SRC Secular Recovery Community

Is "it" a "disease" or ain't it???

2008-02-13T20:02:00.000-08:00

Thu 14 Feb 08, 10:24 a.m.

Hi all,

Rex here.

Chatting with Jim this morning, some musings on the "disease model" of addictions.

I should have responded just a bit more directly. I am reluctant to because, as I said, the debate is not meaningful to me in a personal or practical way. Whatever "it" is, I got "it", and I therefore need to respond appropriately.

However, in the spirit of intellectual honesty, it is worth noting that the only way to diagnose alcoholism is indirectly; by observing behavior, by reports from those close to the alcoholic; family, police, judges, employers, etc., by knowing a patient's drinking amounts and patterns, by observing secondary morbid conditions and disease states which are the direct and indirect result of excessive drinking and using, e.g., liver damage. However, the actual symptoms of alcoholism are primarily morbid, anti-social, destructive and self-destructive behavior. So we know that, as I said, something is driving this collection of secondary symptoms and indications. However, we still do not know what the "it" actually is. At one time, genetics was strongly favored a a cause. Some still favor this, but it remains theory, we as yet have not positively identified a genetic link. We know that addictions, as well as other "issues", run in families, but that is only suggestive of what is going on. Then there is the problem that virtually any lab animal will become addicted given the proper conditions, and that many "normies" become addicted to pain meds following a hospitalization. This, of course, does not disprove a genetic, familial, hormonal, biochemical "push" in the direction of addiction for some individuals, but it certainly suggests the the problem is very complex.

We know there is an "it", but we still do not know what "it" is. I suspect we will learn more over time, and as we do, the possibility increases that there may be better treatments for reducing or eliminating cravings and even for changing thought and behavior. Gawd knows, an alcoholic who continues to drink and use in spite of the obvious often devastating consequences to himself and those around him surely has "something" seriously wrong with his thinking and behavior or he would not drink. In a Republican sort of way, it really is that simple. It is like the cocaine addicts who seek medical treatment for a perforated septum, and when informed that part of the treatment includes the necessity of not using cocaine respond, "Are you out of your fucking mind!!!"

To wrap it up for now, while many things abut addictions "suggest" many things about addictions, we have yet to identify a specific and direct cause; psychological, familial, genetic, hormonal, biochemical. That does not mean that a cause does not exist, just that we have not identified it yet. Meanwhile, as long as it quacks like a duck, I have no problems with the disease metaphor, or if you prefer, disease model. If you are an alcoholic/addict, becoming too entralled with or inflamed by the disease debate misses the pont, really, and distracts you from the important business of recovery.

Aloha,

Rex

PUBLIC MEMORIAL SERVICE FOR DR. ALBERT ELLIS

2007-09-25T02:33:00.000-07:00

Subject: Albert Ellis Memorial Update
From: Gayle Rosellini
Date: Tue 25 Sep 07, 12:57 p.m.
To: REBT News

Dear Friends of Albert Ellis,

Please share the following message with your network of friends and colleagues. We know many of you will not be able to attend the memorial service for Al, but please know that all of Al's friends, fans, admirers, colleagues and clients are welcome to share a warm celebration of this remarkable man's life.

PUBLIC MEMORIAL SERVICE FOR DR. ALBERT ELLIS

Dr. Albert Ellis, the world famous psychologist who revolutionized the field of psychology when he created Rational Emotive Therapy in 1955, died on July 24, 2007. His wife, Debbie Joffe Ellis, is hosting a Memorial Service on September 28, 2007, to celebrate his life and work. The public and press are invited for an evening of memories, inspiration and hope for the future.

In Celebration of Dr. Albert Ellis

Friday, September 28, 2007 at 7:30 pm

Alfred Lerner Hall Auditorium
Columbia University
2920 Broadway at W.114 St.
New York City

Keynote speakers will include

* Dr. Aaron Beck, Beck Institute for Cognitive Therapy and Research
* Dr. Bill Knaus, Former Director of Training, Albert Ellis Institute
* Dr. Alan Kazdin, incoming president, American Psychological Assn.
* Dr. Jeff Zeig, Founder and Director of Milton H. Erickson Foundation
* Dr. Paul Kurtz, Chairman, Center for Inquiry
* Dr. Jon Carlson, Distinguished Professor of Psychology/ Counseling
* Dr. Frank Farley, Past President, American Psychological Assn.

Please join us for an evening of videos, music and memories of one of the greatest thinkers of the 20th Century. Dr. Albert Ellis changed the way the world thinks about human problems. His esteemed peers in psychology, his family and friends will share their memories of how Dr. Ellis touched the world and changed their lives with his brilliance, generosity and acceptance.
See map to Alfred Lerner Hall:

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lernerhall/mapsanddiagrams/campusmap.htm

Dr. Albert Ellis, 93, Creator of Psychology's Cognitive Revolution, Dies

2007-07-25T05:15:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends and Supporters of Dr. Albert Ellis

July 24, 2007, New York City — It is with deep sorrow that we tell you that Dr. Albert Ellis passed away peacefully at home in New York City in his apartment on the top floor of the Albert Ellis Institute shortly after midnight on the morning of July 24, 2007. His wife Debbie was at his side. Below is a notice that went to media outlets. More information will follow.

Sadly,
Gayle ...
On Behalf of Debbie and Al's Friends and Supporters.

Dr. Albert Ellis, 93, Creator of Psychology's Cognitive Revolution, Dies

July 24, 2007

Dr. Albert Ellis, the controversial psychologist who revolutionized the field of psychology when he created Rational Emotive Therapy in 1955, died at home on July 24, 2007. His wife, Debbie Joffe was with him. He was 93. He had been seriously ill for more than a year.
Dr. Ellis was born in Pittsburgh on September 27, 1913, and was raised in New York City. He received his M.A. (1943) and Ph.D. (1947) degrees in clinical psychology from Columbia University. He practiced psychotherapy, marriage and family counseling and sex therapy for over sixty years. He was the founder of Rational Emotive Therapy, the first of the now-popular cognitive therapies. In later years, he called his creation Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, REBT.

Recognizing the slowness and frequent ineffectiveness of Freudian psychoanalysis, Albert Ellis broke away from it in January 1953, calling himself a rational therapist. He presented REBT to the psychological community in 1955, starting a revolutionary paradigm shift in the way psychology thought about human problems and changing the way psychotherapy is practiced around the world.

REBT is a comprehensive approach to psychological issues and problems that deals with the emotional and behavioral aspects of human disturbance, and places emphasis on how people think. REBT reminds people that they control their own emotional destiny according to whether they think in healthy, rational ways or unhealthy, irrational ways. It teaches people how to forcefully analyze and change their self-defeating thoughts and behaviors. A major aspect of REBT is unconditional acceptance of self, others and life.
His influence extended into areas other than psychology, including education, politics, business and philosophy. He wrote extensively on the problems the world currently faces, such as terrorism and nuclear weapons.

Dr. Ellis received the highest awards from professional societies, including recently the New York State Psychological Association's Lifetime Distinguished Service Award. In a 1982 survey, American and Canadian psychologists rated Albert Ellis as having more influence on psychology than Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung or B.F. Skinner. Psychology Today called him The Prince of Reason. The New Yorker Magazine reported that in the off-Broadway play "Trumbo", Dr. Ellis was called "the greatest humanitarian since Gandhi."

Until he fell ill at the age of 92 in May 2006, Dr. Ellis typically worked at least 16 hours a day, writing books in longhand on legal tablets, visiting with clients and teaching. Even while seriously ill, he continued to see students at the rehabilitation center where he was recuperating. He even taught from his hospital bed, giving his last two hour workshop to a group of students from Belgium who visited his hospital room on March 29. In addition to pneumonia, he had had a heart attack that morning, but he refused to cancel the meeting.

In his later years, Dr. Ellis also worked despite profound hearing loss. He was assisted in his work by his wife, Australian psychologist Debbie Joffe. She facilitated his workshops, contributing pertinent points in response to audience questions. Their outstanding rapport helped showcase Dr. Ellis' famous and at-times irreverent humor, as together they taught the principles of REBT to large and small groups.

Humor was an important part of his philosophy and he applied it to his own life challenges, using himself as an example to teach people how to deal with serious adversities. He was also a writer of his unique rational humorous songs. He had said that if he was not a psychologist he would have enjoyed being a composer.

Dr. Ellis was also as one of the founders of the American sexual revolution. His ground-breaking 1958 book, "Sex Without Guilt," created a national discussion leading to a change in the way people think about sexual experience. He wrote more than 75 books, 200 audio tapes and 1,200 articles. His autobiography will be published posthumously by Prometheus Press. Other books, including one on REBT and Buddhism, also await publication.

He held many important positions in the field of psychology, including chief psychologist of the state of New Jersey and adjunct professor at Rutgers and other universities. He had been the president of the Division of Consulting Psychology of the American Psychological Association and president of the Society for the Scientific Study of Sexuality and several other professional boards.

In 1971, the American Humanist Association named Albert Ellis the Humanist of the Year.
In relation to religion and God, Albert Ellis called himself a probabilistic atheist, meaning it is impossible to be 100 percent certain there is no God. Many people considered him spiritual for his tireless contributions to others. In later years, he wrote and spoke about similarities between REBT and aspects of Buddhism, with both philosophies teaching unconditional acceptance of life.
On his 90th birthday, Dr. Ellis listened to congratulatory messages from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Sens. Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton and President George W. Bush. In honor of the occasion, he was given a white silk scarf that had been blessed by the Dalai Lama.

In 1959, Albert Ellis established the Institute for Rational Living, a non-profit organization with the mission to advance and popularize REBT and to provide low-cost counseling to the public. In 1964, he used his personal funds to purchase a six-story mansion on 65th Street in Manhattan. This building housed what came to be called the Albert Ellis Institute.
He lived frugally in an apartment on the top floor, supporting the institute's mission by donating all his personal income to the institute's operation. For almost 50 years, the world's most famous living psychologist took only a $12,000 a year salary for himself, plus living accommodations and a promise of lifetime medical care. He could have been a millionaire many times over had he kept the income from his best-selling books and thousands of therapy sessions.

In 2004, after Dr. Ellis experienced a life-threatening medical crisis, the board of trustees of the Albert Ellis Institute said his medical expenses had become too great and they stopped paying for the at-home nursing care that allowed him to continue working full time. Dr. Ellis had always saved and wisely invested a portion of his small earnings. This cushion of funds was used to pay for his medical care.

In July 2005, the board of trustees barred him from using institute facilities for his popular Friday Night Workshops for the public, which had been a Manhattan fixture for more than four decades. Ellis responded by relocating his workshops and conducting them in exile in a rented building, aided by his wife Debbie Joffe. In front of standing-room-only crowds, they gave live demonstrations of REBT with audience volunteers.

The direction the Albert Ellis Institute will take in the future remains unresolved. Despite Dr. Ellis' strong preference that the institute promote Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy as its sole mission, REBT is now only one of several approaches offered by the organization that bears his name.

In October 2005, Dr. Ellis sued his own institute after its trustees voted by a narrow margin to remove him from the board and to suspend him from all professional duties.
In a stunning decision, the Supreme Court for New York County returned Dr. Ellis to the Board of Trustees in January 2006, with the judge calling the actions taken against Dr. Ellis by the other trustees "disingenuous" and "offensive and contrary to our fundamental process of democratic and legal procedure, fair play and the spirit of the law."

Despite the judge's ruling, the board of trustees prevented Dr. Ellis from any meaningful participation in running the Albert Ellis Institute and his professional duties were not restored.
Fans and professional colleagues used the Internet to create a spontaneous international network of support for Dr. Ellis and REBT. Fansites, discussion forums and Web sites were created in his honor. The trustees of the Albert Ellis Institute then claimed trademark rights to the "Albert Ellis" name, threatening to sue his advocates and supporters for trademark infringement.

Dr. Ellis rejected the Institute's trademark use of his name, calling the current Institute "fake" and likening its Trustees to "pirates" who plundered his life's work.
Also left unresolved at the time of Dr. Ellis' death is a breach- of-contract lawsuit seeking repayment of Dr. Ellis' medical expenses, ownership of his extensive archives and return of the $20 million Albert Ellis Institute mansion in Manhattan through imposition of a constructive trust.

Dr. Ellis believed the current institute that bears his name no longer represented his life work and mission. Friends and supporters intend to keep REBT alive and vital, as he created it. He suggested they do this by using his philosophy in their own lives to promote personal peace and happiness and by teaching REBT to other people. He remained dedicated to the principles of liberty, justice and freedom.

Dr. Ellis is survived by his wife, Debbie Joffe. He embarked on his third marriage at age 90, surprising many people. He said that after several years of friendship, he wanted to marry Debbie because she was the kindest and most giving woman he had ever met, and also the most dedicated to practicing the principles of REBT. He told his supporters that although he'd had several great love affairs in his long life, he loved Debbie Joffe more than any other woman he had ever lived with or loved before.

Debbie personally cared for her husband continuously during the time of his serious illness, seldom leaving his bedside and making it possible for him to continue teaching, promoting REBT and engaging in work he loved, even when he was bedridden and suffering discomfort.
Dr. Ellis is also survived by several nephews.

A public memorial service will be held at St. Paul's Chapel at Columbia University on Thursday, Sept. 27, 2007.

2007-05-19T06:15:00.000-07:00

Subject: Three New Books on Addiction Described
From: DON PHILLIPS daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com
Date: 5/18/07 9:55 p.m.
To: Don's Blog

Palo Alto Weekly (CA) http://www.paloaltoonline.com/ Authored by The Health Library (Stanford) Wed, 09 May 2007

Addiction and its wide-ranging effects -- Three New Books

~~"Addiction: why can't they just stop?"
~~"Women Under the Influence"
~~"100 Questions and Answers About Alcoholism"

Books explore the nature of addiction, options for living with the disease

by The Health Library

Addiction is a disease that causes pain and suffering not only to those who are addicted and those who love them but also to society at large. It is estimated that between four and 15 people are adversely affected by a single addict. Multiply that number by the estimated 22.2 million addicts in the United States, and it's easy to see how addiction is truly a national health issue.

The science of addiction is in its infancy, but new developments in brain imaging prove that substance abuse causes significant changes in brain physiology. This research is leading to the development of new and better treatments. Whether the problem substance is alcohol, prescription or illicit drugs, addiction is now understood to be a chronic, relapsing but treatable brain disease.

For the one in four American families facing addiction, a new book, "Addiction: why can't they just stop?" (Rodale Books, 2007) provides invaluable insight. The book is based on the acclaimed HBO documentary series, "Addiction." In fact, the book's editors are John Hoffman and Susan Froemke, the series' producers. The subtitle sums up the book's message: "New knowledge, new treatments, new hope."

The book debunks common myths and misconceptions to help readers understand current scientific knowledge of the disease. Readers learn how and why people become addicted, including discussion of genetic risk factors and behavior. There is information about the various types of treatment available and ways to choose the most appropriate treatment based on an individual's needs. A section on adolescent substance abuse is especially good. An astounding 9 percent of addicts began using substances under the age of 18. The economics of addiction is covered in depth, helping people overcome some barriers to obtaining effective treatment.

Another book, "Women Under the Influence" (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2006), focuses on the effects of substance abuse on women. This book is full of thought-provoking and important information.

Women are at increased risk for addiction problems. They become addicted more quickly, using fewer substances. Women develop abuse-related diseases such as lung cancer more quickly and suffer more brain damage from both alcohol and drugs than do men. These are just some the important research findings reported by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA) in the book.

This book is the result of more than 10 years of research on female substance abuse in the United States. This is not so much a self-help book; it is a report of the growing problem of addiction in American women and ways the disease is and is not being treated. An evaluation of the efficacy of treatment methods and recommendations for prevention and policy changes are important conclusions in this report.

Alcohol is the most-abused drug in the United States. An excellent primer on the subject of alcohol is the book, "100 Questions and Answers About Alcoholism" by Charles Herrick, M.D., and Charlotte Herrick, Ph.D., R.N. (Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2007). Like all of the books in the excellent "100 Questions and Answers" series, this book delves into the subject of alcoholism in a way that is informative but easy to understand. It starts with the basics, explaining just what alcohol is, and moves through identifying the problem, risk factors for alcohol abuse, and treatment options. There is an excellent section on the medical consequences of alcoholism, including dementia and fetal alcohol syndrome. The book closes with a chapter called, "Surviving Alcoholism," that discusses ways to live well as an alcoholic, including the ability to drink again, privacy rights and other potential legal issues.

There are many more resources at the Stanford Health Library that discuss substance abuse and addiction recovery. Research assistance and information packets are available free of charge from the library. Branches are located at the Stanford Shopping Center near Bloomingdale's; on the third floor of Stanford Hospital; and on the main level of Stanford's Cancer Center. Contact the Health Library at 650-725-8400,
healthlibrary@stanfordmed.org and
http://healthlibrary.stanford.edu. _________________________________________________________________

YourSoberSpace !!!

2007-04-17T08:25:00.000-07:00

Tue 17 Apr 07, 10:11 p.m.

Hi all,

Rex here.

I have to admit that I am a little too old and set in my ways to have ever gotten very excited bout MySpace and similar venues. While MySpace and YouTube are vaguely interesting for an occasional dip into the amateur pornography on offer ;o} those media never really fired my imagination or interest to really participate other than treating them as little curiosity shops.
However, having said that, we know that these new media are the new HOT online communities for millions and millions of people. Now we come to hear about this newfangled “NING” http://www.http://www.ning.com that will allow special interest groups such as LifeRing and SRC to set up our own MySpace-like networks where others can join, set up their own space and participate, but in an more focused, themed environment that the original MySpace and similar large, general venues. In other words, a MySpace-like site just for people in recovery! How about that!

Well, OK, we gotta go for that! And without further ado, we are pleased to announce the brand new, fancy-schmancy SRC Ning Community YourSoberSpace at http://secularrecovery.ning.com/ . You can also get there through the link on the main web site http://www.secularrecovery/ . Please visit and especially, tell your friends!

Here's the rub. I am over-extended, and this project is not something I can attend to very diligently. “Getting with the program” just seems a bit daunting to me. Moreover, as I said, it ain't exactly my thang, and the venue is largely lost on me. It is my very strong hope therefore that some sober folks, younger folks I reckon, will visit, have a looksee, become a
member if they like, create their own sober space, start posting stuff, participating and as sort of “charter members” begin to grown this community. It could be wild! There is no template that I know of outlining how to do this. I guess it will be more social-recreational-networking type stuff than anything else. It's so public, I doubt that we will get people posting videos of their “interventions” or most recent visit to detox! ;o} On the other hand, who the hell knows?
Anywho, we are working on the principle of “Build It And They Will Come.” So, have a looksee around and tell me what you think. And pass the word, please.

Mahalo & aloha,

Rex

One Sky Center -- National Resource Center for American Indians and Alaska Natiives

2007-04-05T21:09:00.000-07:00

Seeking the Connections: Alcoh... DON PHILLIPS 4/5/07 3:31 a.m.
Subject: One Sky Center -- National Resource Center for American Indians and Alaska Natiives
From: DON PHILLIPS
Date: 3/31/07 11:47 p.m.
To: SRC Blog

One Sky Center is the only National Resource Center for American Indians and Alaska Natives that is dedicated to improving prevention and treatment of substance abuse and mental health across Indian Country. It was originally funded by a cooperative agreement with the Department of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's three centers (Substance Abuse Prevention, Substance Abuse Treatment, and Mental Health Services).

Additional funding sources include CDC, SAMHSA, National Highway Traffic Safety, Private Foundations, anonymous donors, and McNeil pharmaceutical company.

If you or your organization would like to help support our services, please contact us at: http://www.oneskycenter.org/index.cfm

You can sign up for their newsletter and also review their draft guide on suicide prevention at the same web site.

When the Cravings Won’t Quit

2007-03-16T20:41:00.000-07:00

March 15, 2007

TV Review 'Addiction'
When the Cravings Won’t Quit, Turn On the Camera

By VIRGINIA HEFFERNAN

Excerpt:

"....As she’s driving to the clinic for the first time, contemplating the new drug that she’s hoping will relieve her dopesickness, she seems to speak for every kind of addict, as well as about the paradox of treating drug addiction with drugs.

As Amanda says, “I hope it works as good as everybody says it does, so I don’t have to worry about feeling like this anymore.”

This just in from pseudoscience: Addiction documentaries contain an element that excites dopamine receptors, shuts down the frontal lobe and causes intense cravings.

Pseudoscientists don’t know yet whether drug-documentary addicts are hooked by the gruesomely thrilling scenes of tourniquets and needles, the photos of pre-Vicodin fifth graders or the promise of redemption through higher powers. But something definitely sets the brain reeling with manic questions: How could they fall so far? How could so many of us? Whom will addiction strike next, and will the culprit be the demon rum or the demon OxyContin?

The American addiction story, as refined by Alcoholics Anonymous, tells of good folks turned bad — of men taking drinks and drinks taking men. No wonder we crave this story: It’s the master narrative of innocence and fall, complete with the possibility of deliverance. Nor is it any wonder that HBO has embraced the genre with its current authoritarian gusto. That channel’s “Addiction,” an anthology of short films by famous documentary filmmakers, has its premiere tonight.

The blunt title holds promise. As a story, addiction to drugs and alcohol has a chilling and ritualistic arc. Typically, the variable is the drug. Some viewers go for the methamphetamine documentaries, with their slightly high-handed attitude toward the Midwest, their contested statistics and their focus on dental issues. Other viewers prefer the shadowy, stylish heroin ones, with the sexy, skinny kids and “Requiem for a Dream” fashion.

When it comes to drug-addiction TV, I’m a garbagehead: I watch it all. But to my amazement, “Addiction” doesn’t quite hit the spot. Someone at HBO seems to have instructed the esteemed filmmakers — auteurs like Albert Maysles and D. A. Pennebaker, even — to deny ravenous viewers what they want. The film is bereft of feel-good scenes and drug-movie clichés. As such, the shorts can build a cumulative sense of deprivation.

Don’t expect needles here, in other words, or ravaged street kids turning tricks, or spectacular scenes of delirium tremens. No one even gets high in “Addiction”; no fervid expression gives way to one of stoned beatitude. It’s enough to make you kind of mad: “Addiction” is holding out on us. And, surely, this is the point.

The program is part of a solemn project, something that Sheila Nevins, the enterprising president of HBO Documentary Films, has called “didactic television.” It is also devised to be more accessible than past HBO projects, with some cable systems, including RCN in the New York City area, showing it free during its first four-day run.

Intended to do more than entertain or alarm, then, “Addiction” is meant to sober people up. To that end, its message is this: Drug and alcohol addiction are diseases of the brain, and they can be treated, at least partly, with medicine.

This straightforward message is remarkable for at least two reasons. First, it’s intrinsically controversial, since A.A. for a long time expected its participants to refrain entirely from drug use, even prescription pills. The model of addiction presented here — addiction as a brain disease — is somewhat at odds with the cognitive model used in classic 12-step programs.

Second, it’s remarkable that so many top-notch filmmakers have consented to push someone else’s point so hard. It’s almost ominous. The sameness of the films in “Addiction” might aid its effectiveness as propaganda, but as art it’s monotone; it’s hard to believe it’s the collaborative work of so many otherwise individualistic artists.

Evidently, filmmakers submitted film to HBO, which took over postproduction. As a result, each installment mixes vérité and to-the-camera interviews in precisely the same proportions; employs explanatory title cards and interviews with experts; showily defers to the experts, most of them M.D.’s and Ph.D.’s; refrains from using graphics, humor or archival photographs; and keeps sound bites short.

AAn exception here is Barbara Kopple. Her short film “Steamfitters Local Union 638” is crisp tonic with lime. Unlike the other filmmakers, she has stuck to her interests and her aesthetic, making a film about a labor union that now actively supports its members who want treatment for addictions. The faces and voices of the union members, many of whom have been installing heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems for decades, are like nobody else’s in “Addiction,” and indeed like those of few other people’s on television.

“We were the hardest-working,” says one union lifer, remembering the ’60s, when he was drinking daily on the job. “We were the biggest drinkers.” He recalls how the members used to enable one another as drinkers, helping them lie to their wives and families and still be paid.

Now the union uses the same infrastructure of loyalty to help people into detox and rehabilitation. Steamfitters like them — with mustaches and paunches like theirs — join them in meetings; there’s no interference from management or doctors. As rendered, this is an extremely effective, and good-natured, program.

By presenting both addiction and recovery as community affairs, only “Steamfitters Local Union 638” has added something beyond the brain-scan science to these drug and alcohol stories. Still, as I detoxed from the sensationalism I had gotten from other films and had been hoping for in “Addiction,” I also came to appreciate other parts of the program. One was the short by Chris Hegedus and Mr. Pennebaker. In their story of two young addicts who try a new Methadone-like drug to treat their cravings for prescription pills, the melancholy Amanda caught my eye. She’s kind of a lazy oracle.

As she’s driving to the clinic for the first time, contemplating the new drug that she’s hoping will relieve her dopesickness, she seems to speak for every kind of addict, as well as about the paradox of treating drug addiction with drugs.

As Amanda says, “I hope it works as good as everybody says it does, so I don’t have to worry about feeling like this anymore.”

ADDICTION

HBO, tonight at 9, Eastern and Pacific times; 8, Central time.
Produced by John Hoffman and Susan Froemke; Sheila Nevins, executive producer.

Experts Look at Perceptions of Illness

2007-02-24T18:31:00.000-08:00

Subject: Medicalize
Me: Experts Look at Perceptions of Illness
From: DON PHILLIPS
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot]com>
Date: Sun 25 Feb 07, 12:22 a.m.
To: SRC Blog

Subject: Medicalize Me:
Experts Look at Perceptions of Illness -- Medicalization of Badness

Hi Listmates,

It might have been Harrison Trice from Cornell or Paul Roman from Tulane (now at Georgia)
who I first heard use the term "medicalization of badness" in the seventies. It had a very distinctive behavioral health connotation at the time. At least for me and the field of addictions:

Excerpt:

“When the term first came into use in the
1970s, it was used critically to mean the ‘evil’ actions of doctors who turned deviation from the norm into disease, and imposed medical authority on aspects of everyday life such as birth, aging or dying,” says Jonathan Metzl, M.D., Ph.D., a University of Michigan Medical School psychiatrist and U-M women’s studies researcher who co-organized the workshop and wrote or co-wrote two of the six Lancet articles. “But today, it’s used more in connection with the actions of pharmaceutical companies, and we need to understand its effects better.”

Don back. Now it has broadened and my very special visceral reaction to
all the prescription drug ads on TV is very much a part of that. But there is
some value in the old definition in examining our intentions and goals as a
society. And a useful construct to examine cultural differences around the
world. Just some random thoughts from one of your 'old codgers'.

Don

Source: University of Michigan Health
System Released: Mon 19-Feb-2007,
09:00 ET

Embargo expired: Thu 22-Feb-2007, 18:30 ET

Summary Description

Do prescription drug ads make people think they’re sick when they’re not, or create “disease” out of thin air? Does the “empowered patient” movement mean that doctors have lost some of their professional clout? These questions and more are the focus of a new set of probing essays on the topic of “medicalization” and what it means.

Newswise — Do prescription drug ads make people think they’re sick when they’re not, or create “disease” out of thin air? Does the “empowered patient” movement mean that doctors have lost some of their professional clout when it comes to making diagnoses and prescribing treatment?

These questions and more are the focus of a set of probing essays in a special section of the Feb. 24 issue of the journal The Lancet, all addressing the topic of “medicalization” and what it means in modern society.

The essays, which grew out of an international workshop, zero in on the fact
that even the word “medicalization” has a different meaning today than 30 years ago.

“When the term first came into use in the 1970s, it was used critically to mean
the ‘evil’ actions of doctors who turned deviation from the norm into disease,
and imposed medical authority on aspects of everyday life such as birth, aging
or dying,” says Jonathan Metzl, M.D., Ph.D., a University of Michigan
Medical School psychiatrist and U-M women’s studies researcher who
co-organized the workshop and wrote or co-wrote two of the six Lancet
articles. “But today, it’s used more in connection with the actions of
pharmaceutical companies, and we need to understand its effects better.”

The six essays focus on the intersections between medicine and society, including the role of the physician and the patient, and of the values, wants
and needs that each doctor or patient brings to each interaction.

Metzl co-authored the introduction with Rebecca M. Herzig, Ph.D., a professor in Women and Gender Studies at
Bates College in Maine who worked with him to organize the workshop. They report that a Google search for the term “medicalization” (and its British spelling, “medicalisation”) yields more than 358,000 hits –most of which have to do with the drug industry’s role in changing societal perceptions of disease,
“normalcy” and wellness.

But the authors also warn against painting this phenomenon with an entirely
negative brush. “The same drugs that treat deviances from social norms also help many people live their lives,” they write. While the old definition of
“medicalization” painted patients as the victims, the new model gives them the
opportunity to be advocates and choosy consumers – if they and their doctors discuss openly their beliefs about what they think the drug from the television
advertisement will do for them.

Metzl examines the impact of direct-to-consumer drug advertising even further, in an essay on what Europeans can learn from Americans’ ten-year experience with the ads if Britain and European countries decided to allow them too.

“Is it the case that our notions of illness are created by the pharmaceutical
industry’s advertising, or is it also the case that drug companies are
reflecting societal expectations?,” Metzl asks. “Culture plays a large role in
this process, and the drug companies aren’t just inventing
this from scratch. They’re playing to a market that’s used to asking for
things from their doctors, and it’s raising very interesting questions of
interpersonal dynamics.”

Metzl and other writers of essays in the special section look to history to shed
light on the current situation. Metzl is the author of a 2003 book “Prozac on
the Couch: Prescribing Gender in the Era of Wonder Drugs,” which examined how depression and anxiety medications were represented in advertising aimed at physicians, and in the entertainment media, in the latter half of the 20th century.

Today’s ads amplify people’s cultural expectations, or even
change them, he says in the new essay –for instance, erectile dysfunction
drug ads that are featured prominently at sporting events as well as on TV play to men’s perceptions of what it is to be a normal, healthy man. The same goes for antidepressant ads showing women who are able to fulfill their roles and duties as mothers.

What people do in response to these ads is another aspect to the medicalization issue, Metzl says. Studies have shown that patients who go to their doctors and ask for a medicine they saw in an advertisement are likely to get it – which, of course, is part of the reason the blitz of ads has escalated every year since the U.S. Food &
Drug Administration relaxed the rules for them in 1997.

But this has led to a kind of tension in the interaction between doctors and patients that is new, Metzl notes, as physicians try to decide whether to say
yes or no to each request. The fact that physicians themselves are exposed to
the same ads, and are part of the same society as their patients, further complicates the issue.

The answer for U.S. doctors, and for the British and European doctors who may soon find themselves in the same position as their American counterparts, may be to bring the social issues directly into their conversations with patients,
Metzl explains. “If a problem is being medicalized, we need to look at what else we can do as physicians besides blaming drug companies, and talk to patients about what else they need to be aware of and what may be driving theirresponse to an ad,” he says. “Doctors and patients shouldn’t mindless follow the suggestions of drug ads, but they should talk about the options and the expectations that they have, and how realistic those expectations may be and then decide whether the medicine is right.”

In addition to Metzl and Hertzig, the essay section features writings by Nancy
Tomes, of the history department at the State University of New York at Stony
Brook, writing on patient empowerment and the dilemmas of today’s medicalization; Nikolas Rose of the London School of Economics, who looks at the history and future of medicalization; Troy Duster of New York University, who examines the medicalization of race including medicines that are being aimed at members of certain ethnic groups; and Cindy Patton of Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, who looks at the specific issue of medicalization in the treatment of HIV/AIDS.

The workshop that led to the writing and publication of the essays was funded by grants from the University of Michigan, the Charles Engelhard Foundation, and Bates College.

Lancet, Vol. 368, Feb. 24, 2007

ADDICTION: Communities Take Action AddictionAction.org

2007-02-11T18:08:00.000-08:00

Mon 12 Feb 07, 9:14 a.m.

ADDICTION: Communities Take Action AddictionAction.org ***************************************************************

Dear Don,

In an unprecedented partnership, Join Together, Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America(CADCA), and Faces & Voices of Recovery (FaVoR) are uniting to help communities make the most of a powerful opportunity to bring the message of addiction treatment and recovery to millions of Americans. We hope you will join with us.

On March 15-18, HBO will launch the Addiction Project, a groundbreaking multi-media campaign to help Americans understand addiction as a treatable brain disease, spotlight new treatment advancements, and provide hope for long-term recovery. The 14-part series will air during a free HBO preview weekend, and it kicks off with a March 15 broadcast of the centerpiece documentary ADDICTION at 9 p.m. ET.

To find out more about HBO's ADDICTION project and exciting ways you can get involved in mobilizing your community around it, visit: www.AddictionAction.org .

We urge you to build on these programs and the national attention they will command, mobilizing your community to improve access to treatment and increase support of long-term recovery.

Visit www.AddictionAction.org to find out how you can get involved:

~~Stand up and be counted. Tell us that you will watch the show and use it to spread the word to your family and friends about addiction and the reality of long-term recovery.

~~Attend a town hall meeting to view a preview screening of the film. Invite your elected officials to watch it with you, then discuss how it relates to conditions in your own community. Community events are currently scheduled in over 30 cities.

~~Host or attend a national house party on March 17 to watch and discuss an airing of ADDICTION with friends, family or colleagues - and develop a plan of action for your community. ~~Spread the word to friends, family and co-workers.

We'll send you updates - and more information - about ADDICTION and the opportunities for advocacy and public education, but you don't have to wait. Don't pass up the chance to start getting out the word!

Can we count you in to watch ADDICTION March 15-19? Visit: www.AddictionAction.org to let us know. Then, sign up to host a house party and invite 10 friends to join you in taking action. With your help, we can play a major role in fundamentally changing the way Americans view - and treat - people with alcohol and drug problems.

Thank you for all that you continue to do.

Sincerely,

Join Together, CADCA, and Faces and Voices of Recovery

We Love Bill O’Reilly!

2007-01-26T03:00:00.000-08:00

Fri 26 Jan 07, 5:35 p.m.

Hi All,

Rex here.

We LOVE Bill! He is a consummate professional. Regardless of the extent to which one agrees or disagrees with his politics (and there is plenty I disagree with!), Bill has has one of the best-organized, best produced, most intelligent news-commentary programs on television, ever! And I agree with his assertion that those who criticize him most harshly, have probably never watched his program. We forgive him the puffed up, self-serving slogans of "no spin" and "fair and balanced". Everybody on television spins, even the "No Spin Zone." On "The Factor", everything spins to serve Bill's "Traditionalist" agenda. So what? Personally, I am smart enough to read between the lines and I do pay attention to the "man behind the curtain", while fully appreciating what O'Reilly can do with interesting topics, well-chosen guest pundits and a fast-paced 60 minutes of air time.

Having said that, we have no use for Mr. Reilly's deliberate campaign to make make "secular" a dirty word, and paint people who identify with the word as involved with some kind of "war", as in Mr. O'Reilly's most recent and very successful book "Culture Warrior." The name of our community proudly begins with the word "secular". It was intentional from our inception. It is a part of "who we are". It means something important, particularly in the context of recovery from addictions. We fly those colors proudly and without apology, and we are not at war with anyone.

Aloha,

Rex
rex [at] secularrecovery [dot] com

A "switch" in the brain to turn off addictions?

2007-01-26T02:27:00.000-08:00

Fri 26 Jan 07, 5:17 p.m.

Hi all,

Rex here.

I only heard the last 30 seconds of a report on the BBC earlier today. And it took me 15 of those seconds to tune into what they were talking about . . . but here it is, I think. Researchers studied cigarette smokers who were stroke victims who had a stroke in a very specific area of the brain. The next day--I believe they said--these individuals simply stopped smoking and expressed no desire whatsoever for a cigarette!Anyone know anything about this? Of course my sketchy report of a sketchy report needs a lot of development. However, if true, and if my take on it is true, for the first time there is some hard data which suggests that not only are addictions (et al) physical in a general way, but also physical in a very specific way, and that potentially there is a switch in the brain which can be simply be turned off chemically or surgically. Very interesting.

Aloha,
Rex
rex [at] secularrecovery [dot] com

2007-01-19T21:58:00.000-08:00

Subject : Is Alcoholics Anonymous a Cult?, An Old Question Revisited
From : DON PHILLIPS
Date : 1/19/07 7:29 a.m.

All,

Here is an Epost that I received on another listserv:

"Since the author just rejoined Addict-L, I thought this might be a good time to post his work....

http://www.freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/a/aa/is_aa_cult.htm "

After a lively back and forth most of us agreed that AA was not a cult. But I thought the referenced article had a far more interesting discussion around the twelve step alcoholism movement (TSAM). I posted this response:

Don's Epost More interesting than the old chestnut about AA -- Cult or Cure? (Yawn) is the portion of the paper on the twelve step alcoholism movement (TSAM). Particularly:

Excerpt

"The Twelve Step Alcoholism Movement "

In 1979, sociologist Robert Tournier raised a ruckus in professional circles when he noted that “Alcoholics Anonymous has come to dominate alcoholism both as ideology and as method. . . . So successful have AA members been in proselytizing their ideas that their assumptions about the nature of alcohol dependence have virtually been accepted as fact by most of those in the field.” In making this assertion, Tournier touched on an important point. AA cannot be viewed as existing in a vacuum. It is not now, and never has been, an independent standalone organization. It has always covertly supported, and been supported by, a powerful cartel of organizations that make up what historians and sociologists call the Alcoholism Movement. The original triumvirate leading this movement was AA, the National Council on Alcoholism, and the Yale Center for Alcohol Studies. Like all successful social movements, it has expanded to include many additional organizations. For greater clarification, the Alcoholism Movement could be called the Twelve Step Alcoholism Movement, after the fact that its basic philosophy is closely aligned with, and in many cases openly expressed by AA’s recovery program, the venerated Twelve Steps.

"To speak of AA outside of the context of the Twelve Step Alcoholism Movement is almost certainly to invite confusion. It is not just a coincidence that many organizations adhere to the same view of alcoholism and the same Twelve Step creed. It is the result of a coordinated social movement.

"Viewed as the Twelve Step Alcoholism Movement, rather than as a single isolated organization, the Program actually looks more cult-like and sinister. For example, AA per se does not seem to exploit its members financially, but AA-styled treatment facilities sometimes do. Witness the case of a family faced with having to sell their home in order to pay for the mother’s long-term addiction treatment - after she had already been through nine expensive Twelve Step treatment regimens in just two years. In a similar vein, Twelve Step treatment units and professional addiction counselors may routinely advertise their wares without giving the slightest hint that the basic treatment they are offering is an indoctrination into AA.

"In 1991, Harper’s Magazine printed a modernistic article on the Twelve Step Movement by David Rieff, “Victims All? Recovery, Co-dependency, and the Art of Blaming Somebody Else.” By this time, the Movement had burgeoned to include scores of “anonymous” programs that recommended AA’s Twelve Steps for practically everyone, from compulsive workaholics to those who were told that they loved too much. As Rieff observed, “any conduct that can be engaged in enthusiastically, never mind compulsively - from stamp collecting to the missionary position - would be one around which a recovery group could be organized.”

"These other Twelve Step organizations are patterned after AA and share many of its characteristics. Innocuous alternatives to AA are not to be found in me-too programs such as Codependents Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous, Adult Children of Alcoholics, Al-Anon, and so on through dozens of other anonymous/anon groups that adhere to the basic Twelve Step ethos. To the degree that they mimic AA, what is said regarding AA may be universalized to apply to other Twelve Step programs."

Don back. My take on TSAM draws a clearer distinction between TSAM and AA. But first my background -- includes having worked at NCA (now NCADD), been a member of AA (20 years), was in the Federal government at the birth of the Hughes Act (served on the Federal Interagency Advisory Committee to NIAAA), worked as a part time alcoholism counselor for 8 years at a private treatment program, served as a Board member to an NCA affiliate, was a Board member of the American Council on Alcoholism, managed a company that regularly coordinated with and referred to addiction treatment programs, on Faculty at the Rutgers Summer School for 10 years and, finally, participated in SOS and SMART Recovery. Not only has the Twelve Step Alcoholism Movement (TSAM) dominated the field in the past but it continues to dominate much of what goes on in the field of addictions. Note that I didn't say AA/NA. I think AA/NA, with forethought, sought to avoid this situation. Indeed it was intent on only providing the environment for the personal miracles that were taking place.

But these individual personal miracles, in some cases, became devoted 'true believers' bent on proselytizing about the process that lead to those miracles. Individually, they began to position themselves within the growing prevention and treatment industries that were developing publicly and privately. Marty Mann's NCA became a group ripe for those intent on spreading the gospel (through public education). The emergence of public treatment programs also began to enlist from the ranks of AA/NA. And, of course, the private for profit or non-profits began to employ the recipients of the miracle (so as to spread it). The reason that I'm certain about this is because I was one of those 'true believers' that eagerly sought ways to contribute beyond church basements and the club houses of AA/NA.

There is a kind of process that many true believers go through. The process of their miracle becomes THE WAY. Then it becomes THE BEST WAY. And finally when threats to the WAY begin to surface, many true believers turn it into THE ONLY WAY. The organizations within which they reside begin to reflect that opinion. As many of you are aware, NCADD (at the national level) is a prime example of this process as they have come to do battle with anything that seems to question the ONLY WAY. They besmear anything that goes against the catechism, i.e. return to social drinking, Moderation Management, alternative mutual support communities. And they become a force to be reckoned with -- and unfortunately -- an impediment to progress in the field.

Harm reduction strategies are a constant target of the 'twelve step alcoholism movement'. We all know what NCADD attempted to do to Moderation Management and the travesty they forced on the Smithers Center in NYC. NCA did their best to discredit the work of the Sobell's in the 70's and 80's.

Other organizations representing the treatment industry (both public and private) and also representing the professionals and paraprofessionals that are employed in it became allied with and part of the TSAM movement. The result is that anything that seems to be new and different may be subject to be discounted and/or discredited.

Again, let me repeat that this isn't the fault of AA/NA. That was not their intent. But it is the understandable result of a process that has taken place over the last 70 years. The result is a movement that can be anti-scientific at times and hugely devoted to the maintenance of the status quo.

An unfortunate corollary to the emergence of a 'true believer' group is the emergence of a 'true disbeliever' group. Whereas the former group devoutly believes that they are blessed with the only true way, the latter group believes that the way of the 'true believer' is misguided at best and evil at worst. From that, only senseless conflict about what is the real "truth" emerges and distracts us from the real task at hand. Ahhh the endless stupid rants! I believe Bill W. foresaw this when he made his comment about the Fellowship needing all the help 'we' can get.

An aside to demonstrate the potency of the 'twelve step alcoholism movement'. As SMART Recovery was planning their annual National Training get together this past year, I encouraged the SMART central office to get their training announcement placed as articles in the Enewsletters of the national organizations representing the addictions field as a regular news item. They dutifully began to do that as I fed them the Eaddresses. In one case, to an organization that publishes a daily Enewsletter that was home based in the very city where the SMART meeting took place, they offered the organization a free press pass to the meeting. Their training announcement was never printed as part of their regular newsletter stories and no one from that organization showed up to cover it. Nor was it covered as a regular story in any of the organizational newsletters in our field. I'm afraid that this slight was an example of the intent to subvert anything that might conflict with the dogma of the 'true believers'. Sad. Don

Rimonabant, drug treatment pill will be soon available

2007-01-18T05:37:00.000-08:00

Thu 18 Jan 07, 8:39 p.m.

Hi All,

Rimonabant, the drug treatment pill will be soon available on the market

di Valerio Di Paola
foto internet - italia 14/01/2007
versione stampabile

A pill to stop smoking marijuana. As happens in science fictions, you have just to swallow it and your bad habit, boredom, conscious choices or, sometimes, real pains will be suddenly removed. It is the stake of Nida, the US Institute of Drug Abuse, which have decided to implement an experimental health record with Rimonabant, the first stop smoking marijuana pill. Now Federsed, the Italian Federation Services for Drugs and other Addictions, decided to grasp the challenge too. This federation, which includes some of the existing national services for addictions treatment, has recently come back from a trip to US to know the Nida Experts and to "formalise an agreed protocol concerning potential collaboration on clinical research focused on addictions prevention". Until now, says Alfio Lucchini, head of Federsed, nothing has been taken for granted: Rimonabant is still waiting the permission to be used in such different way in US, permission to be granted by the Food and Drug Administration, the agency in charge of medical drugs circulation in US. The reason lays in the fact that this pill is, besides a drug treatment, a "fat" remedy. For complete article go to:

http://www.rivistaonline.com/Rivista/ArticoliPrimoPiano.aspx?id=3211

2007-01-17T05:01:00.000-08:00

Subject : A Portrait of "Generation Next" -- A PBS Special Beginning Tonight -
From : DON PHILLIPS
Date : Wed 17 Jan 07, 7:49 p.m.

All,

A fascinating -- part hopeful, part scary -- documentary developed by Judy Woodruff. It tracks the beliefs and behaviors of the 16 to 25 age Generation -- currently in our high schools, universities, work places (new-hires), and prisons. It begins airing on PBS stations tonight.

The Pew Research Center has studied their behavior and beliefs and provide the statistical analysis. Access to info on both the Documentary and the Study are provided below.

Don

From PBS -- See web address below
The U.S. Tour

Judy and the Generation Next crew finished its tour of the United States to gauge the views of 16-to-25 year olds in August. They listened to the politically active in the Northeast, the hardworking in the Midwest, the entrepreneurial in the West, the benevolent in the South, the traditional in the Great Plains -- and others in between, such as a gang member in L.A. and a farmer in Kansas. The hour-long documentary is set to air this month, January 2007. To see when it is airing on your local PBS station, click here.

You can also watch some of the segments that the Gen Next team put together for the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer in the past few months in our Audio/Video section. For more complete information and when it is airing in your area go to:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/generation-next/documentary/index.html

The statistics on Generation Next is based on a Pew Research Center study. Here is a summary with access to the complete report at the end.

A Portrait of "Generation Next"
How Young People View Their Lives, Futures and Politics
Released: January 9, 2007

Summary of Findings

A new generation has come of age, shaped by an unprecedented revolution in technology and dramatic events both at home and abroad. They are Generation Next, the cohort of young adults who have grown up with personal computers, cell phones and the internet and are now taking their place in a world where the only constant is rapid change.

In reassuring ways, the generation that came of age in the shadow of Sept. 11 shares the characteristics of other generations of young adults. They are generally happy with their lives and optimistic about their futures. Moreover, Gen Nexters feel that educational and job opportunities are better for them today than for the previous generation. At the same time, many of their attitudes and priorities reflect a limited set of life experiences. Marriage, children and an established career remain in the future for most of those in Generation Next.

More than two-thirds see their generation as unique and distinct, yet not all self-evaluations are positive. A majority says that "getting rich" is the main goal of most people in their age group, and large majorities believe that casual sex, binge drinking, illegal drug use and violence are more prevalent among young people today than was the case 20 years ago.

In their political outlook, they are the most tolerant of any generation on social issues such as immigration, race and homosexuality. They are also much more likely to identify with the Democratic Party than was the preceding generation of young people, which could reshape politics in the years ahead. Yet the evidence is mixed as to whether the current generation of young Americans will be any more engaged in the nation's civic life than were young people in the past, potentially blunting their political impact.

This report takes stock of this new generation. It explores their outlook, their lifestyle and their politics. Because the boundaries that separate generations are indistinct, the definition of Generation Next and other generational groups mentioned in this report are necessarily approximate. For analysis purposes, Generation Next includes those Americans between the ages of 18 and 25 years old.

Meet Generation Next:

~~They use technology and the internet to connect with people in new and distinctive ways. Text messaging, instant messaging and email keep them in constant contact with friends. About half say they sent or received a text message over the phone in the past day, approximately double the proportion of those ages 26-40.

~~They are the "Look at Me" generation. Social networking sites like Facebook, MySpace and MyYearbook allow individuals to post a personal profile complete with photos and descriptions of interests and hobbies. A majority of Gen Nexters have used one of these social networking sites, and more than four-in-ten have created a personal profile.

~~Their embrace of new technology has made them uniquely aware of its advantages and disadvantages. They are more likely than older adults to say these cyber-tools make it easier for them to make new friends and help them to stay close to old friends and family. But more than eight-in-ten also acknowledge that these tools "make people lazier."

~~About half of Gen Nexters say the growing number of immigrants to the U.S. strengthens the country more than any generation. And they also lead the way in their support for gay marriage and acceptance of interracial dating.

~~Beyond these social issues, their views defy easy categorization. For example, Generation Next is less critical of government regulation of business but also less critical of business itself. And they are the most likely of any generation to support privatization of the Social Security system.

~~They maintain close contact with parents and family. Roughly eight-in-ten say they talked to their parents in the past day. Nearly three-in-four see their parents at least once a week, and half say they see their parents daily. One reason: money. About three-quarters of Gen Nexters say their parents have helped them financially in the past year.

~~Their parents may not always be pleased by what they see on those visits home: About half of Gen Nexters say they have either gotten a tattoo, dyed their hair an untraditional color, or had a body piercing in a place other than their ear lobe. The most popular are tattoos, which decorate the bodies of more than a third of these young adults.

~~One-in-five members of Generation Next say they have no religious affiliation or are atheist or agnostic, nearly double the proportion of young people who said that in the late 1980s. And just 4% of Gen Nexters say people in their generation view becoming more spiritual as their most important goal in life.

~~They are somewhat more interested in keeping up with politics and national affairs than were young people a generation ago. Still, only a third say they follow what's going on in government and public affairs "most of the time."

~~In Pew surveys in 2006, nearly half of young people (48%) identified more with the Democratic Party, while just 35% affiliated more with the GOP. This makes Generation Next the least Republican generation.

~~Voter turnout among young people increased significantly between 2000 and 2004, interrupting a decades-long decline in turnout among the young. Nonetheless, most members of Generation Next feel removed from the political process. Only about four-in-ten agree with the statement: "It's my duty as a citizen to always vote."

~~They are significantly less cynical about government and political leaders than are other Americans or the previous generation of young people. A majority of Americans agree with the statement: "When something is run by the government, it is usually inefficient and wasteful," but most Generation Nexters reject this idea.

~~Their heroes are close and familiar. When asked to name someone they admire, they are twice as likely as older Americans to name a family member, teacher, or mentor. Moreover, roughly twice as many young people say they most admire an entertainer rather than a political leader.

~~They are more comfortable with globalization and new ways of doing work. They are the most likely of any age group to say that automation, the outsourcing of jobs, and the growing number of immigrants have helped and not hurt American workers.

~~Asked about the life goals of those in their age group, most Gen Nexters say their generation's top goals are fortune and fame. Roughly eight-in-ten say people in their generation think getting rich is either the most important, or second most important, goal in their lives. About half say that becoming famous also is valued highly by fellow Gen Nexters.

This report is drawn from a broad array of Pew Research Center polling data. The main survey was conducted Sept. 6-Oct. 2, 2006 among 1,501 adults including 579 people ages 18-25. In addition, the report includes extensive generational analysis of Pew Research Center surveys dating back to 1987.

Much of the analysis deals with comparisons among the four existing adult generations. For purposes of this report, Generation Next is made up of 18-25 year-olds (born between 1981 and 1988). Generation X was born between 1966 and 1980 and ranges in age from 26-40. The Baby Boom generation, born between 1946 and 1964, ranges in age from 41-60. Finally, those over age 60 (born before 1946) are called the Seniors. These generational breaks are somewhat arbitrary but are roughly comparable to those used by other scholars and researchers.

The report is divided into four main sections: (1) Outlook and World View, (2) Technology and Lifestyle, (3) Politics and Policy, and (4) Values and Social Issues.

For access to the complete report go to:

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=300

2007-01-11T22:48:00.000-08:00

Subject : The Check-up -- ME Therapy by Computer or Telephone to Elicit Tx Participation
From : DON PHILLIPS
Date : 1/9/07 11:26 p.m.

All,

I can't see any downside to this strategy. It should be widely available in a variety of different settings (and web sites). Access to complete paper below.

Don

Abstract

http://www.substanceabusepolicy.com/content/2/1/2/abstractProvisional%20PDF
http://www.substanceabusepolicy.com/content/pdf/1747-597X-2-2.pdf

The check-up: In-person, computerized, and telephone adaptations of motivational enhancement treatment to elicit voluntary participation by the contemplator Denise D Walker , Roger A Roffman , Joseph F Picciano and Robert S Stephens

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 2007,
2:2 doi:10.1186/1747-597X-2-2
Published 8 January 2007

Abstract (provisional)

The complete article is available as a provisional PDF. The fully formatted PDF and HTML versions are in production.

Countless barriers come between people who are struggling with substance abuse and those charged with providing substance abuse treatment. The check-up, a form of motivational enhancement therapy, is a harm reduction intervention that offers a manner of supporting individuals by lowering specific barriers to reaching those who are untreated. The check-up was originally developed to reach problem drinkers who were neither seeking treatment nor self-initiating change. The intervention, marketed as an opportunity to take stock of ones experiences, involves an assessment and personalized feedback delivered with a counseling style termed motivational interviewing. Check-ups can be offered in care settings to individuals who, as a result of screening, manifest risk factors for specific disorders such as alcoholism. They can also be free-standing and publicized widely to the general public. This paper will discuss illustrations of in-person, computerized, in-school, and telephone applications of the free-standing type of check-up with reference to alcohol consumers, adult and adolescent marijuana smokers, and gay/bisexual males at risk for sexual transmission of HIV. The paper's major focus is to highlight how unique features of each application have the potential of reducing barriers to reaching specific at-risk populations. Also considered are key policy issues such as how check-up services can be funded, which venues are appropriate for the delivery of check-up interventions, pertinent competency criteria in evaluating staff who deliver this intervention, how marketing can be designed to reach contemplators in untreated at-risk populations, and how a check-up's success ought to be defined.

http://www.substanceabusepolicy.com/content/2/1/2/abstractProvisional%20PDF
http://www.substanceabusepolicy.com/content/pdf/1747-597X-2-2.pdf

Pain Management Without Psychological Dependence

2007-01-11T02:23:00.000-08:00

Subject: Pain Management Without Psychological Dependence

All,

Comments from any experts? Note this:

"Physical dependence is often a natural part of the long-term use of opioids prescribed for pain and can be managed effectively with appropriate identification and treatment (Coluzzi and Pappagallo 2005; Heit 2003; Strassels et al. 2005). Distinguishing between physical and psychological dependence on opioids is critical for the well-being of the patient. Physical dependence is a physiological adaptation to a substance, defined by a growing tolerance for its effects and/or withdrawal symptoms when use is reduced or ends (American Psychiatric Association 2000). Psychological dependence is a primary, chronic, neurobiological disease, with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its development and manifestations (Heit 2003). It may occur with or without physical dependence and is conceptually characterized by impaired control over drug use, compulsive use, continued use despite harm, and craving for the psychic effects of the drug (American Academy of Pain Medicine et al. 2001; American Psychiatric Association 2000; Heit 2003; Strassels et al. 2005)."

Don

SAMHSA Releases New Issue of Substance Abuse in Brief Fact Sheet on Pain
Management Without Psychological Dependence

The Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) announces the publication of a
new issue of its Substance Abuse in Brief Fact Sheet addressing pain management
without addiction.

Pain Management Without Psychological
Dependence: A Guide for Healthcare Providers (Summer 2006, Volume 4, Issue 1)
provides healthcare providers with research-based information on how to provide
pain management while avoiding psychological dependence on opioids. It discusses
nonopioid alternatives to pain management, distinguishes between physical and
psychological dependence and pseudoaddiction, and provides practical advice on
how to reduce patients’ risk of psychological dependence on opioids during pain
management. NCADI Publication No. MS993.

You can view a copy at:
http://www.kap.samhsa.gov/products/brochures/text/saib_0401.htm

To order your FREE copies of this issue of the Substance Abuse in Brief Fact Sheet,
contact SAMHSA’s National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information
(NCADI).

Phone:
800-729-6686 or
240-221-4017
800-487-4889
(TDD hearing impaired)

877-767-8432 (toll free) Hablamos Español
Web: http://www.ncadi.samhsa.gov

Happy Holidays!

2006-12-25T18:32:00.000-08:00

Tue 26 Dec 06, 9:32 a.m.

Hi All,

Rex here, founder SRC Secular Recovery Community. First, Don, I was delighted to read in your recent post that you are still alive! Definitely good news!

Secondly, we owe a huge debt of gratitude to Don Phillips, our intrepid reporter, for his invaluable contributions in spearheading our new blog. Honestly, I don't where he finds the time, but Don is relentless in ferreting out interesting, unusual and important news in the fields of addictions and mental health. So, our hat is off to you, Don! Thanks very much from me personally, and I know from all of your readers as well. Look forward a lot more of your insights in the new year!

. . . And to our members, friend and fans (and even our detractors), thanks for reading, participating and your continued interest. Your presence here helps in the important work of making addicts, alcoholics and the general public aware of alternative approaches in recovery and to traditional support groups and recovery programs. Please visit our website http://www.secularrecovery.com/, remember the secular meeting directory when you need to locate non-religious support group in your area, and you are cordially invited to hang out and participate on the SRC Discussion Forum ==>
http://www.freepowerboards.com/secularrecovery/portal.php

For all of us in recovery, this time of year can be very stressful and we can find ourselves bombarded with temptations and triggers, and surrounded by "slippery" people, places and things. Please do not give into the cultural pressure to do too much, to over-extend, over-shop, over-spend, or to socialize and entertain in ways that can be difficult and downright dangerous for us. In short, please don't feel you need live up to unrealistic expectations of frivolity, and don't upset yourself trying to recapture memories of Christmas long-past, which may be more a product of Charles Dickens and Frank Capra than anything that every really happened in your life! Be that as it may, be careful of "HALT", of letting yourself get too hungry, angry, lonely or tired . . . to which I will add stressed out. Have a great holidays season, but please see to your sobriety needs first, make sobriety your Number One Priority, and let the Holiday chips fall where they may. Please . . . Don't drink or use no matter what. This time for year may be a bit uncomfortable for some of us, but thank gawd, we don't need to drink or use over it.

Have a Wonderful Holiday Season
and All The Best in 2007!

Aloha,

Rex
Rex Alexander
rex [at] secularrecovery [dot] com

Great News for Everyone (Especially Me)

2006-12-25T18:23:00.000-08:00

Tue 26 Dec 06, 9:23 a.m.

Hi All,

I have great news for you. I'm alive. Last night I received a return phone call from a friend and she said "You're alive! Thank God. I heard that you died."

Not only alive -- but very well thank you -- at least according to my primary care Doc a couple of weeks back -- normal blood pressure and all the chem markers in the blood are on target. So maybe I'll be around for a while.

While the past year has been troubling -- worrying about what's in store for all of us, I choose to be optimistic today. I hope the coming year is one of peace, contentment and accomplishment for you. Have a great Holiday season. Don And some random thoughts~~

~~"Everyone is a unique individual with a unique learning history" --Albert Bandura "To be completely honest with oneself is the very best effort a human being can make." --Sigmund Freud "We can consider the process of healthy growth to be a never ending series of free choice situations, confronting each individual at every point throughout his life, in which he must choose between the delights of safety and growth, dependence and independence, regression and progression, immaturity and maturity." -- Abraham Maslow

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Subject: Dysfunctional Cyber-surfing, Disordered Internet Use (Abuse?), Tech Addicts, ETC

2006-12-22T03:15:00.000-08:00

Dysfunctional Cyber-surfing, Disordered Internet Use (Abuse?), Tech Addicts, ETC

All,

I haven't become comfortable yet speaking of internet use as something that can become an addiction.

Yet: "Indeed, although definitions of addiction vary, there is a body of evidence that suggests drug addictions and non-drug habits share the same neural pathways (New Scientist, 26 August, p 30). While only a hardcore few can be considered true technology addicts, an entirely unscientific survey of the web, and of New Scientist staff, has revealed how prevalent techno-addictions may have become.

Don back. Descriptions of disorders are interesting as are some case studies. Don

Just can't get e-nough
20 December 2006
Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition.
Subscribe and get 4 free issues
Richard Fisher

Hello, my name is Richard and I am an egosurfer. The habit began about five years ago, and now I need help. Like most journalists, I can't deny that one of my private joys is seeing my byline in print. Now the internet is allowing me to feed this vanity to an ever greater extent, and the occasional sneaky web search has grown into a full-blown obsession with how high up Google's ranking my articles appear when I put my name into the search box. When I last looked, my best effort was a rather humiliating 47th place. You know you have a problem when you find yourself competing for ranking with a retired basketball player from the 1970s.

Not that I'm alone in suffering from a dysfunctional techno-habit. New technologies have revealed a whole raft of hitherto unsuspected personality problems: think crackberry, powerpointlessness or cheesepodding (see "Modern maladies", bottom). Most of us are familiar with sending an email to a colleague sitting a couple of feet away instead of talking to them. Some go onto the web to snoop on old friends, colleagues or even first dates. More of us than ever reveal highly personal information on blogs or MySpace entries. A few will even use internet anonymity to fool others into believing they are someone else altogether. So are these web syndromes and technological tics new versions of old afflictions, or are we developing fresh mind bugs?

Developing a bad habit is easier than many might think. "You can become addicted to potentially anything you do," says Mark Griffiths, an addiction researcher at Nottingham Trent University in the UK, "because addictions rely on constant rewards." Indeed, although definitions of addiction vary, there is a body of evidence that suggests drug addictions and non-drug habits share the same neural pathways (New Scientist, 26 August, p 30). While only a hardcore few can be considered true technology addicts, an entirely unscientific survey of the web, and of New Scientist staff, has revealed how prevalent techno-addictions may have become.

The web in particular has opened up a host of opportunities for overindulgence. Take Wikipedia. Updating the entries - something anyone can do - has become almost a way of life for some. There are more than 2400 "Wikipedians", p 36 - you know where to look it up if you don't know what it means - who have edited more than 4000 pages each ("see Confessions of a Wikipediholic", below). "It's clearly like crack for some people," says Dan Cosley at Cornell University in New York, who has studied how websites such as Wikipedia foster a community. To committed Wikipedians, he says, the site is more than a useful information resource; it's the embodiment of an ideology of free information for all.

For complete article go to:

http://www.newscientisttech.com/article/mg19225831.200?DCMP=NLC-nletter&nsref=mg19225831.200

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Sometimes, the "Why" Really Isn’t Crucial - Sally Satel - Enemy of Vets

2006-12-20T21:49:00.000-08:00

Thu 21 Dec 06, 12:50 p.m.

Hi All,

I think it might have been Maia that previously warned us that Sally Satel, as a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, was a conservative idealogue. On another listserv someone brought up her opinions about PTSD. Go to the web address below. Toward the end of that item there is a report of a meeting at the IOM on the subject of PTSD. Apparently Satel is the 'pit bull' that conservatives unleash anytime the subject of PTSD is discussed. The IOM were not pleased with Satel or her views.

Don PS She might want to avoid American Legion or VFW get togethers.

http://www.vva.org/TheVeteran/2006_05/featurePTSDstorm.htm

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Sometimes, the "Why" Really Isn’t Crucial

2006-12-20T02:42:00.000-08:00

December 19, 2006

Essay

Sometimes, the "Why" Really Isn’t Crucial
By SALLY SATEL, M.D., NY Times

“Why do I use drugs?” I am asked every few weeks by a patient in our methadone clinic.

I take the query as a good sign; curiosity about oneself is usually healthy. But the premise behind the question — that a person can reliably identify the psychic roots of an addiction, or any other act of self-sabotage — is highly overrated.

Research psychologists have known for decades that it is very difficult to determine causation in mental life and thus, of behavior. For one thing, we can never perform an experiment. Take my patient Karen, 50, who spent most of the 1990s smoking crack. She is certain that the decade-long binge would never have happened had her mother not died when she was 12. We will never know if she is right because we cannot rewind Karen’s life, play it again, and see what would have happened if her mother had lived.

Reconstructing the story of one’s life is a complicated business for other reasons. What scientists call hindsight bias kicks in when we try to figure out the causal chain of events leading to the current situation. We may well come up with a tidy story but, inevitably, it will contain large swaths of revisionist history. It’s not that we bias ourselves deliberately; it happens because the mind tends to make events in the past appear comprehensible and orderly. We forget the uncertainties that might have beset us as we struggled in real time.

For complete article go to:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/19/health/psychology/19essa.html?ref=psychology

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

War on Drugs Expands to Catnip !!!

2006-12-15T16:22:00.000-08:00

Subject: War on Drugs Expands to Catnip -- Beware of CLAWS

Fred Foldvary's Editorial
War on Drugs Expands to Catnip
by Fred E. Foldvary, Senior Editor

Drug warriors scored a virtual victory after the 2006 U.S. elections when they hurriedly extended the War on Drugs to a psychoactive substance previously exempt: nepetalactone, the main psychoactive ingredient in catnip. It is well known that the sniffing of catnip makes some cats "turn on." Their eyes open wide, they roll over on the floor, they hug and bite the catnip toy and kick it with the feet, and they friskily run to and fro, similar to human beings who go crazy ingesting psychoactive drugs.

While catnip does not have the same effect on human beings, the advocates of banning catnip have pointed out that children who give their cats catnip and then see the cat being "happy" might get dangerous ideas about getting high. They think, if the cat can feel good, why not them too? Indeed, the first step to marijuana addiction may well be catnip! According to the drug warriors, catnip has been a major gateway to the human abuse of drugs, and yet there has been no prohibition.

For complete article go to:

http://www.progress.org/2006/fold483.htm

Press Release - Catnap Liberation Army With Spirit Beware of CLAWS

Cats have been organizing in neighborhoods throughout the Nation, stalking supermarkets and malls with petitions and have formed an underground action group called the Catnap Liberation Army With Spirit (CLAWS). It's been reported that when they are strong enough (about six more Manx should do it) they plan to invade the White House, claw all the drapes, chew up the house plants and use the first family's shoes as hair ball depositories and litter boxes. If they can not gain enough strength for this attack, they will settle on the last white house on your block. The CLAWS should be feared. Investigations have been launched by the CIA, FBI, Secret Service and Homeland Security. Warn your friends and neighbors of this threat.

This fun little exchange did lead to getting an excellent Catnip tea recipe for sleep. DAP

Don Phillips,
your intrepid reporter
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Male–female differences in the risk of progression from first use to dependence upon cannabis, cocaine, and alcohol

2006-12-15T03:22:00.000-08:00

Subject: Male–female differences in the risk of progression from first use to dependence upon cannabis, cocaine, and alcoholDrug and Alcohol DependenceVolume 86, Issues 2-3 , 12 January 2007, Pages 191-198

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2006.06.003Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ireland Ltd All rights reserved.

Fernando A. Wagnera and James C. Anthonyb, ,
a Drug Abuse Research Program, School of Public Health and Policy, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD 21251, USAbDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Human Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

Received 12 August 2004; revised 8 June 2006; accepted 16 June 2006. Available online 9 October 2006.

Abstract

Introduction

We extend prior reports about the risk of dependence on specific drugs by providing developmental-specific risk estimates for progression from first use to meeting criteria for DSM-III-R dependence upon cannabis, cocaine, or alcohol, as well as male–female differences.

Methods

The data are from the National Comorbidity Survey, with a national probability sample of persons 15–44 years old in the United States, which included many respondents who used cannabis, cocaine and alcohol on at least one occasion (n = 3558, 1337, and 6149, for cannabis, cocaine, and alcohol, respectively). Survival analysis procedures provided cumulative risk estimates of progression from first use to dependence upon each drug.
ResultsThe estimated risk of cannabis dependence among male cannabis users was 1% in the first year after first use, and reached a peak at 4% per year 2 years later, before declining. In contrast, the estimated risk of cannabis dependence among female cannabis users remained at 1% per year for 3 years, without the peak. For both male and female cocaine users, the estimated risk for developing cocaine dependence was 5 to 6% within the first year after first use. Thereafter, the estimated risk declined from the peak value, with a somewhat faster decline for females in the next 3 years after first use. For alcohol, the estimated risk period extended for many years after the first drink, with female drinkers becoming alcohol dependent at a rate of about 1% per year; with somewhat higher risk for male drinkers. For both male and female drinkers, the period of risk for developing alcohol dependence extended for a span of more than 20 years since first use; for cannabis and cocaine, the estimated period of risk was much shorter.

Comment

There are male–female differences in the risk of becoming cannabis dependent during the first several years after initiation of cannabis use, less pronounced male–female differences for alcohol, and relatively smaller male–female differences for cocaine. These results should interest scientists whose focus is upon the origins of male–female differences in the occurrence of drug dependence.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 517 353 8623; fax: +1 517 432 1130.

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Troubled Children - Off to College Alone

2006-12-09T18:13:00.000-08:00

Troubled Children - Off to College Alone, Shadowed by Mental Illness

Listmates,

Excellent real life stories of youngsters with mental health disorders (bi-polar primarily) transitioning to college life. This is also a critical point where the stressors of this period could cause substance use disorders to emerge (co-occurring). The article speaks to resources available at many colleges and universities. The MH professionals treating these youngsters have played major roles -- particularly with the bi-polar disorder and the need to be so medication conscious. Increasingly universities and colleges are developing support systems for those with both MH and SU disorders. It sounds as if material may be available. Don Excerpt: "Active Minds, a student-led mental health advocacy organization founded in 2001 at the University of Pennsylvania, now has 56 chapters at schools including Georgetown University, Columbia University, the University of South Florida and the University of Maryland. The National Alliance on Mental Illness has 30 campus affiliates, with 18 more in formation, groups that are set up as student clubs and are financed by school activity budgets and fund-raisers. Programs like the Jed Foundation, a suicide prevention program, and National Depression Screening Day, held each October, offer additional resources." December 8, 2006 Troubled Children Off to College Alone, Shadowed by Mental Illness By LYNETTE CLEMETSON - NY Times Her mother called it a negotiable proposition. But to Jean Lynch-Thomason, a 17-year-old with bipolar disorder who started college this fall, her mom’s notion to fly from their home in Nashville to her campus in Olympia, Wash., every few weeks to monitor Jean’s illness felt needlessly intrusive. “I am so totally aware of the control you have over me right now,” Jean said, sitting in her parents’ living room one evening last June, before coolly reminding her mother of her upcoming 18th birthday. “In a few months the power dynamic is going to be different.” For Chris Ference, 19, who is also bipolar, the fast-approaching autonomy of his freshman year held somewhat less appeal. His parents had always directed every aspect of his mental health care. Last summer, over Friday night pizza at his home in Cranberry Township, Pa., he told them that assuming control felt more daunting than liberating. “If it was up to me, I would just have it so you could make those decisions for me up until I was like, 22,” he said. “I mean, you’ve raised me well up to now. You know me better than anyone.” The transition from high school to college, from adolescence to legal adulthood, can be tricky for any teenager, but for the increasing number of young people who arrive on campus with diagnoses of serious mental disorders — and for their parents — the passage can be particularly fraught.

Don Phillips
daphil15 [at] hotmail [dot] com

Meth Addiction Among Gay and Bisexual Men is Treatable

2006-12-09T04:42:00.000-08:00

Listmates,

A question came up yesterday on another listserv about treatment for meth addiction -- specifically whether there are Medication Assisted Treatments available. And then this came up today. For meth addiction specifically the answer is no - see report. For the co-morbid psychiatric conditions and general symptoms that may accompany withdrawal/early recovery - yes. It is good to see a positive on treating meth addiction. Thanks Gay and Lesbian Medical Association. The report also speaks to useful therapies.

Don From Join Together GLMA Report Finds Meth Addiction Among Gay and Bisexual Men is Treatable December 7, 2006 Contact: Gay and Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA) 459 Fulton Street, Suite 107 San Francisco, CA 94102 www.glma.org info@glma.org Tel: 415-255-4547 San Francisco, CA - The Gay and Lesbian Medical Association recently released a report that contradicts the widely held perception that addiction to crystal methamphetamine is essentially untreatable, a misunderstanding shared by some health professionals. The release of the report coincides with National Methamphetamine Awareness Day. The report, entitled Breaking the Grip: Treating Crystal Methamphetamine Addiction Among Gay and Bisexual Men, highlights specific treatment strategies identified as useful by clinicians and researchers. The report also identifies a need for more treatment programs tailored to gay and bisexual men, who use methamphetamine at a rate ten times higher than the general population. "We need to get past the myth that crystal meth addiction can't be treated successfully," said GLMA Executive Director Joel Ginsberg. "Certainly there are barriers to successful treatment -- overcoming addiction is difficult, treatment options aren't perfect, and we need more programs tailored for our community. But it's important for people to know that gay and bisexual men addicted to crystal meth can get better and that they are not a lost cause." GLMA's team collected data for the Breaking the Grip project by examining the peer-reviewed, scholarly literature on the subject and by conducting eight focus groups in five cities where crystal meth use is thought to be widespread. Focus group participants included physicians, psychiatrists, psychologists and therapists working in the field of addiction, researchers in the fields of epidemiology, pharmacology and clinical psychology, and health policy experts. The full report is available at www.glma.org/breakingthegrip.