OK, so I still have tons of doubts about long-term effectiveness of TSM but at this point it is safe to state that there is a clear positive effect in my case. NAL was purchased at Alldaychemist.
Pre-TSM: 80-100 US units/week
First nine weeks on NAL: 43,35,28,33,31,26,23,17,27

Main effect seems to a feeling of slight disgust when exceeding a certain amount of alcohol. Right now it is about two large glasses of wine over a long evening. But on one occasion I couldn't even finish a glass and ended up pouring it down the drain (unthinkable before!) Still drink daily but now can tolerate AF days without much drama.

Now trying to figure out whether it will be beneficial to start forcing down the number of drinks "artificially" (that is, simply not buying the stuff unless badly wanted progressively more days per week/month).

A member asked Dr. Eskapa about this. Here's the question and his answer:

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=146

I struggled with this issue for a while and continued to drink excessively, "out of habit" when the cravings were not there and I could have reduced consumption considerably with a small amount of effort. I highly recommend that people use effort to taper off after their cravings have been reduced. If you then feel strongly compelled to drink, drink through it, but do not mistake your routine for strong cravings.

Lena and Nick - thanks for replying.

If the whole premise of TSM is real, one would think there has to be some optimal point between the two extremes, right? Where exactly probably depends on an individual - making "the sweet spot" hard to find. The craving criterion is a bit uncertain to me. On one hand, I want to drink basically at all times. On the other, while I am on NAL, it feels I can go cold turkey without much trouble. (The thing is, I could always go cold turkey even before - the trouble was that I could not stay there for more than few weeks/months).

I agree with what you are saying, Nick. Based on various bits and pieces of conversations here, I am getting a feeling that the relatively more successful TSMers are the ones that at some point make active and conscious effort to lower consumption. I'll try it in the upcoming weeks. I am also thinking about combining it with the "cue exposure" therapy. (Basically, train yourself to stop after a while; "prime"/"trigger" by having a little drink but then just staring at it, even smelling it but not drinking it. The premise is the same Pavlovian extinction and it has been shown to work to some, apparently limited extent; who knows, maybe in with NAL it will work better?).

Lena, I'd rather learn what people here experience than hear what "Dr" Eskapa says about anything.

Ortho -- Many, but not all, of those who have declared themselves "cured" have put effort into limiting consumption. An example of one who did: SpringerRider, who, as a binge drinker, would make an effort for AF days to create, then extinguish, Alcohol Deprivation Effect. For daily drinkers, ADE is not a trigger to be extinguished, because we never deprive ourselves! Sinclair emphasizes that, while frequent drinking sessions are beneficial, TSM does not require consuming large quantities of alcohol per session. So in theory it would not interfere with TSM to consciously cut back. Here on the board, I've noticed the gamut of approaches to this, with a wide variation in reported success. I think those trying to cut back post about it more often, so it may appear that this approach produces better results, but I'm not convinced that's true. In fact, I suspect that the very members who achieve success with little effort are are the ones to drift away from the board, so we don't hear from them (Thankfully, bob3d, AJ_ and others are exceptions). So I'm frankly not sure what to think, so I hope folks read this and weigh in, even though it has been discussed a lot here. Bottom line: If one can cut back, then why not do it, especially since cutting back does not hamper TSM progress? To me, being capable of cutting back with some effort represents control over drinking, which is exactly what we seek.

I think the reason most people keep coming to the board is to learn from the experiences of one another. Many if not most of us learned about TSM from reading Eskapa's book. We certainly are grateful when Eskapa and Dr. Sinclair take the time to drop in here and offer advice or encouragement. But I think there are quite a few like you who prefer to rely on real-life experiences reported here. I'm glad the board is able to supply both, so people can take whatever works for them. Many of our experiences seem to be at variance with what Eskapa reports, especially as to length of treatment and side effects.

I noticed you put the "Dr" in quotes. So I thought I'd clarify and remind readers that, while Eskapa and Sinclair are not medical doctors, they are doctors. Roy Eskapa and David Sinclair both are PhD's (psychology). Both of them stress the importance of the role an MD in the basic medical management in TSM. (Of course many of us choose not to involve an MD).