Aa history Lovers 2006 moderators Nancy Olson and Glenn F. Chesnut page

Download 14.05 Mb.
Size14.05 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   96
++++Message 3029. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: Alcohol left in food after


From: Doug B. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/7/2006 2:28:00 AM
I got this guide online:


Cooking With Alcohol
When cooking with beer or alcohol, does all of the alcohol evaporate?
No. The following chart should be helpful.
No heat application, immediate consumption 100%
No heat application, overnight storage 70%
Alcohol ingredient added to boiling liquid, and removed from heat 85%
Flamed 75%
Baked, approximately 25 minutes, alcohol ingredient

on surface of mixture (not stirred in) 45%

Baked/simmered, alcohol ingredient stirred into mixture

15 minutes / 40%

30 minutes / 35%

1 hour / 25%

1.5 hours / 20%

2 hours / 10%

2.5 hours / 5%
source: Minnesota Nutrition Council Newsletter
What can I substitute if a recipe calls for beverages with alcohol?
The best, but not always the easiest solution, is to find another recipe

without alcohol that will fill the need. If the beer or wine is a major

ingredient in your recipe, or if a large quantity is called for, it

makes sense not to attempt a substitute. The results could be

unpleasant. In such a case, look for another recipe.
Often the alcohol required will be a small amount, such as a couple of

tablespoons, and in this case there are several substitutions:

In recipes having plenty of seasonings, plan water may be substituted.

Both the alcohol and a substitute may be omitted if the liquid isn't

needed for a gravy or sauce.
When cooking with fish, an equal amount of bottled or fresh clam or fish

stock may be substituted. Just remember, bottled clam juice and some

fish stocks are high in salt. Some people use white grape juice with

Other substitutes include chicken or beef broth

Juice such as lemon, lime, apple or cranberry are all possibilities.
Reprinted from Fall 99 Issue Byerly's Bag
Doug B.
JOHN e REID wrote:
> The Editorial Staff: The Grapevine, The Pathfinder, The Reviver, AA

> Around Australia, NZ Mainstay, Bristol Fashion.


> Some years ago the Grapevine published the results of a study on how

> much alcohol is retained in food after cooking. As Russ J who was


> Number 5" in Australia used the say, "the half truths in



> Recently I heard some fairly newly sober saying to a gathering of

> fairly new folk recently, "do not worry about how much alcohol is


> the food, it is ALL cooked out!!!!"


> For the benefit of us all, would you be so kind as to re-print the

> results of that previous study?


> All the very best for 2006, Thanks and Kind Regards, John R


> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]









Addiction recovery Recovery from Addiction recovery

program addiction center
Christian Alcoholics

addiction recovery anonymous

> -----------------------------------------------------------------------



> + Visit your group "AAHistoryLovers" on the web.


> + To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

> AAHistoryLovers-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com


> + Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of

> Service.


> -----------------------------------------------------------------------

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
++++Message 3030. . . . . . . . . . . . RE: Alcohol left in food after


From: Bill Lash . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/7/2006 8:37:00 AM
Does anyone know the name of this AA Grapevine article or when it was

published? Thanks.

-----Original Message-----

From: AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of JOHN e REID

Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 11:00 PM

To: AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [AAHistoryLovers] Alcohol left in food after cooking

The Editorial Staff: The Grapevine, The Pathfinder, The Reviver, AA Around

Australia, NZ Mainstay, Bristol Fashion.

Some years ago the Grapevine published the results of a study on how much

alcohol is retained in food after cooking. As Russ J who was "AA Number


in Australia used the say, "the half truths in AA".

Recently I heard some fairly newly sober saying to a gathering of fairly

new folk recently, "do not worry about how much alcohol is in the food,


is ALL cooked out!!!!"

For the benefit of us all, would you be so kind as to re-print the results

of that previous study?

All the very best for 2006, Thanks and Kind Regards, John R
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
++++Message 3031. . . . . . . . . . . . DSM-IV definitions: Abuse vs.

Dependence (Alcoholism)

From: ny-aa@att.net . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/5/2006 11:37:00 PM
If we are going to discuss the distinction that is made between

"Alcohol Abuse [305]" and "Alcohol Depencence [303.9]"

it is useful

to look at the diagnostic definitions in what is called "DSM-IV"


"Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ed. 4"

Here are two references to those definitions.
Note: NIAAA (National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism)

only classifies "Alcohol Depencence" as "Alcoholism" The


diagnoses are mutually exclusive.



Friends and family members of the alcoholic are often the first to

notice problems and seek professional help. Many times, the alcoholic

does not realize the severity of the problem or denies it. Some signs

cannot go unnoticed, such as loss of a job, family problems, or citations

for driving under the influence of alcohol. Dependence is indicated by

symptoms such as withdrawal, injuries from accidents, or blackouts.

The American Psychiatric Association has developed strict criteria

for the clinical diagnosis of abuse and dependence. The Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual -- IV (DSM-IV) defines abuse as:
* A maladaptive pattern of substance use leading to clinically

significant impairment or distress, as manifested by one (or more)

of the following, occurring within a 12-month period:

1. recurrent substance use resulting in a failure to fulfill major

role obligations at work, school, home (e.g., repeated absences or

poor work performance related to substance use; substance-related

absences, suspensions, or expulsions from school; neglect of children

or household)

2. recurrent substance use in situations in which it is physically

hazardous (e.g., driving an automobile or operating a machine when

impaired by substance use)

3. recurrent substance-related legal problems (e.g., arrests for

substance-related disorderly conduct)

4. continued substance use despite having persistent or recurrent

social or interpersonal problems caused or exacerbated by the effects

of the substance (e.g., arguments with spouse about consequences of

intoxication, physical fights)

* The symptoms have never met the criteria for Substance Dependence

for this class of substances.
[DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ed. 4.

Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association (AMA). 1994.]

Most often, abuse is diagnosed in individuals who recently began using

alcohol. Over time, abuse may progress to dependence. However, some

alcohol users abuse alcohol for long periods without developing


Dependence is suspected when alcohol use is accompanied by signs

of the following:

* Abuse

* Compulsive drinking behavior

* Tolerance

* Withdrawal

DSM-IV defines dependence as:
* A maladaptive pattern of substance use, leading to clinically

significant impairment or distress, as manifested by three (or more)

of the following, occurring at any time in the same 12-month period:

1. tolerance, as defined by either of the following:

o a need for markedly increased amounts of the substance to achieve

intoxication or desired effect

o markedly diminished effect with continued use of the same amount

of substance

2. withdrawal, as manifested by either of the following:

o the characteristic withdrawal syndrome for the substance

o the same (or a closely related) substance is taken to relieve

or avoid withdrawal symptoms

3. the substance is often taken in larger amounts or over a longer

period than was intended

4. there is a persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to cut down

or control substance use

5. a great deal of time is spent in activities to obtain the substance,

use the substance, or recover from its effects

6. important social, occupational or recreational activities are given

up or reduced because of substance use

7. the substance use is continued despite knowledge of having a

persistent or recurrent physical or psychological problem that is

likely to have been caused or exacerbated by the substance

(e.g., continued drinking despite recognition that an ulcer was made

worse by alcohol consumption)
[DSM-IV, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, ed. 4.

Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association (AMA). 1994.]



# DSM-IV Alcohol Abuse (1 or more criteria for over 1 year)
1. Role Impairment (e.g. failed work or home obligations)

2. Hazardous use (e.g. Driving while intoxicated)

3. Legal problems related to alcohol use

4. Social or interpersonal problems due to alcohol

# DSM-IV Alcohol Dependence (3 criteria for over 1 year)
1. Tolerance (increased drinking to achieve same effect)

2. Alcohol Withdrawal signs or symptoms

3. Drinking more than intended

4. Unsuccessful attempts to cut down on use

5. Excessive time related to alcohol (obtaining, hangover)

6. Impaired social or work activities due to alcohol

7. Use despite physical or psychological consequences
# References
1. (1994) DSM-IV, APA, p. 181-3
++++Message 3032. . . . . . . . . . . . Green Pond, NJ

From: Russ S . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/5/2006 3:20:00 PM

Dear History Lovers,
I live in a town 10 miles from Green Pond, New Jersey. I would like to find

the house Bill and Lois lived in before they moved to Stepping Stones. Any

suggestions on where to start?
Russ from Ogdensburg, NJ
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
++++Message 3033. . . . . . . . . . . . Re: DSM-IV definitions: Abuse vs.

Dependence (Alcoholism)

From: Mitchell K. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/7/2006 6:15:00 PM
PLEASE NOTE. If using the DSM IV as any sort of

defining guideline for alcoholism one must remember

the following: The DSM does state that a person can

remain in total remission from alcohol dependence and

continue drinking as long as they do not exhibit the

criteria used for the diagnosis of dependence.

Abstinence from the use of beverage alcohol does not

define remission.... the lack of exhibiting the

criteria does. If one uses Alcoholics Anonymous and

the DSM in the same manner they are not congruent.

From: Mitchell K.

(mitchell_k_archivist at yahoo.com)

Note from the moderator:
Mitchell K. is one of our best AA historians, and an expert on the history


early AA in the Cleveland area, where there were more AA members at one

point in

early AA history than in either Akron or the New York area. He is responding

here to two earlier messages.
Message 2973 "Data on 3 and 5 year survival rates" from Ernest


(kurtzern at umich.edu)contained an interesting


study by social scientists of how people who have been treated for


are doing 3 and 5 years afterwards, measured against how many AA meetings


have been attending.
Message 3031 "DSM-IV definitions: Abuse vs. Dependence (Alcoholism)

" from

(ny-aa at att.net) laid out one of the standard

definitions of

alcoholism used by social scientists, in this case the one currently used by

psychiatrists and psychotherapists in the U.S. for diagnostic purposes, to


understand how modern social scientists would determine which people in a


whom they were studying were actually alcoholics. This can help us to


the kinds of criteria used in the study in Message 2973.

Mitchell K. in this present message

(mitchell_k_archivist at yahoo.com) points out that NEITHER the social

scientists who made the 3 and 5 year study, NOR the psychiatrists who wrote


DSM, were employing exactly the same kinds of definitions of "real


that are given in various places within the historic heritage of Alcoholics


Mitchell's warning is important, and right on target.
The AAHistoryLovers is not the right kind of forum for attacking the social

scientists for not using AA definitions. We have worked hard over the years


try to keep the AAHL from becoming just a chat group (there are already


of AA chat groups on the internet).

Those members of the AAHL who are AA members simply need to remember that


social scientists are not necessarily using AA definitions, as Mitchell K.

points out, and that any AA members reading articles written by social

scientists will need to take that into account in evaluating that data.
Glenn C. (moderator)
++++Message 3034. . . . . . . . . . . . RE: James Houck and AA in Towson

From: ArtSheehan . . . . . . . . . . . . 1/7/2006 7:02:00 PM

Unfortunately, I believe there is a much more serious and

disconcerting side to James H and his affiliation as the poster child

for the "Back to Basics" (B2B) organization.
B2B propagates revisionist AA history in a classic example of

manufacturing an idyllic scenario portraying the AA program of

Recovery in the "old days" and then manufacturing a contrasting

scenario bemoaning that "today" it's all different and has gone

B2B engages in four practices that I find very troubling in that they

present fiction as history. The B2B practices are: (1) portrayal of

the figurative as the literal (2) broad brush portrayal of the

exception as the rule (3) portrayal of simple associations as

established cause and effect and (4) portrayal of James H's duration

of dry time to be the equivalent of his degree of accuracy and breadth

of knowledge.
B2B claims that AA is currently experiencing a 5% (or less) success

rate. This is supposedly in contrast to a 50% (they used to claim 75%

or 90%) "success rate" that AA allegedly enjoyed in the 1940s and


Their absurd assertion is unquestioningly being cited on web sites, in

literature, in academic papers and TV as established fact when it is

pure fiction.
The assertion that AA enjoyed 50%, 75% or 90% "success rates" in


1940s and 50s is derived solely through selective semantic citation

(which is deficient in context) and is not statistically demonstrated.

There may have been some place at some time with that kind of success,

but to use it to paint a broad-brush overall projection of AA is

Outside of a small number of instances, when AA was quite small, there

is no viable and verifiable body of records or statistics maintained

that would provide any type of reliable basis for stating any type of

overall AA "success rate." The same holds true today in terms of

asserting the erroneous 5% "success rate." The folks that make


kinds of fatuous claims are driven by an agenda, not facts. All too

often, those making the claims do so as a disingenuous null hypothesis

that that someone else must disprove rather than them substantiating

their claims with factual evidence.

As a solution to their manufactured doom and gloom scenario, B2B

advocates the rather unremarkable hypothesis that Step choreography is

the determining factor in successful recovery. This is based on James

H's expert insight via the following gem of wisdom and experience on

B2B's web site:
"James provided Wally with three missing concepts from the


program that allowed him to successfully "fly the plane." They


(1) the verbal Fourth Step (Moral Inventory), (2) the expanded Ninth

Step that included forgiveness as well as restitution, and (3) the

written Eleventh Step (Prayer and Meditation). He supplied Wally with

a four-page pamphlet, written in 1938 by a person who had attended

Oxford Group meetings with Dr. Bob Smith. This pamphlet, titled "How

to Listen to God," provided clear, concise directions on how to

conduct two-way prayer."
B2B first asserted that a verbal 4th Step should be done instead of a

written one. They later embellished this profound thesis with

suggesting the use of a particular "assets and liabilities list"

together with sponsor participation. This, along with a choreography

change to take the "forgiveness" the Big Book suggest doing in the


Step and migrate it to the 9th Step (without passing GO or collecting

$200), and then squeeze in a little "quiet time" in the 11th Step

and, voila, your "success rates" soar from 5% to a 10-fold


increase to %50% or higher.
To state that both the choreography and success rate fantasies are

built on meager threads is it putting it mildly. Even more meager are

any solid demonstration of facts. The notions are based on anecdotal

hearsay or the tortuous twisting of semantic nuance.

To give credence to this theater of the absurd, B2B has elevated and

shamelessly promoted James H to demigod status in terms of his

presumed qualifications to offer expert commentary on how AA and the

Oxford Group functioned 70 years ago. The sad fact is that quite a

number of AA members, who have no way of knowing any better, have been

swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

Over the years, the B2B web site has asserted some rather creatively

evolving "connections" that were supposed to have existed between

James H and Bill W (even a mention of Dr Bob).
The first was that "James attended Oxford Group meetings with Bill

Wilson in Frederick, MD from 1935-1937." James H lived in Maryland,

Bill W lived in NY (a mere 244 miles distant one-way today via

interstate highways).

During the great economic depression (which accounts for the latter

half of the 1930s) and during World War II (which accounts for the

beginning half of the 1940s) travel in the US was no simple matter,

even from Maryland to NY. I'm not sure whether B2B's use of the word

"together" is supposed to be interpreted to mean "at the same


"at the same time" or both. In any event, it gives the impression


James H and Bill W were frequently in contact with one another when I

don't believe any such thing actually occurred.

The next is a claim on B2B's web site that "Although James stayed in

the Oxford Group, he did have contact with the early A.A. fellowship

through Sam Shoemaker, a mutual friend of his and Bill Wilson's. Sam

Shoemaker was the rector of the Calvary Church in New York City, which

was the United States headquarters of the Oxford Group."
This probably took some real doing on James H's part in that Sam

Shoemaker left the Oxford Group in 1941 and evicted the Oxford Group

from Calvary Hall in NYC. So it would be interesting to find out just

how James H worked through Sam Shoemaker.

In response to a question of whether James H was a member of AA, the

answer was "Yes, he is as much a member of A.A. as anyone else who has

a desire to stop drinking. However, for James the compulsion to drink

was successfully removed on December 12, 1934. He has not had a drink

of alcohol or taken a mood altering substance (including nicotine)

since that day. ... James has an A.A. home group. It meets on Thursday

nights at the Towson, MD Methodist church."
In addition to the above is a statement that James H "was a member of

the Oxford Group in the 1930's and is a member of Moral Re-Armament

So he has a home group where no one knows the "longest living"


member and he's a member of Moral Rearmament, which today is called

"Initiatives of Change" (perhaps James hadn't noticed). so it's

anything but clear how James H actually fits into the total picture.
In 1961, a book was published about a man named Ferdinand Waldo DeMara

Jr. The title of the book was "The Great Imposter." I can't help


get the same sense that a similar book could be written about B2B and

James H.

-----Original Message-----

From: AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com

[mailto:AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rob White

Sent: Friday, January 06, 2006 8:07 AM

To: AAHistoryLovers@yahoogroups.com

Subject: Re: [AAHistoryLovers] James Houck and AA in Towson
I have been reading these entires with some mild amusement.
Having lived in the Towson area for most of my life (age 54) and

Share with your friends:
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   96

The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2019
send message

    Main page