2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

Thanks for the thanks. You bring up one point that I forgot to mention: that we really should have a measure on the ballot that requires that all programs or entities that claim to be "drug and alcohol treatment" must be rigorously tested in a medically valid manner, like a randomized longitudinal controlled study, to see whether the treatment actually works. Treatment should obviously be tested in the same manner as the FDA tests drugs. It is against the law to foist quack medicine on sick people, and yet, "treatment" is not tested by the FDA, so criminals can get away with selling a lot of quackery by calling it "treatment".

The way that the Oregon laws read now, frauds and con artists can bill people's health plans for "drug and alcohol treatment" that is a complete sham.

"Randomized longitudinal controlled study" means: the patients are randomly divided into two groups -- one that gets the medicine or treatment, and one that does not. The selection must be truly random -- pick names out of a hat or something. Give one group the treatment, and tell the other group that they can go home and do whatever they want to do. At the end of the lengthy test (--that's the long in "longitudinal" --), you compare the results from the two groups to see how much improvement the medicine or treatment produced.

If the results are the same for the two groups, then the medicine or treatment is worthless and didn't cure the patients at all.
If the treated group did much better than the untreated group, then the medicine or treatment is improving the condition.
If the treated group did worse than the untreated group, then the medicine or treatment is toxic and is poisoning the patients.

Twelve-Step treatment has been tested in such a manner several times, and it always failed the tests. In fact, 12-Step treatment did some very negative things like increase the rate of binge drinking, and increase the death rate in the patients.
See:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html#Brandsma
and
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html#Vaillant

I'm really surprised that the insurance companies haven't jumped on this. They could save a lot of money if they were not paying for fraud.

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context

What really bothers me about these measures is the unfounded assumption that drug and alcohol treatment works. It doesn't. -- Not much, or very often.

During the radio program, one of the guests said that many treatment programs have a terrible failure rate -- like 75%. Another guest declared that he "strongly believed that treatment works."

Sorry, but fervent belief is not evidence that treatment works. But that is the kind of "evidence" that we get to support "treatment", and justify giving the "treatment centers" more of the public's tax dollars.

I can tell you from personal observation that the drug and alcohol treatment programs are expensive fraud. In December of 2000, I went through a drug and alcohol treatment program at PAAC, the local "Portland Alternate Addictions Center". The center used to be located at 12th and Morrison SW, but then they moved it to Burnside, near Broadway SW.

I went through that program voluntarily (not court-ordered -- I was not in trouble with the law), in trade for clean and safe housing, so that I wouldn't be homeless. The "treatment" consisted of three "group therapy" meetings per week where we sat around in a group and talked about getting high. Then they told us to go to at least three Alcoholics Anonymous or Narcotics Anonyous meetings per week, which is just more sitting around talking (and bragging) about getting high. Then they stuck acupuncture needles in us and claimed that it reduced cravings. And they billed the Oregon Health Plan $1700 per person for that "treatment".

They never did a valid randomized longitudinal study to see whether the treatment really worked or made anybody get clean and sober. They just assumbed that it did, and billed accordingly. They did do one study, asking the clients if the acupunture reduced cravings for drugs and alcohol. When I told them that the acupuncture had no such effect on me, because I had also quit smoking, and was crawling the walls for a cigarette, the woman taking the answers said, "Well, we'll just put down that the acupuncture reduced the cravings." That was for a report to the city and state, to get more funding for the acupuncture. Obviously, the report of success was a fake.

Our group suffered a terrible attrition rate. Every week, there were fewer people left. When it got down to the last half dozen people, I began making jokes about it being a game of Survivor, and wondered who would be the last one on the island. I was pretty sure it was going to be me, because I was determined to live. You see, I had actually quit drinking two weeks before the so-called "treatment program" began, after my doctor gave me a stark choice, "Quit drinking or die. Choose one." I thought it over real hard for a month, and then decided to live. I was working my own program and doing very well, thank you.

In fact, a few years later I ran into the woman who managed my housing when I was in the program. She told me that I was the only one left out of the whole group who still had not relapsed.

You are probably wondering how I am doing now. I'm happy to tell you that I just celebrated my 8th anniversary four days ago. That means 8 years clean and sober. And in three more weeks I will also have 8 years off of cigarettes.

But my so-called counselor in the PAAC treatment program didn't do so well. A year and a half after I "graduated", I ran into a fellow alumnus of the program, and he told me that our counselor had been arrested for child pornography. I asked around, and learned that there was a lot more to it than that. He was also arrested for two counts of criminal sexual penetration of a minor and multiple counts of possession of cocaine. He had relapsed big time. They found cocaine in his car, at home, and in his office at PAAC. And then when they searched his computer at home, they found it loaded with child pornography. It seems that after he lectured the clients at PAAC, and told them how they needed a "Higher Power" in their recovery programs, he went home, snorted cocaine, and molested his step-children. He was convicted on all charges and sent to the Snake River Correctional Facility at Ontario, Oregon (near the Oregon/Idaho border).

And that's what you got for your tax money when the Oregon Health Plan paid for treatment of alcoholics and drug addicts.

And that is also what can happen when you assume that just any old addict is qualified to be a "drug and alcohol counselor".

You can read more about this story here:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-intro.html

You can read about the effectiveness of the 12-Step treatment programs (which 93% of the treatment centers in the USA use) here:
http://www.orange-papers.org/orange-effectiveness.html

posted 4 years, 6 months ago
view in context