Alcohol research – Alcohol, Other Drugs, and Health: Current Evidence

bu.edu/aodhealth/index.html

“Informing you of the latest clinically relevant research on alcohol, illicit drugs, and health” 

Cheers

 

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

See also Links and downloads
 

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Alcohol research – National Institute on Aging

nia.nih.gov/health/publication/alcohol-use-older-people

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

See also Links and downloads

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

The Synanon cult infiltration of AA (Grapevine articles 1968-1979)(contd)

Extracts from the aacultwatch forum (old)

“Dear Editors:” AA Grapevine June 1968 Vol. 25 No. 1 http://da.aagrapevine.org/

"I believe there are 'winds' and 'winds' and some of them are far from beneficial.

Those winds again: In the March issue of the Grapevine, under the general head "Winds of Change," there were three articles and an editorial concerning new kinds of meetings devoted to telling the total truth about oneself in a group. Not very many editorial features in the Grapevine produce as much comment in the form of letters and full-length manuscripts as this one has. Some but not all of the comment is contra--contra the idea of such meetings, and contra the editorial, which found in them a kind of harking-back to AA's beginnings in the Oxford Group. Herewith we print what had come in up to the printer's deadline for this issue, in the form of a super "Letters to the Editors" section. It warms our editorial heart to see such interest in Grapevine pages.--The Editors

It is traditional in AA to qualify when one speaks at an open meeting, and since the Grapevine is an open forum, I will start by stating that I have had fourteen years of uninterrupted sobriety. I have also served in nearly every AA service capacity, from coffee-maker up to and including Trustee of the AA General Service Board. In these various AA activities, I have, of necessity, both spoken and listened all over the AA world, and in the process have gathered a good deal of cross-section AA experience.

It is against this background and as an AA member deeply concerned with the AA Grapevine as an AA service tool, that I wish to address myself in candid disagreement with its editorial policy as expressed in the first eleven pages of the March Grapevine, entitled "Winds of Change."

I am all for "Winds of Change." Not to be would put me in the invidious position of defending the status quo, the Establishment, the "good old days and ways." But--and it is a very large but--I believe there are "winds" and "winds" and some of them are far from beneficial. Change in the name of progress can sometimes be seriously damaging: e.g., the "winds" that have polluted the air of our cities.

I find myself sadly but inevitably making this analogy in my reaction to the section which the editors have featured under their "Winds of Change" banner in the March issue of the Grapevine.

In the editor's introduction to this section, they state, ". . .There has grown up a tendency, even allowing for the Fifth Step [my italics], for many AAs to attempt a spiritual life based on new principles without anything like adequate elimination of 'old ideas' and the behavior that resulted from them." I do not know, of course, how the editors arrived at the statistical evidence permitting this categorical generality, since they themselves did not document it. However, from my own experience based on fourteen years of attendance at Twelve Step meetings at my own and many other AA groups, I would have to reject this assumption as false or, at the least, very dubious.

I do not feel that further comment is needed on the editorial introduction to the three "Winds of Change" articles, since it is clearly just what it states: an introduction with a strongly implied, affirmative sponsorship of the viewpoint of the writers involved.

So, in order of appearance, let us first concern ourselves with the "Forty-hour Marathon Meetings." The content of this material is concerned with the advantage of rigorous "honesty" that must accrue if the participant in this therapy is to benefit. So let us be honest. On page 5, paragraph 2, the writer states "Evidently the idea for these (marathons) comes most directly and recently from the programs for narcotics addicts called Synanon and Daytop." Would it not be more in keeping with "honesty" if the author had given details on his attendance at such meetings in an "AA setting," where any personal interest he may have in furthering use of marathons might have appeared? He does indeed describe, in the last paragraph of his article, the type of alcoholic who appears to find this therapy most beneficial, namely, "the long-term slipper--the AA failure." If the author is such a "slipper" and he finds that forty hours of alcoholic talkathons "bid fair to open his heart," then more power to him. But let us have a few clarifying statements for the AA "seeker" or newcomer, who may feel that he has strayed into the wrong pew if he reads this GV issue.

The fact is that programs for narcotic addicts are primarily concerned with young people from urban ghetto areas--our most tragic and underprivileged minority groups. They just do not represent the much larger alcoholic population, and indeed it is for this reason that both Synanon and Daytop have modified the AA program, just as we, in our turn, had to depart from the Oxford Group and evolve our own recovery principles, which are greatly different.

This reference brings me to the "quintessence" of the point of view expressed by the writers on the marathon and on the Fifth Step meetings. The writer of the first states that the "climate" of the addict's marathon is "much closer to the tone and intention of the fifth chapter of AA's Big Book than are most AA meetings today." He further suggests that "thirty-five hours has proved barely sufficient for the 'Fifth Steps' of some sixteen people assembled for the adventure." The Seeker Anonymous of the "Fifth Step Meeting" article suggests (page 8, paragraph 4) that there should be a Fifth Step group that should be "open and mixed"--parents, spouses, children, etc. Well, I would like to suggest to both of these writers that they first read the Fifth Step itself: "Admitted to God, to ourselves and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs." Are these two members proposing a new Fifth Step? How would they like to define it?--since they are clearly purposing to change it. In the book Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions, the exact reason for the wording of this Step in this precise way has been unmistakably spelled out by Bill W. Any investigation of AA history or of Bill's written and spoken words would have elicited the historical fact that it was because of the "Absolutes" of the Oxford Group that Bill realized very early in AA that "open confession" and Absolute Truth, Honesty, etc. could not, would not work for the alcoholic. It was on this very issue that AA in its formative days split from the Oxford Group, and Bill is the first to say that without this split we would not have survived. Clearly, the writers of these two articles have read a different AA history and different AA literature, and have had different experiences--indeed, they appear to have heard a different Bill W. than I have.

Finally we come to the third article of the group: "Tenth/Twelfth Step Meetings." The "seven people" he is describing presumably fit into the category described by the first writer: "long-term slippers--seasoned AA failures." As in the case of the other two writers, this one, too, seems to feel that the Steps as written and defined in the official AA literature are inadequate.

Many have tried, but none have yet succeeded in rewriting or reilluminating the original wordings and intentions of the Twelve Steps as set down by Bill W. It is not surprising to hear this record, played again. This is the rewriter's privilege, and if he has helped his own "hang-ups" on sex or anything else by this private version of the Eleventh and Twelfth Steps--then bully for him! I would, however, like to observe that there have always been special groups in AA--men's discussions, women's ditto, Eleventh Step groups--the list is endless and fills any special need that I, at least, can- think of. I am not condemning special groups as such. They fill a very vital need.

What I object to here are the sweeping generalities, such as on page 10: "All of us are sick in the same way." Well, if there is anything I have learned in fourteen years in this program, it is the nonsense of this remark. We all indeed have the same sickness--namely, alcoholism--but we are no more sick "in the same way" than are the sufferers from any other illness. The miracle of AA is that it can and does embrace our different "ways."

However, what I find most dangerous in "Tenth/Twelfth Step Meetings" is the statement on page 11: "First, they are not, I repeat not, group therapy. They are God and group (in that order) therapy." How, I would like to ask, can the author be so sure about God being there? "Direct pipelines" have long been the classic syndrome of delusion, but they are usually clinical in nature and individual. Does the author suggest that his group has a group pipeline? Personally, I find God, as I understand Him, in every AA meeting, but I would find it more than presumptuous, and indeed frightening, to believe that I could evoke Him. Grace comes to us AAs, it seems to me, unbidden. It is one of the sources of our mysterious process and one we never presume to have earned. I, therefore, find this kind of spiritual arrogance out of place in an official AA magazine which is read by vulnerable newcomers. It is even possible that many of them and many of us still find our main "hang-ups" quite solvable within the framework of the AA program if we truly and continuously remain a viable part of its mainstream.

…....

….. New York"

(our edits)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

PS To use “comment” system simply click on the relevant tab below this article and sign in. All comments go through a moderation stage

PPS Join us on Diaspora* here

Alcohol research – Alcohol, Work and Productivity, Scientific Opinion of the Science Group of the European Alcohol and Health Forum

Alcohol, Work and Productivity, Scientific Opinion of the Science Group of the European Alcohol and Health Forum, September 2011

“FOREWORD

Reducing the negative impact of alcohol on the workplace is one of five priorities picked out in the EU strategy to support Member States in reducing alcohol related harm, and so the Science Group of the European Alcohol and Health Forum (EAHF) was pleased to be asked to give its opinion. The Science Group was aware that there are positive opportunities afforded through work to address problems due to harmful drinking even if they may not obviously impact on productivity. Those in full-time employment – usually about two-thirds of the population of working age - spend about one-third to one half of their waking lives at work and are open to health and wellbeing influences far more frequently than in, for example, conventional healthcare settings. But we need to know if using those opportunities, if employers were to do so, really works – both in terms of economic productivity and health gain.

I am really grateful to members of the Science Group for completing this report and to the subgroup that led the work. There was a lead author for each of the two parts, Professor Peter Anderson and Dr Marjana Martinic, to whom the most credit is due. I am also grateful to the expert reviewers and to those members of the Alcohol and Health Forum who sent comments, most of which we have been able to address.

After careful discussion, the Science Group decided to keep the two parts of the report separate. While there may be an element of repetition, nonetheless they represent two important but different perspectives that the Science Group believes are complementary. Part II draws particularly on the experience of the drinks industry in tackling alcohol problems in the workplace. Of course workplace policies are by no means needed only in the drinks industry. But this seemed a particularly appropriate sector to examine for examples of policies and practices, not only because of the importance of the sector in setting an example to employers in general but also in the light of the industry representation in the membership of the EAHF that requested the opinion of the Science Group.

We have sought both to highlight the evidence and to identify the gaps in knowledge and evidence. It is clear that the evidence for the existence of health, social and economic harm from alcohol in the context of the workplace is much stronger than the evidence of how opportunities and practices at work can be used to reduce this harm. Like all good pieces of work it raises many further questions and it is hoped that it will be the stimulus for researchers within the EU and beyond. In particular there is clearly an urgent need to build proper evaluation into future workplace initiatives. Evidence to date suggests that initiatives through the workplace aimed at general health and wellbeing may be as effective as those focussed specifically on alcohol.

Where will this report lead? Firstly we hope that members and observers of the Alcohol and Health Forum will take note of the findings and take them back to the organisations they represent, whether they be industry, NGOs or governments. Secondly, and equally importantly, it will be a source of reference and advice for a much wider constituency across the countries of the EU and beyond. Our previous report examining the impact of alcohol marketing on young people has been an influential resource in just this way and we believe this second report has the potential to change current practice and show the way forward for future research.

The enormous burden of individual harm (often to those around the problem drinker as well as the drinker themselves) and aggregated lost productivity that are highlighted in the report should make it clear to all that inactivity is not an option and complacency will cost lives. We owe it to the populations we serve to use every opportunity that is founded in sound evidence to preserve and improve health and this report should lay the foundations of applying this to the workplace. But the workplace cannot be taken in isolation: just as work affects health and wellbeing beyond the workplace, so do many factors outside work, such as the price, availability and marketing of alcohol, or access to social programs and general healthcare reflect back on the health of the workforce. The Science Group believes that the European Commission across its various directorates has the potential to be a vital catalyst for good practice in this two-way process.

Professor Ian Gilmore

Chair, Science Group”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

See also Links and downloads

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Draft pamphlet (agnostic and atheist members) submitted to the Literature Committee for 2015 Great Britain conference

We quote (in full):

“The ‘God’ Word

AA is not a religious organisation [but see here]. Alcoholics Anonymous has only one requirement for membership and that is the desire to stop drinking. There is room in AA for people of all shades of belief and non-belief.

Let’s make no bones about it; the 12-Step programme that members follow has its origins in a Christian group. As a consequence you will see the word ‘God’ mentioned quite often. It even crops up in the Serenity Prayer said at many AA meetings. But we make it clear that this ‘God’ is the god of each individual’s own and personal understanding.

Many members believe in some form of god, and we have members that come from and practice all sorts of religions; but also many are atheist or agnostic, so don’t be put off. It’s important to remember that AA is not a religious organisation: we have a simple idea that there is a power greater than us as individuals, a higher power so — a god of your own understanding.

All we need to do is ask ourselves ‘Do I believe that there is a power greater than myself? This higher power can lie within some person’s religious beliefs, or it can be completely separate from any religion. (One member looks at the sea and accepts that it is a power greater than him.) If we can find that higher power we are on our way to being able to use spiritual principles in our recovery.

What we all have in common is that the programme helps us find an inner strength that we were previously unaware of — where we differ is in how we identify the source. Some people have the thought of the word God as standing for “good orderly direction”, or even “group of drunks”; but many of us believe that there is something bigger than ourselves which is helping us today — and that is all you need to make a start. Give it the benefit of the doubt.

We have seen many people come to AA and refuse to accept our help because they become angry or upset when others talk of their beliefs. If you are unable to accept that others have a belief that you don’t, you may find it very difficult. If on the other hand you can be tolerant of other peoples' right to believe in whatever they want to, you will find others tolerant of your rights to believe whatever you choose.

Whatever you do, please don’t let someone else’s religious beliefs prevent you from finding the solution that is available to you through Alcoholics Anonymous.

AA literature and resources you may find helpful:

Tradition 3, short and long forms

AA World Services Pamphlets:

‘A Newcomer Asks’ (in particular, questions on AA and religion and ‘God’)

‘Do You Think You’re Different?’ (in particular, Ed’s story and Jan’s story)

‘Many Paths to Spirituality’

Books:

Alcoholics Anonymous (the ‘Big Book’)[no edition indicated. We refer to the current online (4^th edn)]

In particular:

• Foreword to First Edition
• Foreword to Second Edition, p. xvi
• Chapter 2, ‘There is a Solution’, pp. 26-29
• Chapter 4, ‘We Agnostics’, pp.44-57
• Story, ‘The Vicious Cycle’ [5^th story]
• Appendix 11, ‘Spiritual Experience’

Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions,‘Step Two’

Living Sober

Came to Believe

As Bill Sees It, selections on ‘Higher Power’

Pass It On

AA Comes of Age, ‘Unity: The Second Legacy’, p. 81

Grapevine Articles:

You may also find some of the Grapevine articles on these topics helpful. Articles in Grapevine are written by AA members from around the world and represent their experience, strength and hope in print. These divergent opinions of AA members are not statements of AA policy and are not those of the Fellowship as a whole or AA. The Grapevine is not Conference approved, as the articles cannot go through the process of Conference approval. The articles listed here are provided only as potential sources of information and experience shared by AA members.

The Grapevine is available in print and digital formats by subscription. Both may be ordered through its website, which also has searchable digital archives of articles from past issues.

‘The Dilemma of No Faith’ by Bill W (AA Co-Founder), April 1961. Published as ‘God as We Understand Him: The Dilemma of No Faith’ in The Language of the Heart

‘From Atheist to Agnostic’, by R C, April 1961

‘An Atheist Speaks Out’, by E L, May 1962

‘Can an Atheist Find a Place in AA?’, by Anonymous, June 1964

‘Unbeliever in AA’, by L W, July 1966

‘Sober For Thirty Years’, by Jim B (author of Big Book story, ‘The Vicious Cycle’) May 1968 (reprinted November 1999)

‘The Power of Good’, by Anonymous, April 1978

‘Listening for the Reality’, by June L, April 1991

‘An Agnostic Alternative’, by Mike F, March 2003

‘The Only Faith You Need’, by Michael B, February 2004

‘Finding Our Way’, by Jerry S, September 2013”

(our interpolations in red – links supplied by us. Unfortunately the remainder of the Grapevine references are inaccessible unless you have a Grapevine subscription. In other words you have to pay to read what other AA members have shared for free!)

Comment: Clearly AA has something of a problem (or in the US at least). An independent judicial system (presumably with no axe to grind) has reviewed the evidence and declared quite unambiguously that AA doctrines and practices must be viewed as religious (see our quote above). Of course it might be argued that simply because our doctrines and practices are regarded as religious does not imply that AA itself constitutes a religious organisation. But we reckon that argument is as unconvincing as Bill Wilson's desperate attempt to claim that the Lord's Prayer is not a Christian prayer; something of a non-starter! Setting that aside even the attempt to reconcile these conflicts by recourse to the term 'spiritual' might itself be something of a red herring (especially for those members who regard AA and its programme as merely a conduit for effecting a “psychic' shift ie. an essentially psychological transformation but employing terminology (and references) derived from a religious (Christian) tradition). The simplest resolution to these problems, of course, is to set up an alternative to AA (although clearly distinguished from Alcoholics Anonymous eg. Dual Recovery Anonymous UK) but based on purely secular lines, and then start from scratch. This would avoid the need for endless semantic 'juggling' (which convinces no-one apparently) and would allow the best aspects of AA (from the secular point of view) to be carried over into the new organisation whilst leaving all the 'religious/spiritual' trappings behind – something like Secular Recovery Anonymous. Those of us who have religious/spiritual beliefs or alternatively don't give a monkey's either way can then carry on with our respective recoveries without wasting inordinate amounts of time speculating on essentially irresolvable questions (but see Kant's “Dereinzig mögliche Beweisgrund zu einer Demonstration des Daseins Gottes“ - Go on! We dare you!)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous … and pragmatists everywhere!)

PS Or then again we could all start praying to the Great Red Herring in the sky!

Alcohol research – Prevalence of Alcohol Dependence Among US Adult Drinkers, 2009–2011

Prevalence of Alcohol Dependence Among US Adult Drinkers, 2009–2011, Esser MB, Hedden SL, Kanny D, Brewer RD, Gfroerer JC, Naimi TS.. Prev Chronic Dis 2014;11:140329 

“Abstract 
Introduction
Excessive alcohol consumption is responsible for 88,000 deaths annually and cost the United States $223.5 billion in 2006. It is often assumed that most excessive drinkers are alcohol dependent. However, few studies have examined the prevalence of alcohol dependence among excessive drinkers. The objective of this study was to update prior estimates of the prevalence of alcohol dependence among US adult drinkers. 
Methods
Data were analyzed from the 138,100 adults who responded to the National Survey on Drug Use and Health in 2009, 2010, or 2011. Drinking patterns (ie, past-year drinking, excessive drinking, and binge drinking) were assessed by sociodemographic characteristics and alcohol dependence (assessed through self-reported survey responses and defined as meeting ≥3 of 7 criteria for dependence in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition). 
Results
Excessive drinking, binge drinking, and alcohol dependence were most common among men and those aged 18 to 24. Binge drinking was most common among those with annual family incomes of $75,000 or more, whereas alcohol dependence was most common among those with annual family incomes of less than $25,000. The prevalence of alcohol dependence was 10.2% among excessive drinkers, 10.5% among binge drinkers, and 1.3% among non-binge drinkers. A positive relationship was found between alcohol dependence and binge drinking frequency. 
Conclusion
Most excessive drinkers (90%) did not meet the criteria for alcohol dependence. A comprehensive approach to reducing excessive drinking that emphasizes evidence-based policy strategies and clinical preventive services could have an impact on reducing excessive drinking in addition to focusing on the implementation of addiction treatment services.”

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)

See also Links and downloads 

PS For AA Minority Report 2013 click here

Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions (contd)

aacultwatch's perspective on:

The AA (General Service conference approved) book:

“Twelve Steps and Twelve Traditions: A co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous tells how members recover and how the society functions”

(an almost as wildly discursive commentary as our 'take' on the Big Book)

This tome is much reviled in cult circles (especially amongst the Big Book nutters who regard it as almost heretical! (A point of interest: if you're looking for meetings largely free of the aforementioned 'fruitcakes', and for that matter sundry other screwballs, then a Twelve Step meeting following the format of the above text is usually a safe bet). The text we will be using is as indicated above. And now we come to:

Step Four (pp. 42-45)

“Step Four

“Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.” [note: of “ourselves” - NOT someone else]

”CREATION gave us instincts for a purpose. Without them we wouldn’t be complete human beings. If men and women didn’t exert themselves to be secure in their persons, made no effort to harvest food or construct shelter, there would be no survival. If they didn’t reproduce, the earth wouldn’t be populated [no problems there it would seem – plenty when it comes to the former!]. If there were no social instinct [is there such a thing?], if men cared nothing for the society of one another [“caring” for the society of others is not necessarily the same as being instinctually drawn to their company], there would be no society. So these desires [to be distinguished from 'instincts']—for the sex relation, for material and emotional security, and for companionship—are perfectly necessary and right, and surely God-given [how so “perfectly necessary”, “right” and “surely”?].

Yet these instincts, so necessary for our existence, often far exceed their proper functions. Powerfully, blindly, many times subtly, they drive us, dominate us, and insist upon ruling our lives [and sometimes impel us to seek to rule the lives of others]. Our desires for sex, for material and emotional security, and for an important place in society often tyrannize us [and others in the process eg. cult sponsors]. When thus out of joint, man’s natural desires cause him [and others – hence the need for Steps 8 and 9] great trouble, practically all the trouble there is. No human being, however good, is exempt from these troubles [What! Not even your sponsor? Who'd have thought it!]. Nearly every serious emotional problem can be seen as a case of misdirected instinct. When that happens, our great natural assets, the instincts, have turned into physical and mental liabilities.

Step Four is our vigorous and painstaking effort to discover what these liabilities in each of us have been, and are.

We want to find exactly how, when, and where our natural desires [or rather our “misdirected instinct[s]”] have warped us. We wish to look squarely at the unhappiness this has caused others and ourselves. By discovering what our emotional deformities are, we can move toward their correction. Without a willing and persistent effort to do this, there can be little sobriety or contentment for us. Without a searching and fearless moral inventory, most of us have found that the faith [or modified self and world view] which really works in daily living is still out of reach.

Before tackling the inventory problem in detail, let’s have a closer look at what the basic problem is. Simple examples like the following take on a world of meaning when we think about them. Suppose a person places sex desire ahead of everything else. In such a case, this imperious urge can destroy his chances for material and emotional security as well as his standing in the community. Another may develop such an obsession for financial security that he wants to do nothing but hoard money. Going to the extreme, he can become a miser, or even a recluse who denies himself both family and friends.

Nor is the quest for security always expressed in terms of money. How frequently we see a frightened human being determined to depend completely upon a stronger person for guidance and protection. This weak one, failing to meet life’s responsibilities with his own resources, never grows up. Disillusionment and helplessness are his lot. In time all his protectors either flee or die, and he is once more left alone and afraid [ie. codependency – in AA frequently exhibited in the sponsor/sponsee relationship].

We have also seen men and women who go power-mad, who devote themselves to attempting to rule their fellows [eg. cult (although not exclusively) sponsors – now you can see perhaps why this text is so unpopular with the cult – too close to home!]. These people often throw to the winds every chance for legitimate security and a happy family life. Whenever a human being becomes a battleground for the instincts, there can be no peace.

But that is not all of the danger. Every time a person imposes his instincts unreasonably upon others, unhappiness follows. If the pursuit of wealth tramples upon people who happen to be in the way, then anger, jealousy, and revenge are likely to be aroused. If sex runs riot, there is a similar uproar. Demands made upon other people for too much attention, protection, and love can only invite domination or revulsion in the protectors themselves—two emotions quite as unhealthy as the demands which evoked them. When an individual’s desire for prestige becomes uncontrollable, whether in the sewing circle or at the international conference table, other people suffer and often revolt. This collision of instincts can produce anything from a cold snub to a blazing revolution. In these ways we are set in conflict not only with ourselves, but with other people who have instincts, too.

Alcoholics especially should be able to see that instinct run wild in themselves is the underlying cause of their destructive drinking [or alternatively the fundamental cause is a genetically inherited abnormal physical response to alcohol, overindulgence in which leads to the above distortions in psychological configuration, which in turn are identified as the causes (and justifications) for our excessive drinking]. We have drunk to drown feelings of fear, frustration, and depression. We have drunk to escape the guilt of passions, and then have drunk again to make more passions possible. We have drunk for vainglory—that we might the more enjoy foolish dreams of pomp and power. This perverse soul-sickness is not pleasant to look upon. Instincts on rampage baulk at investigation. The minute we make a serious attempt to probe them, we are liable to suffer severe reactions.”

(our emphases)(our observations in red print)

Coming next – Step Four (contd)

Cheers

The Fellas (Friends of Alcoholics Anonymous)