“STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN”: LYSERGIC ACID DIETHYLAMIDE (LSD) AND ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS (AA) AS A THERAPY FOR PROBLEM DRINKING IN MIDTWENTIETH CENTURY SASKATCHEWAN, 1953-1968
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of problem drinking has and continues to occupy the hearts and minds of Canadians. However, the pursuit of the cause and development of an effective cure has eluded both medical and religious communities alike. This thesis explores one therapeutic model for problem drinking which was developed in Saskatchewan in the mid-twentieth century. This therapy, which drew on the psychedelic properties of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide (LSD) and the program structure of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), not only showed a high rate of success but also served as a mechanism for spiritual growth and development for some patients. Through a close reading of a series of primary sources, this thesis presents the perspectives of both the psychiatric professionals and Christian clergy who were involved in these trials as well as the perspective of a patient who underwent the therapy to examine how the use of LSD and Alcoholics Anonymous to treat problem drinking blurred the lines between science and religion. Moreover, this thesis problematizes the role of spirituality in biomedical forms of addictions within the diverse field of addictions research during the mid-twentieth century.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".