Newsgroups: sci.med.psychobiology
From: [s--sw--s] at [hotellng.unx.sas.com] (Warren Sarle)
Subject: Re: COCAINE, ADDICTIONS
Cc: [MIH H C] at [CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 1994 23:35:10 GMT


In article <[94219 182436 MIH H C] at [CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]>, Michael Harvey <[MIH H C] at [CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]> writes:
|> ..., where do these studies
|> get thier data from? Since AA keeps no record of membership, and
|> is not the same as hospital programs, how are these results
|> obtained? I am not saying I don't believe its possible, I just
|> want to know how it was done.

In Ditman et al. (1967) "A controlled experiment on the use of court
probation in the management of the alcohol addict", American J. of
Psychiarty, 124, 160-163, alcoholics convicted of driving while
intoxicated were randomly assigned to 3 groups: AA, an alcohol clinic,
and a non-treated control group. In the follow-up period, the control
group had the fewest rearrests (60%), followed by the clinic (68%),
with AA coming in last (69%). I do not have the paper or any secondary
references handy and I don't recall other details, such as whether
the differences were statistically significant.

At the time of Miller and Hester's review there was only one other
scientifically valid study of AA's effectiveness, reported in
Brandsma, Maultsby and Walsh (1980) _The Outpatient Treatment of
Alcoholism_, University Park Press, which also found that AA had no
higher an effectiveness rate than an untreated control group. I have
no details on that study.

|> The quote actually reads "our treatement", why does that=AA?

Because Vaillant was studying AA.

-- 

Warren S. Sarle       SAS Institute Inc.   The opinions expressed here
[s--sw--s] at [unx.sas.com]    SAS Campus Drive     are mine and not necessarily
(919) 677-8000        Cary, NC 27513, USA  those of SAS Institute.