Re: Mona ... Anti-depressants

[Guest guest]

Hey Mona,

Thanks for the reply. Question - what's the reasoning people have for

saying that using anti-depressants is not sober?

It was many years before I had to think of my depression as a

problem, and then a couple of years more before I resigned to trying

medication. I'm currently on Effexor. It helps somewhat. But I've

never thought of it as an abuse-able drug.

Thanks,

P.S. My resistance to medication is kind of hilarious, from one who

would have taken *anything* to get high once upon a time

[Guest guest]

Question - what's the reasoning people have

for

> saying that using anti-depressants is not sober?

Theyre morons who try to practice medicine without a licence.

[Guest guest]

> In 1976, the General Services arm of AA issued a bulletin announcing

>that AA who took antidepressants were either not sober, or imperiling

>their sobriety ...

>Anxious and depressed people were

>getting benzodiazapines like Valium, Librium and Ativan from their

>doctors, and eating them like candy.

....which are NOT antidepressants of course, not that AA (or other

like-minded) morons would understand the difference.

> But, these are addictive, and mood-altering.

The whole point of taking them is to alter your mood of course. These

are habit forming which becomes a nuisance, but do little harm unless

you drive under the influence or try to come off them cold turkey.

> My shrink -- who

>practices

> addiction medicine -- says they act on the brain almost identically

>to alcohol; he claims Xanax is just booze that you can't smell on

>your breath.

Which imo is horseshit. This is also said of barbs. Apparently

barbiturates do act on the same neuroreceptors that alcohol does, but

benzos dont, they have their own benzo receptors. Even if they did,

this means bugger all imo. Ever know anyone get totally loaded on

benzos from taking them *as prescribed*??? Ever know anyone who got

loaded on them because they " lost control " and couldnt stop cramming

them in their mouth? Of course not. This is just prejudice dressed

up as science. The effect of a drug depends on a whole host of

factors, not merely what neureceptors it works on but on dosage and

context. Even AA shrink Floyd Garrett knows that benzos can in fact

be safely used by alcoholics.

>

> Since then, the SSRIs have come out, and AA has somewhat relaxed its

attitude

> and is more accepting of the SSRIs, but not all individual AA

members have

> followed suit.

This sounds like AA has officially understands and acknowledges the

difference between different types of antidepressant, which I doubt it

does - in reality its publication " The AA member and other drugs "

talks about street drugs and meds in the same breath, let alone

distinguishes between antideps and benzos, never mind different kinds

of antidep!

In addition, in fact there are no grounds for prejudice against the

older tricyclic antideps either; they tend to cause drowziness which

can be a problem for driving and such but are still used succesfully

by millions of ppl worldwide.

P.

Sponsors often advise their sponsees to go off of

their psych

> meds, and this has led to enormous problems for some individuals,

and some

> say it has even resulted in suicides.

>

> But SSRIs are not mood-altering in the way Xanax is -- it doesn't

make one

> high. SSRIs balance the chemicals in the brain to prevent mood

swings and

> the inundation of the neuro-chemicals that signal too much stress.

> Additionally, many anti-seizure medications have also been

discovered to

> stabilize mood quite well.

>

> Myself, I take Paxil, an SSRI particularly effective for depression

combined

> with excessive anxiety. I also take Neurontin, an anti-seizure med

that

> keeps my mood on an even keel. As studies are beginning to report,

> alcoholics new to recovery can have much less likelihood of relapse

if their

> emotional state (frequently greatly distorted and disturbed by years

of

> excessive drinking) is tended to with appropriate medication.

>

> So, if some idjit wants to hold that I am not sober, let him. I

could give a

> rat's ass, because I feel really good for the first time in years.

My doctor

> is trustworthy, and because I am an alcoholic would not give me

Xanax if I

> begged and/or and bribed him (even tho I've never been addicted to

it)-- but

> he is very strongly supportive of my being on Paxil and Neurontin.

As they

> say in AA, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

>

> --Mona--

[Guest guest]

>

> Oh, man, did he explode! " THAT'S NOT THE SAME!!!!! " Wow! Don't

question

> the AA Cuppa Cawfee and the AA Cigarette! A Drug Is A Drug Is A

> Drug....unless it's the sacred Coffee and Cigarette...

....or the chocolate biscuits they hand out too. Wonder how many of

them know that chocolate was the first drug ever to be banned?

[Guest guest]

>

> Oh, man, did he explode! " THAT'S NOT THE SAME!!!!! " Wow! Don't

question

> the AA Cuppa Cawfee and the AA Cigarette! A Drug Is A Drug Is A

> Drug....unless it's the sacred Coffee and Cigarette...

....or the chocolate biscuits they hand out too. Wonder how many of

them know that chocolate was the first drug ever to be banned?

[Guest guest]

hi Mona

I accept that this sounds like a guy *abusing* Xanax, which would

suggest that at least somebody might want to, but it doesnt actually

show he *lost control* - he could have just decided that that was what

he wanted to do. The fact that a drug might be *capable* of being

abused doesnt mean it shouldnt be given to folks with the wits not

to abuse them. The " loss of control " theory for alcohol is dubious at

the best of times, but imo even more so for benzos. Also presumably

this guy as a benzo addict was supposed to never touch the things

again, so at very least he decided to break the advice to not take

them at all - which means that he's pretty likely not to give a damn

about taking the normal dose either. Of course, no doubt he was told

he *was* powerless over taking benzos, and hence had got a nice excuse

to get loaded on them.....

P.

>

> > loaded on them because they " lost control " and couldnt stop

cramming

> > them in their mouth?

>

> Yes. He was in rehab with me in 12/99, and going through the

tortures of the

> damned in withdrawal. We drunks were given Librium, and feeling

pretty good,

> but he got nothing, zero, zip. He was so anxious he was ready to

jump out of

> his skin. The first day he was paroled and became a day-patient, he

came to

> group totally loaded, and actually pulled out a small white envelope

*in

> *group and popped more Xanax into his mouth.

>

> --Mona--

[Guest guest]

hi Mona

I accept that this sounds like a guy *abusing* Xanax, which would

suggest that at least somebody might want to, but it doesnt actually

show he *lost control* - he could have just decided that that was what

he wanted to do. The fact that a drug might be *capable* of being

abused doesnt mean it shouldnt be given to folks with the wits not

to abuse them. The " loss of control " theory for alcohol is dubious at

the best of times, but imo even more so for benzos. Also presumably

this guy as a benzo addict was supposed to never touch the things

again, so at very least he decided to break the advice to not take

them at all - which means that he's pretty likely not to give a damn

about taking the normal dose either. Of course, no doubt he was told

he *was* powerless over taking benzos, and hence had got a nice excuse

to get loaded on them.....

P.

>

> > loaded on them because they " lost control " and couldnt stop

cramming

> > them in their mouth?

>

> Yes. He was in rehab with me in 12/99, and going through the

tortures of the

> damned in withdrawal. We drunks were given Librium, and feeling

pretty good,

> but he got nothing, zero, zip. He was so anxious he was ready to

jump out of

> his skin. The first day he was paroled and became a day-patient, he

came to

> group totally loaded, and actually pulled out a small white envelope

*in

> *group and popped more Xanax into his mouth.

>

> --Mona--

[Guest guest]

> I've pointed out the LSD use, and the depression, but the usual

response is

> that Bill was not working his program as well as Bob, who really got

it

> right.

LOL - So this guy, who WROTE the damn steps, apparently while having

some kind of automatic writing type experience, and after a personal

visitation from God telling him he was a free man, wasnt working his

program well??? I've little doubt tortured himself trying to

let go of his defects of self pity and self hatred (and infidelity),

and got nowhere. He quite clearly wrote that the found the steps no

use to him for dealing with depression. Also ol' Bobby might not have

suffered depression, but apparently he suffered terrible alcohol

cravings the rest of his life. Ok, he didnt drink again, but he

doesnt sound a very happy bunny. After drowning his sorrows for so

long his brain had probably learned to translate distress into alcohol

cravings, and the fact that that never changed suggests he may have

been in a worse way than , who at least experienced his painful

feelings for what they were. Also I understand one of Dr Bob's sons

didnt work his program well either, dying of alcoholism, and neither

did Ebby Thatcher, who first told of the Oxford Groups'

principles from which the steps are derived. If these worthies couldnt

" work the program well enough " - what bleedin' chance do the rest of

us have? Doesnt it rather suggest a different approach might be worth

examining?

P.

[Guest guest]

> I've pointed out the LSD use, and the depression, but the usual

response is

> that Bill was not working his program as well as Bob, who really got

it

> right.

LOL - So this guy, who WROTE the damn steps, apparently while having

some kind of automatic writing type experience, and after a personal

visitation from God telling him he was a free man, wasnt working his

program well??? I've little doubt tortured himself trying to

let go of his defects of self pity and self hatred (and infidelity),

and got nowhere. He quite clearly wrote that the found the steps no

use to him for dealing with depression. Also ol' Bobby might not have

suffered depression, but apparently he suffered terrible alcohol

cravings the rest of his life. Ok, he didnt drink again, but he

doesnt sound a very happy bunny. After drowning his sorrows for so

long his brain had probably learned to translate distress into alcohol

cravings, and the fact that that never changed suggests he may have

been in a worse way than , who at least experienced his painful

feelings for what they were. Also I understand one of Dr Bob's sons

didnt work his program well either, dying of alcoholism, and neither

did Ebby Thatcher, who first told of the Oxford Groups'

principles from which the steps are derived. If these worthies couldnt

" work the program well enough " - what bleedin' chance do the rest of

us have? Doesnt it rather suggest a different approach might be worth

examining?

P.

[Guest guest]

>

> Such a person is beyond reason, and I don't much try anymore.

>

> --Mona--

Normally, I try to resist cross posting or commenting on individuals

elsewhere, since they cannot answer... but this guy is just *so* good

for a laugh - in a perverse way. My *impression* is he has around two

years in meetings, one of which (by his definition!) " sober " . The Big

Book online has a lot to answer for, in my opinion :-) Another thing

that comes across strikingly to me is that self-styled individualists

and moderates are so " AA " just under the surface. I used to subscribe

to the old Sodom and Gemorrah argument for believing that AA should

continue to exist for those who believed... that's changed a lot now.

I am really not convinced that (many of) these characters have been

around AA that long - Or wittingly or otherwise they are presenting

an untrue picture. What's with this: " I don't go to meetings " or: " I

don't take the Steps " , coupled with: " Noone ever says anything in MY

group " . I must simply presume these *heretical* activites are limited

to online - Certainly, in the groups that I belonged to, conformity

on these issues was strongly " enforced " ... or you " paid the price " .

Mack

[Guest guest]

>

> Such a person is beyond reason, and I don't much try anymore.

>

> --Mona--

Normally, I try to resist cross posting or commenting on individuals

elsewhere, since they cannot answer... but this guy is just *so* good

for a laugh - in a perverse way. My *impression* is he has around two

years in meetings, one of which (by his definition!) " sober " . The Big

Book online has a lot to answer for, in my opinion :-) Another thing

that comes across strikingly to me is that self-styled individualists

and moderates are so " AA " just under the surface. I used to subscribe

to the old Sodom and Gemorrah argument for believing that AA should

continue to exist for those who believed... that's changed a lot now.

I am really not convinced that (many of) these characters have been

around AA that long - Or wittingly or otherwise they are presenting

an untrue picture. What's with this: " I don't go to meetings " or: " I

don't take the Steps " , coupled with: " Noone ever says anything in MY

group " . I must simply presume these *heretical* activites are limited

to online - Certainly, in the groups that I belonged to, conformity

on these issues was strongly " enforced " ... or you " paid the price " .

Mack

[Guest guest]

> ...or the chocolate biscuits they hand out too. Wonder how many of

> them know that chocolate was the first drug ever to be banned?

Hi Pete, Reminds me of my last great activity for the " fellowship " .

When I'd fallen out with the religion etc. and I no longer wanted to

actively represent AA from the podium, I opted for the service

of " tea-maker " . God, is that an unenviable task! I thought (in my

ignorance) that they might actually *prefer* " Decaf " or non-fattening

stuff to nibble. Boy was I wrong! Hardly a meeting passed without the

buggers winging. Finally, my " sponser " started to *duplicate* my

activities, bringing along his " descent " brand of tea, his " better "

buiscuits *and* insisted on announcing that fact before each feckin'

meeting! It seems funny now, but not so at the time :-)

Thank you for letting me vent on a really important issue!

Mack

[Guest guest]

> ...or the chocolate biscuits they hand out too. Wonder how many of

> them know that chocolate was the first drug ever to be banned?

Hi Pete, Reminds me of my last great activity for the " fellowship " .

When I'd fallen out with the religion etc. and I no longer wanted to

actively represent AA from the podium, I opted for the service

of " tea-maker " . God, is that an unenviable task! I thought (in my

ignorance) that they might actually *prefer* " Decaf " or non-fattening

stuff to nibble. Boy was I wrong! Hardly a meeting passed without the

buggers winging. Finally, my " sponser " started to *duplicate* my

activities, bringing along his " descent " brand of tea, his " better "

buiscuits *and* insisted on announcing that fact before each feckin'

meeting! It seems funny now, but not so at the time :-)

Thank you for letting me vent on a really important issue!

Mack

[Guest guest]

> Ive now seen a lovely Gp who agreed to put me on this under her

care , and I

> am thrilled to bits with the result .

> It wont take any problems away but Ill be able to tackle them

without the

> anxiety , which made me run away from them in the past .

> sorry this is so long .

> I have never abused prescription drugs , even though I have easy

access to

> them .

>

I am glad you are getting so much success, and in conjunction with

your GP. With that wonderful thing hinesight(!), my worst drinking

bouts seem to have followed " unsollicited " changes to my scripts <g>.

It's ironic, but I'm now on precisely the same drug regime that I was

initially given at the age of eighteen - and I cope with *consumate*

ease. In a sense, I perhaps " abuse " (my) propanolol (a beta blocker)

for it's anti-anxiety property, though effectively I am now " legit " ,

having been through an alcohol induced(?) MI some time ago. Naw, I'm

not that bitter and jaded, it is nevertheless a bit of a shame about

the intermediate thirty years or so of my life :-/

I too " couldn't " take antabuse... in my case, probably a wise move!

The problem seems that some of these drugs are now classified as " Old

Fashioned " and Lord knows the opinion of this " alcoholic " were rarely

taken into account. It's (imo) unfortunate that *we* are simply not

trusted where there is *potential* for presciption drug abuse, based

on " alcoholic lore " . As you point out, ain't necessarily so! I asked

my GP to delete references to " alcoholic " in my records, since I'm no

loger one and don't like to be tarred with the brush. He might just,

he's a good sort - (un)usually helpful and willing to learn! ;-)

For me it's so invidious this AA anti-med thing. I know I can't hack

it without mine but I know that *with* them, life's a (relative! :-)

breeze. I think the most tragic thing I ever saw in an AA meeting was

this poor woman trying so desperately to relate her life story in

front of a meeting, thanking God and the assembled for her " happy "

drug and alcohol free life. The poor lady could hardly *speak*, she

was shaking so... Now that, I could relate to! :-/

For me, without " anxiety " , alcohol becomes largely irrelevant. And,

Yep, it's a lovely sunny day here too :-)

Mack

[Guest guest]

> I wouldn't say using anti-depressants is 'not sober' (you can be

using any

> drug, and still be sober, depending on how much you took) But I

would say

> you are not clean and chemical free if you are using any substance,

> including aspirin, coffee, cigarettes, ibuprofen, whatever.

Hmmm, " UnClean " eh? Wait, I'll get my Bell! :-/

Actually, I didn't get on too well with antidepressants, but that was

a personal thing. What if my *normal* brain chemistry is simply not

like yours? What if a drug I take usefully replaces or stimulates a

non-existant or low-supply neuro-transmitter (whatever? :-) that is

needed for any " normal " existance. Am I to be branded as not-clean,

chemically dependant? I try to live as " drug-free " as possible, now,

but that doesn't mean I'm going to deny myself the benefit from any

useful treatment on someone's definition. Unclean? Uncool, IMO. :-)

Mack

[Guest guest]

> I wouldn't say using anti-depressants is 'not sober' (you can be

using any

> drug, and still be sober, depending on how much you took) But I

would say

> you are not clean and chemical free if you are using any substance,

> including aspirin, coffee, cigarettes, ibuprofen, whatever.

Hmmm, " UnClean " eh? Wait, I'll get my Bell! :-/

Actually, I didn't get on too well with antidepressants, but that was

a personal thing. What if my *normal* brain chemistry is simply not

like yours? What if a drug I take usefully replaces or stimulates a

non-existant or low-supply neuro-transmitter (whatever? :-) that is

needed for any " normal " existance. Am I to be branded as not-clean,

chemically dependant? I try to live as " drug-free " as possible, now,

but that doesn't mean I'm going to deny myself the benefit from any

useful treatment on someone's definition. Unclean? Uncool, IMO. :-)

Mack

[Guest guest]

> I wouldn't say using anti-depressants is 'not sober' (you can be

using any

> drug, and still be sober, depending on how much you took) But I

would say

> you are not clean and chemical free if you are using any substance,

> including aspirin, coffee, cigarettes, ibuprofen, whatever.

Hmmm, " UnClean " eh? Wait, I'll get my Bell! :-/

Actually, I didn't get on too well with antidepressants, but that was

a personal thing. What if my *normal* brain chemistry is simply not

like yours? What if a drug I take usefully replaces or stimulates a

non-existant or low-supply neuro-transmitter (whatever? :-) that is

needed for any " normal " existance. Am I to be branded as not-clean,

chemically dependant? I try to live as " drug-free " as possible, now,

but that doesn't mean I'm going to deny myself the benefit from any

useful treatment on someone's definition. Unclean? Uncool, IMO. :-)

Mack

[Guest guest]

What, and miss the fun of step 9? I got 9th stepped by a guy once. I

saw him in a restaurant and he started stepping before I could get

away. He cried and went on and on. It was quite a spectacle.

Apparently it worked very well for him, though. I saw him a year

later in the grocery store, and he didn't even know who I was. If

there was anything more irritating than being stepped at, it was that.

Joan

>

> If one is " restored to sanity " in step 2, then what more

> does one need? Sanity should do the trick. Go home now

> folks, you are sane.

>

> >From: " Bob Marshall " <bmarshall@s...>

> >Reply-To: 12-step-free@y...

> >To: <12-step-free@y...>

> >Subject: Re: Re: Mona ... Anti-depressants

> >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:36:21 -0700

> >

> >----- Original Message -----

> >From: <MonaHolland@a...>

> >

> > > Well, I'll tell you the gist of what I've read, been told by

certain AA

> > > members, and my doctor. The basic schtick is this: alcoholism

is a

> > > " spiritual disease, " and as such, if one works the 12 Steps --

> >particularly

> > > the 4th and 5th -- one becomes spiritually whole and " restored "

to

> >sanity,

> >as

> > > per the 2nd Step. One AA member in the about. alcohol forum

recently

> >posted

> > > that those who do a good 4th Step (the fearless moral

inventory) recover

> >from

> > > any mental illness, including schizophrenia, depression, or

Obsessive

> > > Compulsive Disorder. Anything.

> > >

> > > These AA feel that taking psychiatric meds merely " suppresses "

the

> >symptoms

> > > of a spiritual disease, and prevents the steps from working

their

> > " miracle. "

> > > One is to let one's God, or Higher Power, cure those illnesses,

and not

> > > medicate them, as we once did with alcohol, goes this line of

> > " reasoning. "

> >

> > So much for the claims that Bill W was sober since

the 'thirties,

> >since he dropped acid in the 'fifties.

> > Did you point out to the AA member that Bill also

complained of

> >depression -- into the early 'sixties, I believe? How the hell

does

> >anybody

> >know what a " good " fourth step is, if the guy who invented it

apparently

> >took decades to get it right?

> >

> >-- Bob

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

What, and miss the fun of step 9? I got 9th stepped by a guy once. I

saw him in a restaurant and he started stepping before I could get

away. He cried and went on and on. It was quite a spectacle.

Apparently it worked very well for him, though. I saw him a year

later in the grocery store, and he didn't even know who I was. If

there was anything more irritating than being stepped at, it was that.

Joan

>

> If one is " restored to sanity " in step 2, then what more

> does one need? Sanity should do the trick. Go home now

> folks, you are sane.

>

> >From: " Bob Marshall " <bmarshall@s...>

> >Reply-To: 12-step-free@y...

> >To: <12-step-free@y...>

> >Subject: Re: Re: Mona ... Anti-depressants

> >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:36:21 -0700

> >

> >----- Original Message -----

> >From: <MonaHolland@a...>

> >

> > > Well, I'll tell you the gist of what I've read, been told by

certain AA

> > > members, and my doctor. The basic schtick is this: alcoholism

is a

> > > " spiritual disease, " and as such, if one works the 12 Steps --

> >particularly

> > > the 4th and 5th -- one becomes spiritually whole and " restored "

to

> >sanity,

> >as

> > > per the 2nd Step. One AA member in the about. alcohol forum

recently

> >posted

> > > that those who do a good 4th Step (the fearless moral

inventory) recover

> >from

> > > any mental illness, including schizophrenia, depression, or

Obsessive

> > > Compulsive Disorder. Anything.

> > >

> > > These AA feel that taking psychiatric meds merely " suppresses "

the

> >symptoms

> > > of a spiritual disease, and prevents the steps from working

their

> > " miracle. "

> > > One is to let one's God, or Higher Power, cure those illnesses,

and not

> > > medicate them, as we once did with alcohol, goes this line of

> > " reasoning. "

> >

> > So much for the claims that Bill W was sober since

the 'thirties,

> >since he dropped acid in the 'fifties.

> > Did you point out to the AA member that Bill also

complained of

> >depression -- into the early 'sixties, I believe? How the hell

does

> >anybody

> >know what a " good " fourth step is, if the guy who invented it

apparently

> >took decades to get it right?

> >

> >-- Bob

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

What, and miss the fun of step 9? I got 9th stepped by a guy once. I

saw him in a restaurant and he started stepping before I could get

away. He cried and went on and on. It was quite a spectacle.

Apparently it worked very well for him, though. I saw him a year

later in the grocery store, and he didn't even know who I was. If

there was anything more irritating than being stepped at, it was that.

Joan

>

> If one is " restored to sanity " in step 2, then what more

> does one need? Sanity should do the trick. Go home now

> folks, you are sane.

>

> >From: " Bob Marshall " <bmarshall@s...>

> >Reply-To: 12-step-free@y...

> >To: <12-step-free@y...>

> >Subject: Re: Re: Mona ... Anti-depressants

> >Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 20:36:21 -0700

> >

> >----- Original Message -----

> >From: <MonaHolland@a...>

> >

> > > Well, I'll tell you the gist of what I've read, been told by

certain AA

> > > members, and my doctor. The basic schtick is this: alcoholism

is a

> > > " spiritual disease, " and as such, if one works the 12 Steps --

> >particularly

> > > the 4th and 5th -- one becomes spiritually whole and " restored "

to

> >sanity,

> >as

> > > per the 2nd Step. One AA member in the about. alcohol forum

recently

> >posted

> > > that those who do a good 4th Step (the fearless moral

inventory) recover

> >from

> > > any mental illness, including schizophrenia, depression, or

Obsessive

> > > Compulsive Disorder. Anything.

> > >

> > > These AA feel that taking psychiatric meds merely " suppresses "

the

> >symptoms

> > > of a spiritual disease, and prevents the steps from working

their

> > " miracle. "

> > > One is to let one's God, or Higher Power, cure those illnesses,

and not

> > > medicate them, as we once did with alcohol, goes this line of

> > " reasoning. "

> >

> > So much for the claims that Bill W was sober since

the 'thirties,

> >since he dropped acid in the 'fifties.

> > Did you point out to the AA member that Bill also

complained of

> >depression -- into the early 'sixties, I believe? How the hell

does

> >anybody

> >know what a " good " fourth step is, if the guy who invented it

apparently

> >took decades to get it right?

> >

> >-- Bob

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " " <ghhws1@h...>

>

> > Oh, man, did he explode! " THAT'S NOT THE SAME!!!!! " Wow! Don't

question

> > the AA Cuppa Cawfee and the AA Cigarette! A Drug Is A Drug Is A

> > Drug....unless it's the sacred Coffee and Cigarette...

>

> Sounds like the " Church " of $cientology. They're rabidly

anti-drug,

> although L. Ron Hubbard's ongoing drug use (which led to the

church's

> teachings) was " research, " and most members smoke like chimneys.

>

> -- Bob

Here are some stats from the book " Why Marijuana Should Be Legal. "

This also goes back to the thread awhile back about that topic and the

relative harmlessness of marijuana.

p. 58

" DRUG DEATHS IN THE UNITED STATES IN A TYPICAL YEAR

Tobacco kills about 390,000

Alcohol kills about 80,000

Secondhand tobacco smoke kills about 50,000

Cocaine kills about 2,200

Heroin kills about 2,000

Aspirin kills about 2,000

Marijuana kills 0

All illegal drugs combined kill about 4,500 people per year, or about

one percent of the number killed by alcohol and tobacco. Tobacco

kills more people each year than all of the people killed by all of

the illegal drugs in the last century (NIDA Research Monographs). "

And didn't I hear that Bill himself died of tobacco-related

causes? I can't remember where I heard that - maybe here.

This was one of the chinks in the AA wall for me. I became utterly

convinced that tobacco was THE most dangerous and harmful drug it was

possible to use and seeing all those people just sucking them down

took it's toll. Some meetings were so bad that I literally couldn't

sit through them. But they don't see the slightest thing wrong with

this picture.

Hicks

[Guest guest]

> I am convinced that's a case of " post hoc, ergo propter

hoc " or " B

> follows A, therefore A causes B. "

> When I have the occasional dealcoholized beer (Clausthauler

by

> Heinekin, and St. i Girl are both pretty good) or glass of wine

(why

> can't they make a good red), I find that I never have more than two

and,

> frankly, wouldn't want to drink the real stuff because the memory of

> consequences of my alcohol abuse make the thought of being under the

> influence most unpleasant.

> Of course, if I was " powerless, " the minute amount of

alcohol in the

> stuff (about the same as a glass of orange juice) would be enough

to set off

> that damn disease!

>

> -- Bob

I'll have to check out some of these non-alcoholic drinks. In some

ways, I was fortunate(?) that my " alcoholic " drinking had so little

variety. So as long as I'm not " forced " into buying *that* stuff -

and in *quantity* I reckon I'm fairly safe!

I believe the idea of getting used to having *some* contact with

alcohol (in my case look-alikes :-) is important and I conciously

don't go overboard if I see that my food or medication contains small

amounts of the alcohol. I'm grimly reminded how some AAs related how

they took (caustic) emetics when they found out they had accidently

consumed alcohol.

I knew one lady who seems to have a permanently ongoing " binge and

purge " relationship with alcohol over years, which seemed to be very

much tied up with a confessional and forgiveness aspect of meetings.

It's also rather sad to watch " mixed " marriages break up when the AA

party cannot take part in family gatherings, go on holiday or even

visit a restaurant, because of this acquired fear of wet places.

So much is in the mind... I saw a recent report that the quality of

many street drugs was so inferior that addicts were getting high on

substances with almost no active constituant. Nevertheless, the

removal from an environment must be of some importance otherwise the

US would have been overrun by addicts, following the Viet-Nam war?

I see that one (non-XA?) drug rehab actually takes patients through

the act of preparing for a fix, but stopping short of the actual act.

This gets people used to the process and then not following up on it.

Seems very sensible to me - A big thing seems to be anticipation...

Mack

[Guest guest]

> I am convinced that's a case of " post hoc, ergo propter

hoc " or " B

> follows A, therefore A causes B. "

> When I have the occasional dealcoholized beer (Clausthauler

by

> Heinekin, and St. i Girl are both pretty good) or glass of wine

(why

> can't they make a good red), I find that I never have more than two

and,

> frankly, wouldn't want to drink the real stuff because the memory of

> consequences of my alcohol abuse make the thought of being under the

> influence most unpleasant.

> Of course, if I was " powerless, " the minute amount of

alcohol in the

> stuff (about the same as a glass of orange juice) would be enough

to set off

> that damn disease!

>

> -- Bob

I'll have to check out some of these non-alcoholic drinks. In some

ways, I was fortunate(?) that my " alcoholic " drinking had so little

variety. So as long as I'm not " forced " into buying *that* stuff -

and in *quantity* I reckon I'm fairly safe!

I believe the idea of getting used to having *some* contact with

alcohol (in my case look-alikes :-) is important and I conciously

don't go overboard if I see that my food or medication contains small

amounts of the alcohol. I'm grimly reminded how some AAs related how

they took (caustic) emetics when they found out they had accidently

consumed alcohol.

I knew one lady who seems to have a permanently ongoing " binge and

purge " relationship with alcohol over years, which seemed to be very

much tied up with a confessional and forgiveness aspect of meetings.

It's also rather sad to watch " mixed " marriages break up when the AA

party cannot take part in family gatherings, go on holiday or even

visit a restaurant, because of this acquired fear of wet places.

So much is in the mind... I saw a recent report that the quality of

many street drugs was so inferior that addicts were getting high on

substances with almost no active constituant. Nevertheless, the

removal from an environment must be of some importance otherwise the

US would have been overrun by addicts, following the Viet-Nam war?

I see that one (non-XA?) drug rehab actually takes patients through

the act of preparing for a fix, but stopping short of the actual act.

This gets people used to the process and then not following up on it.

Seems very sensible to me - A big thing seems to be anticipation...

Mack

[Guest guest]

The medical board here treats doctors who drink very harshly. There

was one doc not too far from here who was diagnosed as an addict (he

was diagnosed as bipolar subsequently, and the consensus was that he

had been self-medicating to smooth out his highs. However, he had

never in the past abused alcohol). He did, however, take Nyquil while

he had a probational license. He was randomly checked the next day,

and they found two nanograms of alcohol in his urine. The board

concluded he had been drinking, and his license was consequently in

jeopardy.

Two nanograms? These were doctors, and they apparently didn't know

what a nanogram is. Also, they didn't stop to inquire what the level

would have been if he had had one cocktail the evening before.

> I'll have to check out some of these non-alcoholic drinks. In some

> ways, I was fortunate(?) that my " alcoholic " drinking had so little

> variety. So as long as I'm not " forced " into buying *that* stuff -

> and in *quantity* I reckon I'm fairly safe!

>

> I believe the idea of getting used to having *some* contact with

> alcohol (in my case look-alikes :-) is important and I conciously

> don't go overboard if I see that my food or medication contains

small

> amounts of the alcohol. I'm grimly reminded how some AAs related how

> they took (caustic) emetics when they found out they had accidently

> consumed alcohol.

>

> I knew one lady who seems to have a permanently ongoing " binge and

> purge " relationship with alcohol over years, which seemed to be very

> much tied up with a confessional and forgiveness aspect of meetings.

> It's also rather sad to watch " mixed " marriages break up when the AA

> party cannot take part in family gatherings, go on holiday or even

> visit a restaurant, because of this acquired fear of wet places.

>

> So much is in the mind... I saw a recent report that the quality of

> many street drugs was so inferior that addicts were getting high on

> substances with almost no active constituant. Nevertheless, the

> removal from an environment must be of some importance otherwise the

> US would have been overrun by addicts, following the Viet-Nam war?

>

> I see that one (non-XA?) drug rehab actually takes patients through

> the act of preparing for a fix, but stopping short of the actual

act.

> This gets people used to the process and then not following up on

it.

> Seems very sensible to me - A big thing seems to be anticipation...

>

> Mack

[Guest guest]

The medical board here treats doctors who drink very harshly. There

was one doc not too far from here who was diagnosed as an addict (he

was diagnosed as bipolar subsequently, and the consensus was that he

had been self-medicating to smooth out his highs. However, he had

never in the past abused alcohol). He did, however, take Nyquil while

he had a probational license. He was randomly checked the next day,

and they found two nanograms of alcohol in his urine. The board

concluded he had been drinking, and his license was consequently in

jeopardy.

Two nanograms? These were doctors, and they apparently didn't know

what a nanogram is. Also, they didn't stop to inquire what the level

would have been if he had had one cocktail the evening before.

> I'll have to check out some of these non-alcoholic drinks. In some

> ways, I was fortunate(?) that my " alcoholic " drinking had so little

> variety. So as long as I'm not " forced " into buying *that* stuff -

> and in *quantity* I reckon I'm fairly safe!

>

> I believe the idea of getting used to having *some* contact with

> alcohol (in my case look-alikes :-) is important and I conciously

> don't go overboard if I see that my food or medication contains

small

> amounts of the alcohol. I'm grimly reminded how some AAs related how

> they took (caustic) emetics when they found out they had accidently

> consumed alcohol.

>

> I knew one lady who seems to have a permanently ongoing " binge and

> purge " relationship with alcohol over years, which seemed to be very

> much tied up with a confessional and forgiveness aspect of meetings.

> It's also rather sad to watch " mixed " marriages break up when the AA

> party cannot take part in family gatherings, go on holiday or even

> visit a restaurant, because of this acquired fear of wet places.

>

> So much is in the mind... I saw a recent report that the quality of

> many street drugs was so inferior that addicts were getting high on

> substances with almost no active constituant. Nevertheless, the

> removal from an environment must be of some importance otherwise the

> US would have been overrun by addicts, following the Viet-Nam war?

>

> I see that one (non-XA?) drug rehab actually takes patients through

> the act of preparing for a fix, but stopping short of the actual

act.

> This gets people used to the process and then not following up on

it.

> Seems very sensible to me - A big thing seems to be anticipation...

>

> Mack