-------------------------------
[MODERATOR'S SUMMARY OF THE DATA GIVEN BELOW: 56% of those who stay three months
are still active in AA at the end of a year. That first year is the hardest:
the retention rates dramatically improve for those who have earned their
one-year chip. The current U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau) is 296 million,
with around 220 million over eighteen years of age. In the data given below,
the NIAAA estimates that roughly 8% of the U.S. population over age 18 abuse
alcohol (17.6 million out of 220 million), but that there are only 7.9 million
true alcoholics over eighteen years of age in the U.S., which is 3.6% of the
population over eighteen years of age. With roughly 1 million AA members, that
means that around 12 to 13% of these genuine alcoholics (about one out of eight)
is in AA at this point.]
-------------------------------

FROM <ny-aa@...>:

There is a tendency of some observers to offer a pessimistic view of A.A. today.
This becomes the basis for advocating return to the practices of some time in
the past. Often, they back this up with a misreading of one particular graph in
a summary of the 1977 through 1989 Triennial Surveys.

"Percent of Those Coming to AA Within the First Year Who Have Remained the
Indicated Number of Months." It graphed the "Month" and "Dist" (distribution)
columns here. Note the "Dist" column adds up to 100. It is NOT a retention
percentage. For every 100 people surveyed with under a year, 13% were in their
2nd month and 9% were in their 4th month. The "New" column I added is scaled to
show retention. The "3mo" column tracks retention after the usual introductary
period when, presumably, only "real alcoholics" (about half) will stay.

Month Dist . New . 3mo
1 ... 19 ... 100
2 ... 13 .... 68
3 ... 10 .... 53
4 .... 9 .... 47 . 100 <=== Over 3 months
5 .... 8 .... 42 .. 89
6 .... 7 .... 42 .. 83
7 .... 7 .... 36 .. 77
8 .... 6 .... 34 .. 72
9 .... 6 .... 32 .. 68
10 ... 6 .... 30 .. 64
11 ... 6 .... 28 .. 60
12 ... 5 .... 26 .. 56

The Dist(1)=19 does NOT mean that "81% dropped out in a month." Dist(3)=10 does
NOT mean that "90% leave within three months." And Dist(12)=5 does NOT mean that
"95 abandon active participation in AA inside of a year." What it does show is
that 56% of those who stay three months are still active in A.A. at the end of a
year. Other Survey results show substantially better retention rates after the
first year. Here is a typical example of misinterpretation of the table.

> "Those of us who have survived in A.A. for a
> good many years know for a certainty the dire
> failure statistics of today -- statistics reported
> by A.A.'s own service structure:
> 81% of new members drop out in a month;
> 90% leave within three months; and
> 95% abandon the active participation in AA inside of a year."

That's just not true. Another misreading of statistics is to forget that not
everyone who shows up at an A.A. meeting is an alcoholic. And not everyone with
"a drinking problem" is an alcoholic (yet) either. For example, in 2002 the
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism said that there were 9.7
million "alcohol abusers" and 7.9 million "alcohol dependent people" over age
eighteen. There are clear definitions for these two categories. Only the 7.9
million are what A.A. calls "real alcoholics." These NIAAA numbers are misquoted
as:

> "And in America, there are less than a million
> AAs at any given time out of an estimated
> eighteen million alcoholics in all."

Eighteen million is the total of "real alcoholics" and "a certain type of hard
drinker." Further, most alcoholics have never tried or even visited Alcoholics
Anonymous and have never made any serious attempt at recovery through any other
means. With that in mind, one million sober American AAs is rather impressive.
It also shows the need to reach out and invite more alcoholics to try Alcoholics
Anonymous. Let's hope the pessimistic message of gloom-and-doom doesn't scare
away and discourage the rest of those who need help.

-------------------------------
[ADDITIONAL NOTE BY MODERATOR: In early AA, they often said that 50% of those
(as they put it) "who made a serious effort" in AA got sober the first time they
tried. Careful reading of the early documents and interviews with old timers
makes it clear that they were not counting those who came to a few meetings but
then fizzled out when they gave their 50% success rate. When early groups gave
their membership figures, they usually made a rough-and-ready but clear
distinction between the numbers of those at their weekly meetings who were just
coming to a few meetings at that point and the numbers of those who were much
more committed members. So early success rates were not actually all that much
different from the present success rate. AA is still extraordinarily effective
today, just as it was in the old days, particularly when we remember that
alcoholism has always been the third leading cause of death in the United States
ever since the 1930's: a fifty percent remission rate for what is frequently a
fatal disease is medically impressive by any standards.]
-------------------------------