A farewell to this blog

Back in 2014, one Lance Dodes posted a book claiming a 5% success rate for Alcoholics Anonymous. The numbers in this book were widely criticized by treatment experts at the time, but because of the outrage effect of social media, where something which generates anger and outrage is more widely shared and remembered than accurate information, it was Dodes’s 5% figure which got a lot of traction back then.

These numbers were never considered accurate by treatment experts, but it took six years for the numbers to be definitely discredited with the 2020 Cochrane Review of Alcoholics Anonymous, which saw a 42% success rate for AA (number of alcoholics still sober one year after treatment).

Since Cochrane reviews are considered the gold standard of medical studies, this review got widely praised in the mainstream press. The mainstream thinking now is that Alcoholics Anonymous is quite effective for some alcoholics.

This blog existed to counter the destructive thinking that AA has a low success rate, a thought which was in mainstream consciousness in the mid-2010s. Now that the 2020 Cochrane study is out, there is no longer a need for me to take a deep dive in to medical studies to demonstrate why Alcoholics Anonymous is effective for some alcoholics.

One of the better articles to help people understand what the medical reviews are saying is from 2014 at Slate Star Codex; its information is dated, of course, now that we have rock solid evidence of AA efficacy, but it is a good read and introduction to the medical science and why it was so hard to find solid evidence for AA efficacy.

I would restart this blog again if inaccurate claims about AA efficacy made it back to the mainstream press, but I find that unlikely in light of the latest Cochrane review on the matter.

As I type these words, we are in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is a challenging time for everyone, and I am glad that AA has been able to adapt to online meetings so alcoholics can still experience fellowship and recovery.

My final words are this: For people who do not like AA, other treatments, such as SMART recovery, appear to be just as effective. Just get better, whether or not it’s in the rooms or outside the rooms of AA.

Disqus is going out of style

In the mid-2010s, back when “AA has a 5% success rate” was all over the press, the commenting platform everyone was using was Disqus, a platform which thrived on outrage culture. Naturally, the kinds of people who claim Alcoholics Anonymous does not work were more interested in spreading outrage than in spreading objective truth, so this was a hotbed of “AA does not work” nonsense.

Here, in 2020, most platforms have moved beyond using Disqus. To note:

• The Fix no longer uses Disqus, and, indeed, no longer has comment sections for their articles.
• The Atlantic no longer uses Disqus. Like The Fix, they simply no longer have a comments section.
• A number of regional newspapers no longer have Disqus comments.

The only place with significant discussion of Alcoholics Anonymous who still uses Disqus is Patheos, and, not surprisingly, there are still articles, mostly in the Atheist section of that site, which have comments that parrot the same outdated, inaccurate nonsense about AA’s efficacy.

The only other place besides Disqus comments where I have seen people still parrot claims that AA has a low success rate is on Reddit, which is a well known hotbed of outrage-inducing inaccurate information.