Letters

Letters CCCXLVIII

Letters, We Get Mail, CCCXLVIII

[ Link here = http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters348.html#HBC ]

This was copied over from the forum:

Submitted by Ed on Tue, 03/12/2013 - 13:43
Subject: What to feed the wildlife

http://hardeybordercollies.com/id91.html

What to feed waterfowl
http://birding.about.com/od/birdfeeders/a/whatduckseat.htm

Orange

Tue, 03/12/2013 - 18:23

Thanks for the links. The second one is easy: I feed them rolled oats, which is on the recommended list. They only get a little bread, and it's not white bread. They get whole wheat or 7-grain bread or something like that. And that is just a treat, not a diet.

It will take a few minutes to go through the arguments of the first file. I can see errors already, but have to carefully read all of it.

LATER:

The "hardeybordercollies.com" web page "Ten Reasons Why You Should Not Feed Wild Waterfowl & Canada Geese" is a good example of deceptive and untrue propaganda from what I call "Nature Nazis" — people who have extreme views of wildlife and try to force their opinions on others.

Here is the web page:

http://hardeybordercollies.com/id91.html

I'll go through it point by point:

Birds Have Amazing Survival Skills

Yes, they do, but that doesn't mean that we should not feed them. Most all of the geese's and ducks native feeding grounds have been stolen from them and turned into farms, where the farmers get eradication permits to kill the Canada Geese that try to feed on their farms.
See: https://epermits.fws.gov/eRCGR/geSI.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2feRCGR%2fgeSTC.aspx
...where you can register to exterminate Canada Geese.
Also see: www.fws.gov/forms/3-200-13.pdf for the form.
Saying that we shouldn't feed ducks and geese because they have "amazing survival skills" is a Non Sequitur.
The author just assumes that there is a lot of food "out there", somewhere: "the abundance of naturally occurring food." What abundance? The grassy meadows have been plowed up and turned into farms, and the swamps have been drained and turned into farms. Native habitat for ducks and geese is like old-growth forest habitat for Spotted Owls: there is very little of it left, and somebody is always trying to take what is left.
Food Quality Is Critical

Yes, it is, but this author confuses food types. Baby birds whose parents feed them worms or fish, like Robins or Eagles, require high-protein diets. Baby geese, on the other hand, eat grass and seeds. Ducks live on everything and anything from algae and duckweed to worms and insects.
When feeding the wildlife, one should should always feed quality foods, not junk food. Like rolled oats, rather than white bread.
A Diet of White Bread Can Be Fatal to Wildfowl.

I agree. So don't feed them white bread. Feed them rolled oats or whole wheat. Whole grain is the best. A 40-pound bag of rolled oats costs $11.50 at the local farm feed store.

Malnutrition

The author is guilty of the propaganda trick of way over-generalizing. He claims that because some people feed wildfowl white bread and popcorn, that all wildfowl who get some food from humans are suffering from malnutrition. Not so.
First off, the wildfowl always still scrounge for whatever they need. The only ones I see who are not very good at scrounging are the domesticated ducks. Even a domesticated goose like Gus is good at scrounging for greens. (See Gus below.)
Wildfowl are not stupid. They have a good idea of what constitutes a balanced diet for them. They know what they need to eat. They hunger for the things that are good for them. When I was hand-feeding Carmen, when she was less than a week old, she insisted on filling her stomach three-quarters full of grass first, and then she would fill the remaining space with cooked rice. She never deviated from that ratio, and she always insisted on eating the grass first. She was actually born (hatched) with a built-in idea of what constituted good nutrition for her. No way was she suffering from malnutrition.

Carmen standing on her plate of rice and graham cracker crumbs.
Dependency

Again, the author exaggerates and way over-generalizes. Wild geese and ducks do not suddenly become dependent on humans just because they get some supplemental feeding. What is the alternative? Are they supposed to just starve to death because the farmer won't let them feed on his land?
Among his arguments, the author says that fed birds will lose their fear of humans. And so what is so bad about that? The Nature Nazis want "pure" wildlife who fear and distrust humans, and have no contact with humans. What is so great about that? Those crazy purists are foisting their unrealistic ideas on an unwilling population of animals and humans.
Then, under the title of "Dependency", the author slips in all kinds of fear-mongering and misinformation, like claiming that an aggressive goose can knock down a senior citizen. Well, I'm a senior citizen (66 years old), and in 12 years of feeding them, I've never been attacked. Not once. Canada Geese are actually very mellow and easy-going. It's the white domestic geese that will attack you without provocation. I would not keep white geese around children, because they attack children just out of general meanness.
Then the author argues in so many ways that the geese should just die, to prevent "overpopulation", and "concentration near highways and airports". And this guy continues to pretend that he loves wildlife.
Disease

This is a Reversal Of Reality, another propaganda trick. Starvation makes them sick, not getting some good supplemental feeding.
And the author uses the trick of Confusion of Correlation and Causation. He tries to imply that feeding the wildfowl caused his list of diseases. Nonsense. Of course disease outbreaks occur where the concentrated populations of wildfowl are located. It's like how the human flu breaks out in the middle of the largest cities long before it appears on remote farms in Nebraska.
By the way, just listing three outbreaks of disease is the use of two propaganda tricks: Cherry-Picking and Proof By Anecdote. He never mentions how many other times the birds didn't get sick.
Environmental Degradation

This is another Confusion of Correlation and Causation. Concentrate the wildfowl in one small territory by taking all of their territory and making it into farms, highways, cities, streets, buildings and parking lots, and then complain that the overcrowded wildlife are "degrading their environment". So what is the author's answer? Just to let the wildfowl die off so that there aren't so many of them in a small space.
Water Pollution

This is another gross deception. Cites dump millions of gallons of sewage water into rivers and lakes, and then they claim that the geese are polluting the water.
The Fernhill Wetlands is the dumping ground for waste water from the city of Forest Grove's sewage treatment plant. After 10,000 people defacate in the water, you won't even notice what a few geese and ducks do. And there are nasty algae blooms during the summer, all right, but they are caused by all of the phosphates in the water from detergents.
Besides, the author is using another propaganda trick there: Assume The Major Premise. He assumes that feeding wildlife makes them poop in the water. Not so. The truth is, the ducks always poop in the water. It's just what they do, and they will do it no matter whether they get some muchies from humans or just eat lots and lots of algae, weeds, worms, and insects. Geese, on the other hand, tend to poop on the grass, which is why some people hate them eating the grass in city parks. And they poop more when they have to eat a lot of low-calorie grass to get their nourishment, and less if they are eating some whole wheat bread and rolled oats.
Increased Hybridization

Oh horrors! Blacks and Whites having sex together, and making babies! Miscegenation! Racial Impurity! Mixing of the races!
Now the Nazi attitudes of the purists are really becoming obvious. We just can't have those inferior Untermenschen polluting our pure "wild" blood now, can we?
Again, much ado about nothing. Cross-breeding among the geese is rare. I have only seen two instances of it in 12 years of feeding the geese. In Waterfront Park in downtown Portland, Oregon, "Jefferson" was a pure white big fat honking male goose who liked to jump on those pretty French Canadian Geese, and he produced one son. That son produced another child, who produced another. The line went on for three or four generations, and then died out. That's the thing: If the hybrids are inferior, then Mother Nature eliminates them. Evolution is still going on. Survival of the fittest. So we don't need Nature Nazis demanding Racial Purity.
The other instance of cross-breeding is Gus the Greylag Goose at the Fernhill Wetlands at Forest Grove, Oregon. He married a Canada Goose female (they mate for life, you know), and each of the last three years, they have had children. But only one child has survived each year. I love Gus, but have to admit that sometimes he isn't the sharpest pencil in the box. He doesn't seem to be as quick-witted as the Canada Geese, and neither are his children. So the weasel or ermine or eagle picks them off, and he has had only one child survive each of the last three years. We shall see whether they survive in the long run.

Gus and Family
The ducks are much more into miscegenation. People have been dumping all kinds of domestic ducks at the Fernhill Wetlands, and they have interbred and also bred with Mallard Ducks, and produced some real mongrels that are a little of everything. But they are dying out too. There used to be a dozen of them, but they are down to five, all males. I think that the weasel or ermine got the females while they were sitting on their nests.

The gang of Mongrel Ducks
Again, Mother Nature will take care of the situation, like she has been doing for the last four billion years without any help from humans who want to enforce racial purity.
By the way, you might notice that Mother Nature does not like to enforce racial purity at all. She wants to mix the genes up and try every combination and every mixture of breeds. Then natural selection eliminates the inferior ones. And life goes on.
Delayed Migration

The whole planet is cooking from Global Warming, and this guy is complaining about delayed migration, and imagining that it is caused by feeding the geese? Geez Louise. That is the propaganda trick of Blame A Non-Factor.
By the way, it isn't just the geese and ducks that are migrating late. Lots of species are doing it, from whales to caribou to other birds. And those animals are not getting food from humans. Ecologist are citing the delayed migrations of so many species as real evidence of global warming.
Overcrowding in Unnatural Sites

Again, this is the fault of greedy humans who took all of the best land for themselves, and left the wildlife the worst. In Forest Grove, for instance, the Fernhill Wetlands is the dumping ground for the city's sewage treatment plant waste water. That's what the wildlife get. Sewage water. And then this guy complains about the wildlife living in unnatural locations?
And what is this author's answer to "overcrowding"? It is to have them die.
Costly Management Efforts

What do you expect? Take away their lands and food sources, and then complain that they want to feed on somebody's farm? And it costs money to kill them? This is draconian.
Notice that if I am feeding geese over at the wildlife refuge, then the geese don't need to fly to the farmer's field to get something to eat, and he doesn't have to pay money to kill them. Funny how that works.
Devaluation

This is insane. I mean, really insane. The author says that we should not feed the geese and ducks, just let them starve to death, and then he accuses those people who love the wildlife and want to help the geese and ducks and be friends with them of "devaluing them"? That is barking-mad insanity.
And it's another Reversal Of Reality. It's the people who think that the wildlife should starve to death to "reduce overcrowding" who devalue them.
Keep Our Wildfowl Wild

That is impossible, given that there is no wilderness left. Like Indians killed off and forced onto reservations, the wildlife are restricted to a few "wildlife refuges" where they are supposed to starve. And the author calls that "keeping them wild".
The slogan "Keep Our Wildfowl Wild" is an example of the propaganda trick called The Glittering Generality. The author of that page imagines that if we just don't feed the wildlife, that everything will be wonderful.

*             orange@orange-papers.info        *
*         AA and Recovery Cult Debunking      *
*          http://www.Orange-Papers.org/      *
*       http://www.Orange-Papers.org/forum    *
*
**     "The thinking man must oppose all cruel customs no matter how
**     deeply rooted in tradition or surrounded by a halo. We need a
**     boundless ethic which will include the animals also."
**        ==  Albert Schweitzer, physician/Nobel Laureate.
*
**     We have enslaved the rest of the animal creation, and have treated
**     our distant cousins in fur and feathers so badly that beyond doubt,
**     if they were able to formulate a religion, they would depict the
**     Devil in human form.
**       ==   William Ralph Inge

June 23, 2012, Saturday: The Fernhill Wetlands

Nutria

Great Blue Heron

A Slug, another resident of the wetlands

[More gosling photos below, here.]

[ Link here = http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters348.html#Jennifer ]

Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:38 am (Answered 15 March 2013)
From: "Jennifer"
Subject: admiration

Terrance,

It is me again,(don't know if you remember.) Well I am much better. Haven't had a drop in 6 months or so, and have no plans to. :) Feels great. I just wanted to say I am so happy you are still at it. I love your views, pictures of the geese, I honestly have always loved hippies. I'm originally from Eugene, ORE, what can I say. :) I live above a pond and have geese around here. Love watching them and think of you while watching them. You have a STRONG spirit. I have told many professionals about your site, including therapists, psychiatrists, and professor's. Some thought whoa he's angry, however some were very interested. I think you SHOULD start the other site about corporations. Who knows maybe it will start a revolution here in the states. :) God knows we need one.Take care of yourself,

Jennifer

Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 12:44 am (Answered 15 March 2013)
From: "Jennifer"
Subject: Re: admiration

Hey Orange could you please fix that last email I sent it got all jumbled when it was sent. :) I'm on a Kindle maybe that's why. I don't know....

Take care,
Jennifer

Hello Jennifer,

Thank you for the letter and all of the compliments. Yes, I remember you. I'm glad to hear that you are doing well. Congratulations. That's great news.

And your letter wasn't too disorganized. I know how hard it is to type into those little text boxes on web pages and try to get things right with basically no text editing or formatting tools. I prefer to edit files on my own computer and then upload the finished file to a web page, if at all possible. Trying to tell a good story in those small boxes on a Facebook page is frustrating.

Have a good day now, and a good life.

== Orange

*             orange@orange-papers.info        *
*         AA and Recovery Cult Debunking      *
*          http://www.Orange-Papers.org/      *
**     As I see it, every day you do one of two things:
**     build health or produce disease in yourself.
**          ==   Adelle Davis

[ Link here = http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters348.html#Crystal_H ]

Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 5:22 am (Answered 14 March 2013)
From: "Crystal H."
Subject: Quite confused. Not hate mail!!!!

I've just spent about 3 hours reading your page, which just completely reinforced what I already thought of AA: that it is a cult of self flagellating religious nuts, that i want nothing to do with. I'm on my ipad, so maybe I'm missing something, but I never managed to find any info about your opinion on what a positive, healthy recovery would look like (outside of the 5% or so who achieve a spontaneous one). I'd love to see more info on that. I REALLY don't need much convincing about AA; my dad died of cirrhosis when I was 10, 18 years ago. He was 48, and a seasoned alumni of AA and several other programs, all similar: abstain completely or die, one slip makes you a bad person, might as well just give up until you are ready to start over....that sort of thing. Part of that 95% failure rate. I fear suffering the same fate every day, although I'm not suffering the ill consequences of drinking....yet. I even get into the "am I just in denial?" mindset on a regular basis.

I fear that I won't know when I finally cross the line, I fear that my only option will be to become religious (I'm NOT) in order to get a support system or a framework for help, if i realize its not worth it to drink.

I'm not trying to be critical/criticize in a negative sense, but rather looking for some information on something other than on what I already know AA to be...a pile of crap. As you say over and over....most people aren't going to stop themselves, most of us aren't going to just yank ourselves up by our own bootstraps and decide enough is enough.

So what IS there for those of us who will just drink more when we feel bad, and call up a friend who is okay with that to hang out with that day? Because I see that in myself. It scares me. It scares me because it could happen on a regular basis pretty easily. I, personally, would like help of a different variety than what is available out there, if and when I decide I need it. I'd love to see you add more of that!

I know that most people take a lot of convincing to let go of their culturally-ingrained idea of AA, but for those of us who are convinced....now what?

I actually just watched a television show the other day where a guy had two...TWO...sips of champagne and that was played out to the viewer as a huge lapse in character on his part...and then he went to an AA meeting and said he had only been sober for 5 hours and that was supposed to be touching for the viewer. PLEASE. HE WAS NEVER NOT SOBER, and he never failed morally.

I'm really glad I stumbled upon this site because it articulates a lot of what I have felt about recovery programs.... thank you for that. Someone had to say it, no? 90% of them are malarkey snake oil sales for people who just want help, and the biggest moral failing isn't a relapse on the addicts part but rather a failure on the part of our society to accept that people are human, and that the (only legal) drug we are peddling on every corner is addictive.

I just wish you had more answers I suppose... heheh. Maybe you should start a cult, call it Drinkers Confidential, and solve all your money problems, right? I understand no one has the answers :)

Sent from my iPad

Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 5:27 am (Answered 14 March 2013)
From: "Crystal H."
Subject: OH, MY GOODNESS, I SEE WHAT I WAS ASKING ABOUT!

Sorry to email bomb you, but after my last message I went back to the home page and scrolled to my right (as i said im on my ipad... apparently ive got it quite zoomed in) and found your "solution" stuff. I'm sorry for questioning, I haven't read it yet, but please disregard my earlier questions, although the THANK YOU part and other stuff still stands. :)

Sent from my iPad

Date: Thu, March 14, 2013 5:50 am (Answered 14 March 2013)
From: "Crystal H."
Subject: Okay, last email, lol

Hi again,

I also wanted to tell you that I had to just laugh at the guy who said "i don't need statics to know that my life is better." He reminds me of the people who say "I don't need your so-called "facts" you "intellectual" SNOB!" to me regularly. My degree is in sociology but my undergrad favorite was statistics; I return for graduate school with a focus in stats in May. I hear there is a lot of money to be made by female statisticians, and I'm good at it :) I will NEVER, never understand those who say statistics don't matter, or even that statistics can lie. PEOPLE can manipulate statistics, to be deceiving (it is quite simple, on TV every day!) but pure numbers are real and can't lie, because they aren't alive, aren't subjective, as people are, and are based on universal fact.

So these people who keep telling you that your statistics don't matter because they were the one in a million who were "saved" and that you are killing people.... ignore them. Take heart, Fellow human. You are doing the right thing. The truth is never wrong to speak.

And you know you are speaking truth because you have facts on your side, not "feelings" or "beliefs." You know for sure. You definitely have my respect. You're definitely not in the "opinion" section considering your documentation and facts.

Sent from my iPad

Hello Crystal,

Thank you for the letters and the compliments.

You actually brought up an interesting question in your first letter: "what a positive, healthy recovery would look like." I think you meant what a good recovery program would look like, but at first I took it the other way, and wondered what a description of a good sober lifestyle would look like. And I thought, "Hmmm... that's difficult, because they are all different. That is, someone who stops killing himself with alcohol and finds something else to do with his life could do anything: Go back to college, or resume a career, or get married and have kids, or even go to the beach and lay in the sun and feed the goslings."

About ways to recover, yes, I trust that you found: How did you get to where you are?
And the list other, saner, recovery groups and methods: http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-alt_list.html

That second list includes Moderation Management. I noticed your remark about the extremists who insist that absolute abstinence is the only way. The worst part is teaching the idea of powerlessness, and that you will totally relapse if you have one drink. That becomes a self-fullfilling prophesy with many people. That is a really bad teaching and does a lot of harm. What SMART teaches is: If you have a drink, or go to a party and get buzzed one night, then that is a "lapse", not a "relapse". And the thing to do is just stop drinking again. When you fall off of the horse, just climb back up on the horse and ride it some more. Don't continue to drink and make a lapse into a full-blown relapse.

There is also HAMS and the Harm Reduction Network. Dr. Peter Ferentzy has been sending me a bunch of news about what they are doing in Canada, and I've been mirroring it here. I find that a very practical approach, because they have a good chance of helping people who will just walk away if you start talking about total abstinence. And the logic is good: If you can't get them to stop their addiction, at least reduce the harm done. We don't really need all of the junkies also becoming expensive AIDS patients.

Now to clarify, some people can drink moderately, and some can't. It all depends on the individual person. Many years ago, way back in 1978, the famous government think tank, the Rand Corporation, found that the successful people who had stopped drinking self-destructively were evenly split between total abstinence and tapering off into moderate, controlled, drinking. So total abstinence is not the only way. It all depends on the individual person. Of course, the A.A. true believers flipped out when the Rand Corporation released that report. (More on that here.)

Now I'm not recommending that anybody drink alcohol. I'm just saying that one drink does not necessarily end all recovery and instantly readdict all alcoholics. Some yes, some no.

Personally, I'm one of those people who has to 100% avoid alcohol, or I slide back down that slippery slope very quickly. But that's okay, because I'm tired of being sick from alcohol anyway. No big loss. I already got my lifetime quota of that kind of suffering. I don't need any more of that.

I certainly don't want to force my style of recovery onto other people. Whatever works. Different strokes for different folks.

About the statistics, I find that the people who refuse to hear the numbers, and don't tell the truth about the numbers, are those people who prefer to live in a fairy tale rather than in the real world. They really don't want to know the truth.

And yes, I've heard the accusations and complaints about bad statistics so many times. I know what deceptive manipulations can be done with statistics. I even have Darrell Huff's classic book How To Lie With Statistics listed in the bibliography, and I use some of his examples and techniques in the web page about Propaganda and Debating Techniques.

"If you can't prove what you want to prove, demonstrate something else and pretend that they are the same thing."
— Darrell Huff (How to Lie with Statistics, p. 74.)

And I know about the famous quote that is attributed to both the British Prime Minister Desraeli and to Mark Twain, "There are three kinds of lies: Little white lies, damn lies, and statistics."

I also like this quote:

'After all, facts are facts, and although we may quote one to another with a chuckle the words of the Wise Statesman, "Lies — damn lies — and statistics," still there are some easy figures the simplest must understand, and the astutest cannot wriggle out of.'

Leonard Henry Courtney, the British economist and politician (1832-1918), later Lord Courtney, speaking at New York, August 1895.

Yes, not all numbers are lies. And as you well know, a good statistician uses numbers to get at the truth, not to decieve and fool people and perpetrate a fraud.

Unfortunately, A.A. uses numbers to perpetrate a fraud. All of their claimed success rates are untrue, and so wrong that they aren't even in the right ballpark. It isn't a matter of a small mistake, it's a matter of a huge lie. I covered much of that here:
http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-effectiveness.html#Bob_memorial

And finally, you really don't have to go down the same road as your father did. Yes, it is very good to be wary, as there does seem to be a genetic component to alcohol addiction in about half of the cases. But just because you have a gene that makes you more inclined to get addicted to alcohol doesn't mean that you have to do it. And even if you do get addicted, like I did, and just like how Dad and Grandma did, you can just get unaddicted, like I did (and they didn't).

Have a good day now, and a good life.

== Orange

*             orange@orange-papers.info        *
*         AA and Recovery Cult Debunking      *
*          http://www.Orange-Papers.org/      *
*
**     Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have
**     carefully considered what they do not say.
**         ==  William W. Watt
**     (Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable.)
*
**     Wouldn't it be terrible if I quoted some reliable statistics
**     which prove that more people are driven insane through
**     religious hysteria than by drinking alcohol?
**        ==  W. C. Fields

June 23, 2012, Saturday: The Fernhill Wetlands

Pondscape, with the older Family of 6 coming ashore.

The older Family of 6, wondering if I have some more bread. You can still see which one is the baby of the family. (rear center) That younger one will catch up with its brothers and sisters eventually. The goose closest to me with its mouth open is begging for some bread.

The older Family of 6, eating rolled oats

The older Family of 6, hunting crop stones After they ate the rolled oats, they went to this slope where years of rain had washed away the dirt and exposed lots of little stones and gravel, and they picked out crop stones to swallow. Birds do not have teeth, so they have crops to grind their food. The crop is a muscular bag before the stomach that the birds fill with small stones, sand, and gravel, and the crop grinds their food for them. So all of the grain that they eat ends up being "stone ground", just like the loaves of whole wheat bread advertise. So here they are, carefully picking out just the right little stones to swallow.

By the way, you really can hear their crops grinding. One of the funniest experiences I had with Carmen was when she walked up to me and looked at me plaintifly with her crop grinding, and I could hear it grinding. It's a sort of swish-swish sound, like the sound of sand rubbing together. A baby bird's crop grinding is much like a human's stomach growling when they are hungry. And I got the message, "Oh, okay, so you are hungry, huh? Empty crop? Well, let's get you some more food to eat."

[The story of the goslings continues here.]

[ Link here = http://www.orange-papers.info/orange-letters348.html#iamnotastatistic ]

Date: Fri, March 15, 2013 4:23 am (Answered 18 March 2013)
From: "iamnotastatistic"
Subject: World Health Organization says that AA is "cult' like, anti-medication and potentially harmful.

The World Health Organization in the Mental Health section of its website provides:

"Evidence-based recommendations for management of alcohol use disorders in non-specialized health settings"

Here, the WHO asks the question:

"Should non-specialist health care providers refer alcohol dependent patients and their family members to mutual help groups such as AA?"

In its reply to the question the WHO evaluates the "Balance of benefits versus harms". The following is the WHO's opinion:

"As these groups are outside the treatment system they are known to sometimes develop "cult" like behaviours. They can also be very against the use of medications. There is the potential for harm."

Weirdly in its Final Recommendations the WHO states:

"Non-specialist health care workers should be encouraged to familiarise themselves with locally available mutual help groups (such as AA), and they should encourage the alcohol dependent patient to engage with such a group."

How can the WHO state that AA is cult like, anti-medication with the potential for harm and then recommend that alcoholics be encouraged to attend AA? A more than slightly mixed message.

Still, when the world Health Organization recognizes AA as "cult" like that really is a huge step forward in changing the treatment system.

Source:
http://www.who.int/mental_health/mhgap/evidence/resource/alcohol_q6.pdf

Iamnotastatistic

Hello iamnotastatistic,

Thanks for all of the information. I can only agree. Alas, I think that even WHO is suffering from a certain kind of informational cowardice that is common to bureaucracies. In the interests of "fair and balanced coverage", so that they can't be accused of bias, they just have to say good things about both sides. It makes me think of a priest saying,

"The purpose of Christianity is to help you to live a good life and get into Heaven. However, in the interest of fairness, I have to say that Satan also offers a very attractive package of benefits."

Date: Fri, March 15, 2013 5:47 am (Answered 18 March 2013)
From: "iamnotastatistic"
Subject: 100 Men Corporation, etc.

Hi Orange, I know that you've thoroughly dealt with the subject of the 100 Men Corporation so maybe you've already dealt with this but I thought these quotes were interesting:

"How we got through the summer of 1939, I'll never quite know. Hank P. had to get a job. The faithful Ruth accepted shares in the defunct book company as pay."
The A.A. Service Manual, page S5, Bill Wilson, AAWS Inc., 2005.
http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/en_bm-31.pdf

Why does Wilson refer to the shares given to Ruth Hock as "shares in the defunct book company"? Wilson couldn't have been referring to shares in Works Publishing Co. since it wasn't incorporated until June 1940. In fact, Works Publishing only existed in Wilson's head during the summer of 1939. And, Works Publishing could never have been described as defunct — it came into existence and has stayed in existence ever since — only the name has changed.

So the shares that Ruth Hock was given could only have been shares in the 100 Men Corporation. Otherwise there is no logical reason to refer to shares in Works Publishing as "shares in the defunct book company" since Works Publishing was never defunct. It must have been tough for Wilson to keep track of all the lies.

Ah, good catch. I must have read that text a few dozen times, and yet the word "defunct" somehow slipped by without me connecting the dots. I knew that Ruth Hock had to be getting stock in the 100 Men Corporation because "Works Publishing, Inc." did not exist, and wouldn't exist for another year.

It was April, 1939. Henry, absolutely broke, was trying to get work. Ruth, living at home, was given meaningless stock certificates in the defunct Works Publishing as pay. She cheerfully accepted these and never slackened her efforts. All of us were going into debt just for living expenses.
Alcoholics Anonymous Comes Of Age, page 173

But Bill wrote that the publishing company (the 100 Men Corporation) was already "defunct" in April of 1939 when they were writing the Big Book? So Bill was inadvertently admitting that there was another publishing company in existence before Works Publishing, which is one of the most closely-guarded secrets in A.A. history. Even though Bill Wilson called the defunct publishing company "Works Publishing" in his falsified history, the defunct company could not possibly be Works Publishing because Works Publishing didn't come into existence until a year later. Ah yes. Good catch.

Also, Wilson wrote in Alcoholics Anonymous comes of Age:

"Four hundred shares of stock [Bill's & Hank's] had never been issued and could not be issued, under our original agreement, until the cash subscribers had received all their money back." AAcoA pg 188.

But Wilson also wrote:

"Meanwhile, some of the stockholders in the book company,Works Publishing, began to get restive. All the book profits, they complained, were going for A.A. work in the office. When, if ever, were they going to get their money back? We also saw that the book "Alcoholics Anonymous" should now become the property of A.A. as a whole. At the moment [1940], it was owned one-third by the 49 subscribers, one-third by my friend Hank P., and the remainder by me.
As a first step, we had the book company,Works Publishing, audited and legally incorporated. Hank P. and I donated our shares in it to the Alcoholic Foundation (as our board of trustees was then called). This was the stock that we had taken for services rendered. But the 49 other subscribers had put in real money. They would have to be paid in cash.Where on earth could we get it?"
The A.A. Service Manual, page S6, Bill Wilson, AAWS Inc., 2005.
http://www.aa.org/pdf/products/en_bm-31.pdf

How, if the shares were never issued, did Bill and Hank "donate" shares that "we had taken for services rendered" to the Alcoholic Foundation? One can't donate something that "had never been issued and could not be issued".

Also, Wilson states that the shares couldn't have been issued until "the cash subscribers had received all their money back" in AAcoA. But in the Service Manual Wilson states that he and Hank P. donated their shares to the Alcoholic Foundation before the subscribers were paid back. What a mess of lies and contradictions!

Yes.

Finally, in AAcoA Wilson writes:

"Ruth had no time to keep books, and I did not know how."
AAcoA, pg. 188.

How was Wilson, as a self proclaimed "stockbroker"(which we know he wasn't) and business analyst who traveled the country evaluating companies, unable to keep books? How did Wilson not know the basics of accounting? If Wilson wasn't able to keep books then he wouldn't have known how to analyze or evaluate them either? So, how did Wilson evaluate or analyze a company if he couldn't analyze or evaluate their books? He must have been the suckiest business analyst ever.

Or was he just trying to distance himself from the financial irregularities by claiming that since he didn't know how to keep books and didn't keep the books then he wasn't to blame for the missing money?

Yes, I think the later. I think that Bill Wilson was familiar enough with the laws of stocks to know that he was also engaged in felony securities fraud. He definitely wanted to distance himself from that, and pretend that somebody else did it.

Thanks Orange
Iamnotastatistic

Date: Fri, March 15, 2013 12:00 pm (Answered 18 March 2013)
From: "iamnotastatistic"
Subject: Death threats in AA literature

Hello again Terrance,

The threats of death to the alcoholic or AA member in AA literature are alarming and disgusting. Why does AA have to threaten its members with death? Here's a list that I've put together: some are direct and explicit, some are implicit, some are subtle — all contain the same message: Do it the AA way or die!

I've covered all of the Big Book except for the personal stories, the 12&12, The AA Service Manual and the Traditions pamphlet.There are 56 examples in this list. I wonder how many death threats there are in total in all AA literature?

Thanks

*Big Book, 4th Ed.*

Fwd to 2nd Ed. But out of this frightening and at first disrupting experience the conviction grew that A.A.'s had to hang together or die separately.
Doctor's Opinion: They believe in themselves, and still more in the Power which pulls chronic alcoholics back from the gates of death.
11 Then he had, in effect, been raised from the dead, suddenly taken from the scrap heap to a level of life better than best he had ever known!
14 Faith without works was dead, he said. And how appallingly true for the alcoholic!
15 If he did not work, he would surely drink again, and if he drank, he would surely die.
16 Faith has to work twenty-four hours a day in and through us, or we perish.
24 When this sort of thinking is fully established in an individual with alcoholic tendencies, he has probably placed himself beyond all human aid, and unless locked up, may die, or go permanently insane.
25 ...if we had passed into the region from which there is no return through human aid we had but two alternatives: One was to go on to the bitter end ... and the other, to accept spiritual help.
30 The idea that somehow, someday he will control and enjoy his drinking is the great obsession of every abnormal drinker. The persistence of this illusion is astonishing. Many pursue it into the gates of insanity or death.
44 To be doomed to an alcoholic death or to live on a spiritual basis are not always easy alternatives to face.
62 Above everything, we alcoholics must be rid of this selfishness. We must, or it kills us!
66 ...this business of resentment is infinitely grave. We found that it is fatal.
66 The insanity of alcohol returns and we drink again. And with us, to drink is to die.
66 In that state, the wrong-doing of others, fancied or real, had power to actually kill.
70 We have listed and analyzed our resentments. We have begun to comprehend their futility and their fatality.
75 He should realize that we are engaged upon a life-and-death errand. [The 5th step is a life and death errand]
92 Continue to speak of alcoholism as an illness, a fatal malady.
96 To spend too much time on any one situation[prospective member] is to deny some other alcoholic an opportunity to live and be happy.
103 A spirit of intolerance might repel alcoholics whose lives could have been saved...
117 Never forget that resentment is a deadly hazard to an alcoholic.
124 With it you can avert death and misery for them. [working with another family]
142 Say that you believe that he is a gravely ill person, with this qualification — being perhaps fatally ill...
150 They have a new attitude, and they have been saved from a living death.
154 But what about his responsibilities — his family and the men who would die because they would not know how to get well, ah-yes, those other alcoholics?
Appendix 1: To those now in its fold, Alcoholics Anonymous has made the difference between misery and sobriety, and often the difference between life and death.
Appendix 1: We alcoholics see that we must work together and hang together, else most of us will finally die alone.
Appendix 1: A.A. must continue to live or most of us will surely die.

*12&12*

23 ...our drinking even then was no mere habit, that it was indeed the beginning of a fatal progression.
24 Under the lash of alcoholism, we are driven to A.A., and there we discover the fatal nature of our situation.
30 We saw that we had to reconsider or die.
31 In A.A. we saw the fruits of this belief[in God]: men and women spared from alcohol's final catastrophe.
64 It is plain for everybody to see that each sober A.A. member has been granted a release from this very obstinate and potentially fatal obsession.
69 Delay is dangerous, and rebellion may be fatal. [giving up character defects]
76 If that degree of humility could enable us to find the grace by which such a deadly obsession could be banished, then there must be hope of the same result respecting any other problem we could possibly have.
108 We knew we would have to quit the deadly business of living alone with our conflicts, and in honesty confide these to God and another human being.s
130 His life actually depends on obedience to spiritual principles. If he deviates too far, the penalty is sure and swift; he sickens and dies.
131 Like us they had suddenly found themselves saved from death...
141 At last experience taught us that to take away any alcoholic's full chance was sometimes to pronounce his death sentence,...
142 If we turn this man away, he'll soon die.
151 For us, if we neglect those who are still sick, there is unremitting danger to our own lives and sanity.
174 Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant.
189 A.A. must continue to live or most of us will surely die.

*The A.A. Service Manual combined with Twelve Concept for World Service, 2005-2006 Edition.*

S1 We must carry the message, else we ourselves can wither and those who haven't been given the truth may die.
S13 A.A. must continue to live or most of us will surely die.
8 We very well know that the penalty for extensive disobedience to these principles is death for the individual and dissolution for the group.
42 What the sponsor does and says...can make all the difference, often the difference between life and death.
73 If after a trial they cannot do better, we know they face a choice: they can go mad or die or they can return to Alcoholics Anonymous.
75 We know that we personally have to choose conformity to A.A.'s Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions or else face dissolution and death, both as individuals and as groups.

*AA Tradition — How it developed by Bill W.*, A.A. pamphlet available at:
www.aa.org/pdf/products/p-17_AATraditions.pdf

5 We know that Alcoholics Anonymous must continue to live. Else, save few exceptions, we and our brother alcoholics throughout the world will surely resume the hopeless journey to oblivion.
6 A.A. must continue to live or most of us will surely die.
12 He can join A.A. on the mere suspicion that he may be one [an alcoholic], that he may already show the fatal symptoms of our malady.
32 Still it is a fact that most of us do follow, in our personal lives, the Twelve Suggested Steps to recovery. But we do this from choice. We prefer recovery to death.
43 A.A. is a power greater than any of us; it must go on living or else uncounted thousands of our kind will surely die. This we know.

Yes. Thanks for the lists. Nothing like a few death threats to keep the suckers in line.

Oh well, have a good day now.

== Orange

*             orange@orange-papers.info        *
*         AA and Recovery Cult Debunking      *
*          http://www.Orange-Papers.org/      *
*
**     "Then came that little man that we who live in this area saw so much,
**     him with the kind blue eyes and white hair, Doc Silkworth. You'll
**     remember that Doc said to me, "look Bill, you're preaching at these
**     people too much. You've got the cart before the horse. This 'white
**     flash' experience of yours scares those drunks to death. Why don't
**     you put the fear of God into them first. You're always talking about
**     James and The Varieties of Religious Experiences and how you have
**     to deflate people before they can know God, how they must have humility.
**     So, why don't you use the tool of the medical hopelessness of alcoholism
**     for practically all those involved. Why don't you talk to the drunk
**     about that allergy they've got and that obsession that makes them
**     keep on drinking and guarantees that they will die. Maybe when you
**     punch it into them hard it will deflate them enough so that they will
**     find what you found."
**       ==  Bill Wilson, speaking at the Memorial service for Dr. Bob, Nov. 15, 1952

June 23, 2012, Saturday: The Fernhill Wetlands