I get accused of being Mr. Downer at meetings and online sometimes. I also get told I’m intolerant of other peoples’ ways of working program when I point out that my observations of what works over the years runs counter to some way previously mentioned. Other times, I’m branded as a “know-it-all.”

Here’s the thing… I’m certainly not a “know-it-all” (ask my sponsor or my wife), but I have been in program for 33 years and it gives one a different perspective. I have observed what works and what doesn’t work – and not just for me but for large groups of people. These observations are also in regard to what works in the long term for those people.

Does that mean that what I say about a subject (usually abstinence: how to get and keep it) is based on observations that have yielded 100% results? No. When I talk about what I have observed that “works vs. doesn’t work,” I mean for the majority of people I've observed in program – and for whom it has worked in the long term.

I will hear or read of people speaking cheerily of how they have been relieved of the disease and can now eat foods moderately that they had once were once red light binge foods. My question has and always is: “… and for how long has this worked?”

I ask this because I think back to my own relapse cycle that I have thankfully been out of for 20 years this month. I call it a relapse “cycle” because it wasn’t one continuous binge, but rather and “on and off” cycle of abstinence and compulsive eating. Often, the “on” times of the cycle would last weeks, even months.

But then, to quote the Big Book: “All of us felt at times that we were regaining control, but such intervals -- usually brief -- were inevitably followed by still less control, which led in time to pitiful and incomprehensible demoralization.”

It’s not that I’m wishing that anyone ends up falling backwards into the food, just that they consider how the disease works – both in themselves and others.

The key to real abstinence is not only physical abstinence, but mental and spiritual abstinence – concerning the food – as well. What’s the difference? For me, when I was still in my “sometimes in, sometimes out” period, the idea of giving up certain foods forever was intolerable. I had to continually use the mantra “I don’t eat that – just for today.” Why? I had yet to come to the point of mental surrender to the 12 Step way of recovery. Now, having been out of the food long enough to have perspective, I see that giving up those foods was a no-brainer. Those foods had kept me not only in that relapse cycle, but also prisoner to continuing to want them. Why would I want to subject myself to that torture?

Recently, there was an article in a major magazine that was highly critical of AA. It attacked the program for many reasons, but mostly about its “abstinence only” model of recovery. The author (who I believe might have problems of her own on the subject) considered such “abstinence only” models “intolerable” to those trying to give up alcohol. She believed finding a way to have moderation in drinking was the better way.

The article brought to mind the sad story of Audrey Kishline. Ms. Kishline started a group called “Moderation Management” that attempted to convince alcoholics that they could learn to moderate their drinking. She went on all kinds of television shows promoting her program and her theories.

Then Ms. Kishline got drunk – and she drank and drove drunk. She got on a highway in the wrong direction and smashed head-on into a truck, killing a father and his daughter. She spent years in prison, and after her release eventually committed suicide – all for the dream of finding a way to drink safely again.

Sometimes I think about my past and wonder whether I was a full-blown alcoholic or possibly a compulsive eater that simply went through a drinking phase. The answer is simple: who cares? Why would I want to drink again anyway? What is the upside of drinking? There really is none.

And this is where I am today with my particular problem foods. There is such a plethora of alternatives to my problem foods in the world -- why would I want to dance with the devil again?

This brings me back to those who brag about being able to eat their problem foods in moderation. Firstly, the “… and for how long?” question arises, but also “why would you want to try this?” For me – at least when it comes to my real problem foods – zero is much easier than one. And for those who are advertising this “moderation management,” at least let people know how long this experiment has been going on for you. It’s not fair to advertise a product that has yet to be fully tested.

When I was not abstinent, I was always looking for the easier, softer way (or rather my disease was doing the looking). To that end, I would latch on to people telling me what I wanted to hear. It was not unlike the otherwise intelligent smokers who would believe the 1 out of 100 doctors who said smoking did not cause cancer – because those doctors were helping justify the smokers’ addiction.

As a result, when people told me I could eat my problem foods moderately, I believed them and tried again (even though I had failed at it many times). I believed it when people said if I just worked on the Steps and spiritual part of the program, I would eventually be granted an abstinence that would just come effortlessly to me. I believed it when they told me to pray for the willingness to stop and eventually that willingness to stop would come. My Higher Power would someday do the work for me – I would not have to do the footwork and endure some uncomfortable times in the beginning.

What I failed to see was how my disease was working on me now that I was in program. It used everything it knew about program and program slogans – as well as what other people said – to complete its daily task. And my disease’s one daily task was simple: to keep me from putting down the food for another day.

Are there people who have worked on their spirituality and then gotten effortless abstinence at some point? Yes, probably a few. Are there people who can now eat moderately what had previous been binge foods for them? Yes, probably a few.

The thing that I have observed is that for every one of those people, there are hundreds (or more) people in program trying to hit that lottery as well. Unfortunately for them, they can buy as many tickets as they want – they are not going to hit it. They are going to have to do what the vast majority of us have had to do and that is to sit down with a sponsor, develop a food plan and avoid the foods that caused us problems in the past.

The sad fact however, is that often those “lottery ticket” people do not do this. Eventually they hit a crossroads. They either come to realize that they need to surrender fully or they leave program altogether, convinced the program doesn’t work for them.

But the program does work. As it says in the Big Book, however, it works for those “willing to go to any lengths.” It works for those who realize “half measures avail us nothing.” How “willing to go to any lengths” is it to pin your hopes on a recovery that will mean you have to give up nothing in return for a vastly better, fulfilling life?

I can understand why people don’t want to hear this. It’s so much nicer to hear or read of people for whom the abstinence fairy has dinged them on the head with the abstinence wand. It’s nicer to read that there is hope based on some easier, softer way that somebody says (or posts) they are working today.

There are those who want to say this “put the food down first” approach does not take the spiritual part of the program into account. I disagree. I believe in a Higher Power today, but one that is grounded out in reality. The program is the “rowboat to shore” our Higher Power gave us, and it’s our job to use it as directed. Until 1935 and the start of the 12 Step programs, people were still dying in countless thousands of their diseases. That’s when the rowboat got delivered. All we have to do is quit fighting to stay in the stormy waters and get in and start rowing.

I truly wish – with all of my heart – that these easier, softer ways worked for the majority of people in the long term. I would even settle for seeing it work for small group of people for the long term. The only thing that I have seen that works for the majority of people in the long term are the things that most people with long term abstinence speak about: get a sponsor, take direction, develop a food plan that includes isolating and eliminating your problem foods, and then move on to working the Steps.

There is an old program saying that “there are as many ways to work the program as there are people in it.” I find this to be true – up to about 7-10 years of abstinence. After that time, I find most of the people I know in program who have 10+ years of abstinence tend to work the same type of program and have the same take on how to work it. This approach tends to mirror very closely what I see in AA. They take it very seriously, and they take their abstinence – and their daily eating – just as seriously. And they don't entertain the thought of "dancing with their devils" again.

Why does the road narrow (in terms of different approaches to the program) at 7-10 years? Pure Darwinian evolution: that which does not work is not repeated (people don’t stay abstinent or leave program), and that which does work is repeated (and people stay in program and abstinent). I choose to listen to those long-timers, as whatever they are doing has kept them around and abstinent for an extended period of time.

In the future, when someone talks about some great way they work program that seems too good to be true, don’t forget to ask the $64,000 question: “… and for how long has it worked?”