and irrelevant. 12-step programs are empirically superior to any alternative; established by comp

Your mention of the dismal US healthcare system is ad hominem and irrelevant. 12-step programs are empirically superior to any alternative; established by comprehensive literature review [1]. Your “science-backed” implication is utterly false. 12-step literature repeatedly, to exhaustion, emphasizes that the spiritual nature of the program is as the person understands it. [1] https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD012880.pub2/full https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...

techdragon 4y ago
The research you cite doesn’t refute criticism of the poor state of US healthcare. It also doesn’t refute the criticism being presented here, that treating the issue as an individual failing doesn’t work for everyone and we need more collective “whole community” approaches, such as decriminalisation, ending the war on drugs rhetoric, serious pushback against excessive force use on cognitively impaired individuals under the influence of drugs who are cooperative but having difficulty complying… and basically an all around general effort to try and stop me the stigmatisation of “drug users” as scum… Because worldwide, on average: most of us drink alcohol or coffee at least occasionally and many do so with regularity; many smoke cigarettes or cigars or hookah’s; some overuse pain medication unnecessarily to keep up with gym routine when they should let their body heal; some smoke weed and others mix the active ingredients into food and drinks for the same sorts of desired reaction; there’s a thriving trade in male sexual enhancement pills which range from unnecessary viagra prescriptions to illegal imports from overseas vendors of otherwise normal pharmaceutical products to “herbal” supplements illegally laced with pharmaceutical grade ingredients not listed on the packaging if the packaging even has a list of ingredients at all; there’s a statically significant number of people who use amyl nitrate for sexual purposes; there’s many people with various medical conditions, such as Narcolepsy and ADHD where the prescription is pharmaceutical grade amphetamines, and they go about their days routinely consuming medicine that were they not prescribed it, would categorically make them under present attitudes towards drug use “drug addicts with serious dependence issues”, I’ve more than once heard a story to the effect of “I thought I was addicted to dex, even tried rehab, turns out I just had ADHD”; there’s people with anxiety and other psychiatric disorders who are prescribed things like benzodiazepines which again have thriving off label use by people without prescriptions when they’re able to get them… We as a species have embraced the idea that you can live “better through chemistry” and that’s not going away because it has roots so deep they stretch back to tribal practices and into prehistory. The idea that there’s a magical list of drugs that are ok and not ok and you should punish people that like the not ok ones, is stupid fairy tail morality and translates about as well to the real world as prohibition of alcohol did in America, except this has worked longer because we exported around the world via treaties and we made a smaller group of people than “everyone who likes to drink alcohol” into the villains of our fairy tale narrative. There are obviously going to be things that should be illegal and laws will need to exist and be enforced, my point is that by encouraging the fairytale morality we’ve had generations of people concentrating power into the hands of groups of people we all have blatantly seem abusing it, and that’s not just about the police it’s about the organised crime and their victims. The whole system is in a slow spiral and it will not get better until we break they pattern. And as for the researchers you cited , they were pretty specifically comparing focused treatment programs that are aimed at the individual not at any sort of social interventions like changing drug policy at the state/national level.
- sirsinsalot 4y ago
  You're absolutely right. I was a cocaine addict. It turned out, I had ADHD. Through science and evidence led medicine, I was treated for ADHD and this gave me the foundation to leave cocaine behind. I'm pretty sure the self-shaming, placebo based 12-steps programme wouldn't have led to an ADHD diagnosis that actual therapy with a qualified psychiatrist found. Modern medicine is amazing. Using group support sessions whose framework was invented before we knew any better as the primary source of addiction treatment is like refusing to use cars because a horse and cart do the same job. America's obsession with puritan, white Christian conservative values keeps it in the dark ages (in terms of mental/physical health) and no amount of psudoliberalism will counter that. What's the point in telling yourself it's the "greatest country on earth" if your population are one of the most unhealthy?
sirsinsalot 4y ago
> 12-step literature repeatedly, to exhaustion, emphasizes that the spiritual nature of the program is as the person understands it. That has no place in the treatment of psychological issues such as addiction. It'd be like trying to pray your way out of schizophrenia or use meditation to get rid of a tumor. Or like asking a pastor to cure your ... Actually, Americans do that a lot. I saw a senator asking parents to pray that no more school shooting happen (there have been 19 in 2023 alone in America[1]). Keep praying, but a better strategy might be actual addiction treatment and stopping people carrying guns. Anything else is just enabling suffering. Other governments have worked this out. It isn't a mystery anymore. It doesn't require prayer or spirituality or faith. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States_(2000%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_th...
- comfypotato 4y ago
  You’ve changed the target of the argument far enough that I’ll consider my purpose achieved.
  - sirsinsalot 4y ago
    Really? > Those places, let's not forget, deliver care often with a motive of indoctrination in to religion. It really is taking advantage of people who are vulnerable. Because I think i've provided more to backup my claim than your "nuh-huh!" replies. You changed target from _my_ claim they are used for indoctrination to their validity in science. Both refutations are dubious at best, it seems you have taken a position and are sticking to it, out of dogma. A bit like those who blindly follow religion. Like those people, I don't debate with them. It is pointless. Have a good day.
    - comfypotato 4y ago
      I haven’t shifted my target since my first comment, and you have failed to argue against it. You have instead raised “America has problems” straw men and posited that 12-step philosophy is wrong. Pointing out your false statement that there’s no science behind 12-step programs was in direct defense of my original comment/argument’s claim about them being recommended/supported by the medical community. My previous source only denotes 12-step programs as “at least as good” instead of “superior”, but labeling a literature review as “dubious at best” implies science denial that would make this a worthless discussion. My “nuh-huh” reply regarding your use of the word indoctrination was in fact citing the AA preamble read every meeting: “AA is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization, or institution … neither endorses nor opposes any causes”. AA is technically a religion (in the US at least). In the positive sense, indoctrination is a correct word to use regarding what goes on in meetings. The common negative sense in which you’re aggressively using the word, implying hidden agendas/motives, is entirely false. Saying 12-step programs act directly opposite to the stated preamble would be a conspiracy theory also making this discussion worthless.
msrenee 4y ago
>12-step programs are empirically superior to any alternative ... You'll want to reread your study there. For most of the criteria they measured, the conclusion was that AA performed as well as other interventions. Not better. It certainly doesn't establish AA as the superior treatment. The author's conclusion seems to be that it might be about as good and it's free.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- comfypotato 4y ago
  My point is valid, and its validity is confirmed in the first sentence of the conclusions.
  - msrenee 4y ago
    Ah, now I can reply. It wasn't letting me for a while there. Probably because you repeatedly edited your comment. The study you linked says that for a certain measure, it works better according to a grand total of two studies they looked at. For the rest, the conclusion was that AA performed as well as other interventions. It's also a review study, which can sometimes be helpful, but often cannot draw clear conclusions due to the studies being reviewed not necessarily measuring the same parameters. They also rejected about half the papers they found due to apparent bias. It's certainly not the kind of paper that establishes something as settled science and even at that, it doesn't say what you claim it does.
    - comfypotato 4y ago
      The deeper a comment is the longer you have to wait to reply. I’ll improve your day by telling you that you can always click on a comment’s time stamp to reply immediately :) The purpose of my comment was refuting that 12-step programs aren’t science-backed, which is blatantly false. As you’ve stated, the entirety of literature on the subject shows that it’s at least as good.

techdragon 4y ago

The research you cite doesn’t refute criticism of the poor state of US healthcare. It also doesn’t refute the criticism being presented here, that treating the issue as an individual failing doesn’t work for everyone and we need more collective “whole community” approaches, such as decriminalisation, ending the war on drugs rhetoric, serious pushback against excessive force use on cognitively impaired individuals under the influence of drugs who are cooperative but having difficulty complying… and basically an all around general effort to try and stop me the stigmatisation of “drug users” as scum… Because worldwide, on average: most of us drink alcohol or coffee at least occasionally and many do so with regularity; many smoke cigarettes or cigars or hookah’s; some overuse pain medication unnecessarily to keep up with gym routine when they should let their body heal; some smoke weed and others mix the active ingredients into food and drinks for the same sorts of desired reaction; there’s a thriving trade in male sexual enhancement pills which range from unnecessary viagra prescriptions to illegal imports from overseas vendors of otherwise normal pharmaceutical products to “herbal” supplements illegally laced with pharmaceutical grade ingredients not listed on the packaging if the packaging even has a list of ingredients at all; there’s a statically significant number of people who use amyl nitrate for sexual purposes; there’s many people with various medical conditions, such as Narcolepsy and ADHD where the prescription is pharmaceutical grade amphetamines, and they go about their days routinely consuming medicine that were they not prescribed it, would categorically make them under present attitudes towards drug use “drug addicts with serious dependence issues”, I’ve more than once heard a story to the effect of “I thought I was addicted to dex, even tried rehab, turns out I just had ADHD”; there’s people with anxiety and other psychiatric disorders who are prescribed things like benzodiazepines which again have thriving off label use by people without prescriptions when they’re able to get them… We as a species have embraced the idea that you can live “better through chemistry” and that’s not going away because it has roots so deep they stretch back to tribal practices and into prehistory. The idea that there’s a magical list of drugs that are ok and not ok and you should punish people that like the not ok ones, is stupid fairy tail morality and translates about as well to the real world as prohibition of alcohol did in America, except this has worked longer because we exported around the world via treaties and we made a smaller group of people than “everyone who likes to drink alcohol” into the villains of our fairy tale narrative. There are obviously going to be things that should be illegal and laws will need to exist and be enforced, my point is that by encouraging the fairytale morality we’ve had generations of people concentrating power into the hands of groups of people we all have blatantly seem abusing it, and that’s not just about the police it’s about the organised crime and their victims. The whole system is in a slow spiral and it will not get better until we break they pattern. And as for the researchers you cited , they were pretty specifically comparing focused treatment programs that are aimed at the individual not at any sort of social interventions like changing drug policy at the state/national level.

sirsinsalot 4y ago
You're absolutely right. I was a cocaine addict. It turned out, I had ADHD. Through science and evidence led medicine, I was treated for ADHD and this gave me the foundation to leave cocaine behind. I'm pretty sure the self-shaming, placebo based 12-steps programme wouldn't have led to an ADHD diagnosis that actual therapy with a qualified psychiatrist found. Modern medicine is amazing. Using group support sessions whose framework was invented before we knew any better as the primary source of addiction treatment is like refusing to use cars because a horse and cart do the same job. America's obsession with puritan, white Christian conservative values keeps it in the dark ages (in terms of mental/physical health) and no amount of psudoliberalism will counter that. What's the point in telling yourself it's the "greatest country on earth" if your population are one of the most unhealthy?

sirsinsalot 4y ago

> 12-step literature repeatedly, to exhaustion, emphasizes that the spiritual nature of the program is as the person understands it. That has no place in the treatment of psychological issues such as addiction. It'd be like trying to pray your way out of schizophrenia or use meditation to get rid of a tumor. Or like asking a pastor to cure your ... Actually, Americans do that a lot. I saw a senator asking parents to pray that no more school shooting happen (there have been 19 in 2023 alone in America[1]). Keep praying, but a better strategy might be actual addiction treatment and stopping people carrying guns. Anything else is just enabling suffering. Other governments have worked this out. It isn't a mystery anymore. It doesn't require prayer or spirituality or faith. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_the_United_States_(2000%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_school_shootings_in_th...

comfypotato 4y ago
You’ve changed the target of the argument far enough that I’ll consider my purpose achieved.
- sirsinsalot 4y ago
  Really? > Those places, let's not forget, deliver care often with a motive of indoctrination in to religion. It really is taking advantage of people who are vulnerable. Because I think i've provided more to backup my claim than your "nuh-huh!" replies. You changed target from _my_ claim they are used for indoctrination to their validity in science. Both refutations are dubious at best, it seems you have taken a position and are sticking to it, out of dogma. A bit like those who blindly follow religion. Like those people, I don't debate with them. It is pointless. Have a good day.
  - comfypotato 4y ago
    I haven’t shifted my target since my first comment, and you have failed to argue against it. You have instead raised “America has problems” straw men and posited that 12-step philosophy is wrong. Pointing out your false statement that there’s no science behind 12-step programs was in direct defense of my original comment/argument’s claim about them being recommended/supported by the medical community. My previous source only denotes 12-step programs as “at least as good” instead of “superior”, but labeling a literature review as “dubious at best” implies science denial that would make this a worthless discussion. My “nuh-huh” reply regarding your use of the word indoctrination was in fact citing the AA preamble read every meeting: “AA is not allied with any sect, denomination, politics, organization, or institution … neither endorses nor opposes any causes”. AA is technically a religion (in the US at least). In the positive sense, indoctrination is a correct word to use regarding what goes on in meetings. The common negative sense in which you’re aggressively using the word, implying hidden agendas/motives, is entirely false. Saying 12-step programs act directly opposite to the stated preamble would be a conspiracy theory also making this discussion worthless.

msrenee 4y ago

>12-step programs are empirically superior to any alternative ... You'll want to reread your study there. For most of the criteria they measured, the conclusion was that AA performed as well as other interventions. Not better. It certainly doesn't establish AA as the superior treatment. The author's conclusion seems to be that it might be about as good and it's free.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
comfypotato 4y ago
My point is valid, and its validity is confirmed in the first sentence of the conclusions.
- msrenee 4y ago
  Ah, now I can reply. It wasn't letting me for a while there. Probably because you repeatedly edited your comment. The study you linked says that for a certain measure, it works better according to a grand total of two studies they looked at. For the rest, the conclusion was that AA performed as well as other interventions. It's also a review study, which can sometimes be helpful, but often cannot draw clear conclusions due to the studies being reviewed not necessarily measuring the same parameters. They also rejected about half the papers they found due to apparent bias. It's certainly not the kind of paper that establishes something as settled science and even at that, it doesn't say what you claim it does.
  - comfypotato 4y ago
    The deeper a comment is the longer you have to wait to reply. I’ll improve your day by telling you that you can always click on a comment’s time stamp to reply immediately :) The purpose of my comment was refuting that 12-step programs aren’t science-backed, which is blatantly false. As you’ve stated, the entirety of literature on the subject shows that it’s at least as good.