You are welcome C. I have my own theory (not discussed in the book) that the length of time and the amount you drink is also related to how long extinction takes to occur. I've been boozing progressively more and more since 16 (I'm 45) -- and TSM took about six months to work for me. I'm guessing that the subjects who were "cured" in three to four months were younger people, although their ages are not identified in the book or the studies. AJ is quite young and experienced extinction very rapidly, so his experience would fit in with my theory.

Well then I guess I am being conservative in thinking that 9 months should show some results for me as I am 47 and have been drinking since about 14 - steadiily over the past 25 years. I really hope that when Dr. E revises the book he takes these observations into consideration as it would really help the future TSMers. For example, I know that the part in the book that stated to stay away from things that give you pleasure until one has AF days scared the heck out of me. Sex was one of the main questions that so many people write about. Personally, I have found absolutely no difference in enjoying those things that you classify as basic instinct - intimacy, food, cuddling a baby, etc. I think this was extremely misleading in the book and may steer people away from trying this method. Also noted is what you've coined the "extinction burst" as well as your theory on the length of time for extinction vs. one's habit of drinking. All very noteable observations that seem to be ringing true!!

.

Hey C --

Sorry I'm only getting back to you now as I had not seen your post until today. I entirely agree that the throw away line about avoiding positive behaviors while on naltrexone is very problematic and needs to be clarified in the book. I have continued working out daily and having regular sex throughout TSM with no difference worth mentioning. Too many people with a potentially lethal alcohol habit may be scared away from this method because it might hinder their sex lives or workouts. That would be a major shame. The bottom line is this: there is only one rule of TSM -- take the pill an hour before you drink. That's it. If you follow that rule most of us are headed to drastically reduced consumption and cravings. Beware of paralysis by over-analysis I say.

As for the "honeymoon" and "extinction burst" I need to thank other TSM members -- Lena and Hapful especially regarding these two concepts. They pointed them out respectively to me and I just added my two cents. I agree that for me, the NUMBER ONE benefit of this board was not freaking out when my drinking spiked after the honeymoon. If I were on my own, I very well may have concluded TSM is bogus and quit it before I was cured. On the other hand, probably not because from the beginning, I liked the clarity and control naltrexone has given me when I drink. Even if I were still killing 50 units over three nights, it would be a lot better on naltrexone because I wouldn't be doing the foolish drunken routine that was starting to become normal for me. But regardless, it sure was good to know that a spike in drinking after an initial decrease when starting naltrexone is entirely normal.

>You should not be actively trying not to drink just a couple of weeks into the method, if you have a craving for a drink

I somewhat disagree with this, Nick. I am alarmed by some messages on this board that view NAL as a license to drink a ton every day. I get the impression that some members here take NAL daily but drink 10 every single day, for months, then ask, "why am I not cured?"

IMO this is a fundamental misunderstanding of Eskapa's "drink as you normally would." What's your goal here? To reduce your drinking, or to get wasted every day for 6 months and expect to wake up one morning suddenly cured of your urges?

If you crave a drink, yes, take Nal and have a couple. But "I took my NAL, so it doesn't matter if I drink 2 or 10" seems to miss the point of all this: reducing intake. Personally, I have experienced great success by a combination of NAL and simple steps to have more AF days. I may be wrong.

Hi,
Can I just pop in with my experience which may be relevant.

My son had been drinking one litre of gin daily for the last fifteen years (that I know of - maybe longer) and was desperate after
numerous detoxs to give up. I found TSM for him and he has been taking naltrexone since June '09. He doesn't read the forum(I do that) or keep records, so knows nothing of any ongoing debate/advice. All he does is take the pill and "drink as he normally would".
We rarely discuss it as it gets him agitated.

He is now down to 35cl. a day and now that he sees it working he is determined to keep going and reach his goal.
So from my/my sons experience is does work without great effort. We are looking towards a cure (abstinence or safe levels)
in another couple of months.

Our experience also confirms Nicks theory that the longer and more you drink, the longer extinction takes.
I used mabelees equation (do you remember that) when we started out which, if I remember rightly, put his extiction time at
9 months, so we shouldn't be too far out

I have been an avid reader of the board since the beginning of last year, so a huge thank you to all who have contributed and
shared your experiences. I am cheering you all on from behind the scenes.

Best wishes
Chris

Chris I'm praying for you and your son. I have a feeling you wish it were you and not him going through this, right? I'm a parent too and pray that my grown up kids don't have to tackle what their parents are going through, even though those genes are in them too. You're a good father for standing behind your son and I know you love him very much, he'll come through this with all your help behind him. We're here for you and him.


corkit

Nemo: now I see why Lena reacted as strongly as she did. I am only seeing this post now:

>You should not be actively trying not to drink just a couple of weeks into the method, if you have a craving for a drink

"I somewhat disagree with this Nick."

We are not as close in our positions as I initially thought. Taking naltrexone IS A LICENSE to drink as you always drank, just as Lena identified and this is a major theme of the book. In addition, DRINKING THROUGH TRIGGERS -- IE, drinking as you always have when you crave a drink -- is another key component of TSM success. I strongly stand by the above statement: YOU SHOULD NOT BE ACTIVELY TRYING NOT TO DRINK JUST A COUPLE OF WEEKS INTO THE METHOD, IF YOU HAVE A CRAVING FOR A DRINK.

As many others have pointed out, the lab rats did not use willpower when they began choosing water over alcohol.

The trickier issue for some of us occurs much later than just after a few weeks into TSM. It is not debatable that pharmacological extinction takes -- at minimum -- three to four months, per Eskapa, and probably far longer for most of us per our experiences here. I was still routinely drinking ten in one sitting five months into TSM out of habit and not craving. In other words, extinction had occurred for me and it would not have at just a couple of weeks into TSM. It was at that point -- when I was drinking ten when I could take it or leave it -- that a little effort to curb the habit proved to be invaluable to my progress.

I'm not trying to re-start a dispute, but I remain highly confident that both Dr. Sinclair and Dr. Eskapa would entirely agree that not only should we not be seeking to cut down our drinking in the face of cravings to drink before extinction has occurred, but as Firebird said on another thread, this very well may be detrimental to our progress on the method. The key to TSM success is being triggered to drink and then drinking on naltrexone when the positive reinforcement (endorphins) are blocked.

Right, Nick: This is the post that first set me off. Thanks for getting it finally; because you are a guy, I gave you extra time to come around [ humor alert ].

CHRIS: I've been anxiously awaiting another post by you. Like corkit, I've been praying for you and your son. What absolutely wonderful news!!!!! Please do keep us posted.

Nick, I am in agreement with basically everything you say.

I consider this subject closed.