Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChrisMarshallNY | Hacker News Reader

I have opinions and...more importantly...skin in the game, here. It's been my experience that most of this stuff is written by folks, to whom addiction is an intellectual exercise. Maybe they know someone that may or may not be an addict, and the chances are good, that what happens to that person won't really be life-changing to the person writing about their pet theory.

Things are quite different, when it's your ass, or someone that you really care about, experiencing it.

There's also a great deal of money to be made. Desperate people are easy marks.

That's all I'll say.

View on HN

"to whom addiction is an intellectual exercise. Maybe they know someone that may or may not be an addict, and the chances are good, that what happens to that person won't really be life-changing to the person writing about their pet theory."

Spot on. I also got a massive armchair amateurish feel reading it. They feel very comfortable emphasizing that certain lucky addicts can seem to recover and moderate, but don't really seem to put nearly as much emphasis on addicts that might die or ruin their lives if they read that advice and think they can moderate before relapsing again. No mention in the article about %s of addicts these facts apply to, no mention of the author's name or credentials. Just a crappy article that doesn't help the situation at all really.

Agreed. This article, while interesting enough, is clearly written by someone who is not an addict and does not have close/intimate relationships with any addicts.

"In theory there is no difference between theory and practice, while in practice there is." - Benjamin Brewster

> clearly written by someone who is not an addict and does not have close/intimate relationships with any addicts

I have a disproportionately large number of addicts in my family as a percentage. I grew up around this. This article is written by someone working completely in theory.

There is nuance in everything, and many people may actually beat addiction - but from what I’ve seen, to some degree it’s always there somewhere, forever dormant or just napping, just takes the right conditions to come back.

This article is at best naive and at worst dangerous and deadly. Addiction is visceral and affects the ancient parts of the brain, the best you can do with consciousness and reason is outsmart it at every turn. Can you rationalize being hungry or in love? It's more like a natural reflex that is described: That's what it addiction feels like. Unfortunately you never get to "eat" or "fall in love". It's at best annoying and at worst crippling, and such is the rest of your life to some degree. I wish you luck brother.

Nailed it. It’s easy to pick apart the “official” writings of AA since they were mostly written in the 1930s, but the books don’t do justice to the actual experience of someone recovering from alcoholism.

> That's all I'll say.

I respect that but I'd wish you'd say more. I have no way to verify who's more knowledgeable about this, you or the person writing the article but as someone who knows a friend of a friend who might be dealing with this kind of problem I'm having trouble finding any real conversation about it. it seems like it's all advertising or armchair psychology when it comes to online resources about this.

Feel free to contact me offline. Most of the folks that have something to say, don't really do so in public.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com