I was just wondering, if any one here, knows the reason why this method did not help all the alcoholics in the trial- i am so afraid that i will be one of them. My husband is quite angry that i want to try this, he can, t understand i have to keep drinking while doing the treatment. Will the treatment work if on the days i take naltrexone i try and cut back on the amount i am drinking, this would get my husband of my back!


Thanks
Gillygem

I don't think it would hurt as long as you follow the rule taking Naltrexone 1 hour before drinking. If you only have one drink you are still doing the Sinclair Method. Make sure you have at least one drink if you take the meds.

Hi Gillygem,

I suspect that many members of this forum have had exactly the same thoughts and fears that you're expressing above - particularly when first starting out on the Sinclair Method (TSM). I can't remember off-hand if Dr Eskapa addresses this question in his book The Cure for Alcoholism. You could, of course, put the question directly to him in 'Questions for Dr Eskapa'. Until such time as a definitive answer to this question emerges, I guess most people can only speculate as to why TSM did not work for all on the trial.

All the best.

V.

WTE gives a very plausible breakdown .I agree .
One thing I remember was the mention of "Gabba" alcoholics a type of alcoholic
where the gabba receptors figure more significantly in their addiction . Dr E considered this a factor for the lack of sucess .

Hi

I just thought I'd jump in here to offer the following. I am a neuroscientist and one thing most people do not realise about drugs -especially for any sort of psychiatric or 'head' application - is that a lot of the commonly used drugs have a surprisingly low 'efficacy' often showing improvement in as little as 30% of patients. It is some time since I studied this at a very well known Institute of Psychiatry and some compounds may have emerged that are 'better' than this, but, I doubt it. However, the low efficacy compounds are widely used and regarded as very useful in mainstream medicine. My point is that 75% upwards represents a very high efficacy for naltrexone and so we should be very encouraged that the failure rate is so small relative to other treatments (antidepressants and anti anxiety meds currently widely used). It is also apparent from my reading of both the book and the papers that the 'failure' is likely to be largely a compliance issue. All of us here have been on the nal now for a number of weeks. Personally Im beginning my 16th week and am still waiting for significant change. When a pill is not an immediate magic bullet it is really understandable that some people 'give up' before they have reached their goal. We mut encourage each other to keep going util we reach our goal - however long it takes. I hope that this contributes something positive to this topic.

best wishes

Camelia

It really helps to read all the information about Naltrexone on this site. One of the pages explains why the trial didn't work for everyone. Basically, it's impossible for all humans to follow instructions correctly, some don't pay attention, some are unwilling. Often it isn't the drugs fault.

Camelia, thankyou for that post. Yes, some of us who are not seeing any difference at all could decide to just give up, me included. I am glad that someone who has been involved in this process and also knows a bit about pharmacology is posting. It is also nice to see that you have some of the same feelings at times and are not giving up. I think about this 24/7 and come on here every day looking to see a post that will resonate with me and this did!

Hi LaBear

did you see my post where I described exactly what happened in the double blind nal trial? In fact the researchers considered the first six months as an induction period (I will find the paper again and confirm this) with the real trial lasting many more months beyond that.

Keep on going on

Camelia

Thank you, Camelia. Very informative post. At week 13, didn't you go on a trip and experience significant reduction in drinking and craving? Overall, are your levels down consistently? Just curious.

This does seem like a roller-coaster ride at times. First we experience progress - then the drinking spikes back up - then levels go down to below our previous progress, etc. Thank God for this Board, or I'm sure I'd have given up by now.