Ad for Idea Lobby blogger Emily Badger
Friday, February 10, 2012   |  Miller-McCune Homepage

close this window


We encourage you to share any articles or material you find on Miller-McCune.com with friends and colleagues. Please fill in the fields below with the name and e-mail address. Then fill in the same information for you. Miller-McCune will not keep any information about you or your friend, and the e-mail your friends receive will appear to have come from your e-mail address. The asterisk (*) denotes a required field.


From:





To:







Health

July 24, 2009

Addiction Advances Haven’t Made AA Obsolete — Yet

Although they approach the challenge of addiction differently from scientists, 12-step programs still have a therapeutic role in helping human beings.


| PRINT | SHARE

Alcoholics Anonymous may have pioneered the concept of alcoholism as a disease, but will scientific research that proves the point eventually make AA obsolete?

Studies that reveal brain and genetic links to addiction seem to suggest that future cures may come in pill boxes or, even better, in vials of vaccine that prevent it to begin with. Surely, that could impact 12-step programs that have been the prototype of recovery regimes for three quarters of a century.

It’s an intriguing issue invited by imaging studies that have identified differences in addicts’ brains, including a 2007 British report headed by Cambridge nueroscientist Jeff Dalley that showed rats with reduced dopamine receptors are more likely to become compulsive users of cocaine. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter associated with emotion and motivation. If the same deficiency identified in rats is found in humans, scientists say, some of us are born with a predisposition to addiction.

Two million alcoholics in 180 countries around the world are members of AA, according to its Web site. There are countless others who attend meetings of Narcotics Anonymous and Cocaine Anonymous, and other progeny of AA. So, what’s the implication of this research on these vast networks of fellowship recovery programs?

Not as much as you’d think.

“We’ve had a great deal of emphasis on the neuroscience of addiction. Some people mistakenly think that would mean there’s no role for social support in recovery,” said Wilson Compton, senior scientist at the National Institute on Drug Abuse, a department of the National Institutes of Health.

While current and future medications may improve treatment of addiction by blocking intoxication, easing withdrawal symptoms and inhibiting cravings, they’ll supplement 12-step programs rather than replace them.

“We don’t have the kind of medications that turn on or turn off a disease like alcoholism or drug addiction,” Compton said. “And I don’t think we will in the foreseeable future have such a medication.”

Medication can help people make the changes necessary to manage their addiction, and for many of those people, “recovery support services are absolutely essential,” Compton said.

When AA was founded in 1935, it embraced the theory proposed two centuries earlier by Dr. Benjamin Rush: that alcoholism was a biological malady beyond the control of the addict. Dr. Elvin Jellinek confirmed the theory in a landmark 1960 book, Disease Concept of Alcoholism. The concept was subsequently endorsed by major medical associations and eventually became conventional wisdom — though it’s not without its fierce critics.

But AA’s disease model was as much ideology as biology, meant as counterpoint to the popular belief that alcoholism was a moral lapse or a failure of will. The sophisticated studies of today are attempting to identify the actual mechanism of the disease, which reinforces the original AA model but also raises hopes for a “cure” through medical intervention — false hopes, it appears, at this point.

Mark Willenbring, director of treatment and recovery research at the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, said the brain studies need to be “taken with a grain of salt.”

“Most of what you hear are extrapolations from studies on rodents. Rodents are not humans. And there are no rodent alcoholics. In the wild, you don’t see rodents being drunk or snorting cocaine.”

Not to mention that the research, as presented in the mainstream media — consider the portrayal of a synapse that many of us have seen — “grossly oversimplifies the brain,” Willenbring said, leading to false assumptions about the role of genetics and brain structure in the treatment of addiction.

“There are more neuronal connections in the brain than there are stars in the universe.

“The most important functions of the brain can’t be directly perceived because they’re a result of the interaction of multiple, probably hundreds of different places in the brain all at once. Our ability to model these things is extremely primitive,” Willenbring said.

Nor are there one or two abnormal genes that “cause” addiction that could simply be fixed.

“People tend to think there’s a gene or a couple of genes and if you have those, it’s determinative. It’s not determinative,” Willenbring said.

“The genetics are very complex involving hundreds of genes, each contributing a tiny bit to the overall variability in expression.”

Willenbring emphasizes that the environment plays a crucial role in determining whether genes will be expressed at all. And life experience also impacts the brain itself, he said, changing brain structure and function in ways that impact behavior, which helps explain why interventions such as AA can be effective even without other treatment.

“We learn in various ways and one of them is by seeing somebody else do something. There’s a specific neurological system called mirror neurons involved in this kind of learning. So AA newcomers get to see what sober people are like,” he said.

AA also “provides a social context of support and understanding, and an alternative social group distinct from the drinking group. … There’s lots and lots of folk wisdom, collective wisdom about how to successfully stop and stay stopped.”

And the experience of attending regular meetings changes addicts’ brains, Willenbring said.

“If people change their behavior and outlook and attitudes, then of course it’s reflected in changes in the brain,” he said.

Alcoholics Anonymous would not comment for this article, adhering to its policy of anonymity and avoidance of all public discourse. AA takes no positions on any controversy and, in fact, has no executive or figurehead to speak for the organization at all.

“We’re just amateurs here,” a staff spokesperson said when asked for comment.

AA need not defend its role in recovery anyway. Clearly, there’s no belief that such 12-step fellowship programs will ever become obsolete.

“When I treat patients with alcohol dependence, I routinely recommend medications, and I also recommend AA,” Willenbring said.

“There’s no incompatibility at all.”

Sign up for our free e-newsletter.

Are you on Facebook? Become our fan.

Follow us on Twitter.

Add our news to your site.

 

word on the street

Post your comment here
  • Edward Peter

    I don’t want to accuse Ms. Porter of journalistic dishonesty, but I think it’s more than a little suspect how she manages to jam what is clearly authorial commentary (or personal opinion) in between quotes from sources. Two examples:1) In paragraph 7 she states: “While current and future medications may improve treatment of addiction by blocking intoxication, easing withdrawal symptoms and inhibiting cravings, they’ll supplement 12-step programs rather than replace them.”This comes in between 2 direct comments from Wilson Compton in paragraphs 6 & 8. If the words in paragraph 7 are what Compton means to convey, why not quote him outright? I suspect, that it’s NOT what Compton means to convey but rather what Ms. Porter would have the lay reader infer as Compton’s opinion.2) In the 3rd to last paragraph Ms. Porter states:”AA need not defend its role in recovery anyway. Clearly, there’s no belief that such 12-step fellowship programs will ever become obsolete.”Again, this is commentary rather than quote. The quotes come before & after this little bit of commentary — in a tortured chain running from Mark Willenbring to a ‘staff spokesperson’ (is ‘deep background’ really necessary for a puff piece on AA?) back to Willenbring again. Whether or not Willenbring has any opinion about the obsolescence of AA or 12-Step is something for Willenbring express — not for the author to imply.Ms. Porter’s glib, “So, what’s the implication of this research on these vast networks of fellowship recovery programs?Not as much as you’d think.” holds about as much water as her initial assertion that AA ‘pioneered’ the idea of alcoholism as a disease. (She acknowledges as much later in the later article when she writes that Benjamin Rush had proposed that it was a ‘biological malady’ some 200 years prior; I’m no doctor, but isn’t the qualitative difference between a “biological malady” & a “disease” a matter of semantics rather than science?)AA is steadfast in its opposition to research, intellectual inquiry, & medical approaches to alcoholism. For all the Big Book’s palaver about ‘not being doctors’ there’s more than enough material in the book itself, the followup “12 Steps & 12 Traditions’, & general discourse in meetings that slams medicine, psychiatry, & just about any intellectual exercise that doesn’t unequivocally endorse AA’s free-form theological ‘solution’.Whether or not neurological research sounds the death knell for AA/12X12 is something both Ms. Porter & I can have an opinion on. The difference is that I don’t try jamming my opinion into someone else’s mouth.By the way, only one medical body (the AMA) officially recognizes ‘alcoholism’ as a “disease”. And E.M. Jellinek’s work when examined closely (just like his academic credentials) is hardly ground-breaking. Interested readers can’t research these matters on their own.

  • Edward Peter

    That last sentence should read:”Interested readers CAN research these matters on their own.”

  • Lenny Robinson

    The discussion of the cause of addiction has indeed become rather carnavalesque; you can buy into or advocate almost whatever you will. This article reminded me of one of the masterful works of the sci-fi writer and story-telling genius Phillip K. Dick. Some would remember his, “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.” In this story, made into the film Bladerunner, the use of a “mood organ” (not in the film version) was the way one would alter brain chemistry to alter or regulate moods. You just dial to the desired feeling and presto!–you’re comfortably numb or whatever you like again. I thought Ms. Porter’s article to be interesting though perhaps symptomatic of the limitations of neuroscience. Since no science is by itself culpable, perhaps there is something to be said about the difference between the culture that produced AA and its 12-step cousins (I suppose that would include GA=Gamblers Anonymous)and the postmodern culture that drives us to seek the quick fixes to whatever might be deemed problematic. To be sure, the truth is stranger than it used to be; as monolithic as the AA approach to addiction might have been, the truth about what kept people in denial about their primary source of self-demise was something it it always helped people to acknowledge. Of course, these are aspects of human nature that pharmaceuticals cannot really address. As a mental health professional, I tell clients that psychotropic medications are never to be viewed as the “cure.” They are at best a means (often an excellent means) to reduce symptoms such as to enable the real cure that comes from the psychic aka the soul or mind. Perhaps the primary limitation of brain science is its persistence to confuse the human brain with a person’s mind. AA inspired 12-step programs have tried and do endeavor to strengthen the hearts, minds and souls of individuals who have faced the ravages of and are struggling with addiction. Each person’s addiction has its own phenomenology–its cure is subjective and unique to that person. No manner of treatment can top that.

more in this section

also by this author

Jill Porter

Jill Porter retired this year after 34 years at the Philadelphia Daily News, 30 of them writing an award-winning metro column. She worked at ...

A Genuine Jolt to the Memory

Little bits of electricity have been shown to help people remember names, a finding that might have implications for restoring memories and making new ones.

Are American Kids Crazy or What?

While our kids may drive us crazy, a prominent researcher given a big new prize hopes to spend his money finding out if that’s universal.

Receive 1 year (6 issues) of our print magazine for just $14.95. Miller-McCune features polished, in-depth reports on research and solutions across the policy spectrum — from health care, education and energy to international affairs, poverty and the global economy. It's a must read for well-informed and solutions-driven individuals.

Loading

follow us on:

join our newsletter:

from the source

Better Super Bowl Makes for Better Ads

A lot of people say they watch the Super Bowl mostly for the ads. But it turns out a good game surrounding those ads makes them seem better.

Overseas Troops Finally Get Fair Shot at Voting

After decades of obstacles hindering the voting process, new laws will allow overseas and military voters to submit their votes in time for the 2012 election.

Neglected Tropical Diseases Neglected No More?

World health leaders announce coordinated push to eradicate or control neglected tropical diseases.

Children’s Books Increasingly Ignore Natural World

A survey of award-winning children’s picture books from 1938 to 2008 suggests our increasing estrangement from the natural environment.

Traffic Solution: Make Drivers Less Lonely

Rather than moaning about too many cars on the road, the Ridesharing Institute says the real key to battling traffic congestion and pollution is filling empty passenger seats.