Over the past three weeks, I have changed my dosing regimen to 100mg per session for a couple of reasons; 1) Now that I am a moderate controlled drinker (cured, as some say), I have a lot of extra Naltrexone tablets laying around due to my abundance of AF days, and 2) I wanted to ensure a complete opioid blockade during these light to moderate drinking times. My thought is that since I am down to those hard-to-extinguish triggers, that maybe a higher dosage would help with further reductions.

The result? I am happy to say there is absolutely no difference in the effect of 50mg and 100mg. My number of drinks per week is still in the single digits and is decaying just as slow as ever.

Why am I doing this? Well, I've cut my drinking from unhealthy levels to 1/10 of what they used to be and I am now drinking at the extreme low level of the NIAAA moderate range and I am now about to enter the NIAAA Light Drinker category. I guess I wanted to get there sooner, but it doesn't work that way. Extinction is entirely time (duration) based. I'll have to wait another couple of months before I reach Light Drinker levels.

Bob

...hungover and jealous...

Remind me... what is this "hangover" of which you speak?

lol

Doesn't Sinclair say somewhere that 50 will do the job and there is really no use going higher? Bob3D - save those pills!! You never know what's around the corner And hey when we, your buddies, are in panic mode you can be the "man"

Gives me great hope that I'll get where you are too, and yes, I'm hungover as hell

Yes, the book does say that. However, I had little, if anything, to lose by trying a higher dosage. And lo and behold, 50mg will do the job just like he said.

Bob