Here’s a recommended read from The Atlantic. If you or somebody close to you is an addict, you’d be wise to read this vintage article. The article explores how a pseudoscientific, religious organization birthed the most trusted method of addiction treatment

Source: The Surprising Failures of 12 Steps – The Atlantic

As well as being a Chartered Accountant by profession, I have a Doctorate in Business Admistration, so I tend to look for the scientific evidence and then collaboration of the evidence, then I look for alternatives. In other words, I’m pretty skeptical of headlines and popular solutions. I’m just sharing my bias.

To me it’s obvious, as a trained social scientist, that ‘one-size fits all’, panacea programs has severe limitations – simply, it fails to deal with individual context.

Sadly, addiction brings enormous psychological, social and economic consequences to victims, their families and friends. Addicts are by definition extremely weak people and they’re constantly looking for an easy solution. Unfortunately, everybody is genarally desperate by the time that they turn to the ’12 Steps’.

The Atlantic article looks at the underlying scientific evidence and it raises some fundamental questions about the ’12 Steps’. Of course individuals might argue that ’12 Steps’ worked for them but their arguments are not based upon scientific analysis.

Thoughts?