Trumps is in!

[MrPots]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Thank you

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by noonereal

logic, common sense (experience) and informal education (I really am a boring dolt in real life who prefers not to leave the house and reads some of the driest most boring books ever written... slowly so I can absorb them... very slowly (lol))

This is not a revolutionary concept it's just that AA became mainstream.

The first article I googled, https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...he-only-option

and I'll tell you something else... the idea that heroin is so hard to get off of is bullshit... what makes it so difficult is how we go about it. Methadone on the other hand is a bear to get off. Yet we take heroin addicts and turns them into methadone dependents. Brilliant, freakin' brilliant.


This conversation reminds me of all the year I railed against ADD drugs. I got the same shit. Everyone knew better because they were TAUGHT this or that. The doctor said... the school said... Well, people are now catching on that it's insane... decades later...

Sorry John, I am over explaining why I know what I know. This is on me. my bad, I own it. I take responsibility. Tons I don't know. Tons. That should make barb and don happy to hear. But this is not that subject.

I have a useless degree in Economics yet I would not run to myself for financial advise.

I can tell you about doctors too if you like?

So, you have no relevant experience, expertise or factual basis for your pronouncements regarding alcohol and drug addiction, just common sense and Google.

[MrPots]

That's more than T-rump and T-rump is running for president......

[barbara]

Originally Posted by noonereal

Barbara

It both makes sense and is FAR superior a way to withdrawal. Period.



I get that you have always been taught that alcoholics are helpless pups blah blah blah... Do YOu think I was raised under a rock?



It is, in fact seldom the case that genetics make one unable to not stop after a drink or two. It is the rare exception. The AA model is widely adapted here but not elsewhere where it is seen for what it is. Extreme and unhelpful to many.



BTW, this is all an offshoot to my point, my point being that the healthy thing to do with one remaining bottle of liquor, if someone has become physically dependent is to use it to ween them.

I haven't been "taught" anything in regards to alcoholism.... My learning comes from life experience. While I've never been a drinker, many of the people in my life have been.

continued discussion regarding addiction is probably off topic on this thread so we will just have to agree to disagree.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by noonereal

logic, common sense (experience) and informal education (I really am a boring dolt in real life who prefers not to leave the house and reads some of the driest most boring books ever written... slowly so I can absorb them... very slowly (lol))

This is not a revolutionary concept it's just that AA became mainstream.

The first article I googled, https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...he-only-option

and I'll tell you something else... the idea that heroin is so hard to get off of is bullshit... what makes it so difficult is how we go about it. Methadone on the other hand is a bear to get off. Yet we take heroin addicts and turns them into methadone dependents. Brilliant, freakin' brilliant.


This conversation reminds me of all the year I railed against ADD drugs. I got the same shit. Everyone knew better because they were TAUGHT this or that. The doctor said... the school said... Well, people are now catching on that it's insane... decades later...

Sorry John, I am over explaining why I know what I know. This is on me. my bad, I own it. I take responsibility. Tons I don't know. Tons. That should make barb and don happy to hear. But this is not that subject.

I have a useless degree in Economics yet I would not run to myself for financial advise.

I can tell you about doctors too if you like?

We may be talking past each other.

If you have the liquor locked up, the drinker has no car keys, and you otherwise think you can safely physically make it impossible for them to drink more than you say, you might be able to make their initial move to zero consumption more comfortable due to being less abrupt. That much I'll give you. Hardly seems worth the trouble to me, though, unless you're talking about someone so hooked they face serious physical withdrawal symptoms--shakes and DTs.

In any case, I don't think anyone with a serious alcohol habit can ever be stable at a level other than zero. The idea has to be to go to zero and stay there.

Here's one guy on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D4aCJ-7FgA

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Boreas

So, you have no relevant experience, expertise or factual basis for your pronouncements regarding alcohol and drug addiction, just common sense and Google.

I said I had experience, I also have expertise, albeit not academia validation and I don't dwell in make believe. I did not and will not offer a bibliography.

I see you chose to dispute my argument by attacking my credibility, ignoring the fact that even if rendered not credible, that is not proof that the theory is not valid.

So, let's go back.

What is it you dispute, specifically?

Are you trying to tell me that physical addition, to anything, is best done by immediate abstinence? That a continued lower doses that allows the body to adjust slowly to life again without the substance depended on is not preferable?

[Pio1980]

Withdrawl shock is potentially fatal, especially unmonitored.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

We may be talking past each other.

If you have the liquor locked up, the drinker has no car keys, and you otherwise think you can safely physically make it impossible for them to drink more than you say, you might be able to make their initial move to zero consumption more comfortable due to being less abrupt. That much I'll give you. Hardly seems worth the trouble to me, though, unless you're talking about someone so hooked they face serious physical withdrawal symptoms--shakes and DTs.

In any case, I don't think anyone with a serious alcohol habit can ever be stable at a level other than zero. The idea has to be to go to zero and stay there.

Here's one guy on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1D4aCJ-7FgA

I am not addressing the issue of a person not wanting to stop drinking. I was speaking to the best use of one last bottle of alcohol to someone physically addicted.

and I disagree that someone who has abused alcohol and has been labeled an alcoholic by the AA organization can never drink again without being a fall down drunk again.

I apologize with my lack of patience on this but it is frustrating to me how people just accept past practice as best without ever questioning. How people accept titles for knowledge or correctness on a subject...

peace brother

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

Withdrawl shock is potentially fatal, especially unmonitored.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

hard for me to believe this is being disputed here

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by noonereal

I am not addressing the issue of a person not wanting to stop drinking. I was speaking to the best use of one last bottle of alcohol to someone physically addicted.

and I disagree that someone who has abused alcohol and has been labeled an alcoholic by the AA organization can never drink again without being a fall down drunk again.

I apologize with my lack of patience on this but it is frustrating to me how people just accept past practice as best without ever questioning. How people accept titles for knowledge or correctness on a subject...

peace brother

Using the last bottle as you suggest can and frequently does lead to an alcoholic seizure.

AA doesn't label anyone anything. Determining whether someone is an alcoholic is something they must work out for themselves.

There are doubtlessly some people around who can return to drinking and experience no problems but they are a very small minority and probably fall into the category of the "problem drinkers" your article mentions as opposed to people who are alcohol dependent, IOW addicts. Different problem, different solutions - except that total abstinence, if you can manage it, always works whereas trying to drink in moderation rarely does. So, where's the percentage in taking that risk?

It's empirical, ed. Abstinence works.