SR,

I am both upset and offended by your choice of words above. Furthermore, it's out of character for someone whose posts are normally very interesting and beneficial to those on this forum.

You will probably realize that I am a person with both psychiatric and alcohol problems. In fact, the former gave rise to the latter. I can assure you that I have had a great deal of "couch" time but I still have deep-seated issues that are as difficult to resolve as the resulting alcohol problems.

V.

Virgil -

I doubt SR meant any offense and his comment had a kernel of truth in that alcoholism will kill you and most other psychiatric conditions won't. Alcoholism adds a layer of fog that makes it difficult to determine how many of our problems are alcohol-related or not. Getting the addiction dealt with makes everything else more clear. I wouldn't beat him up too much over what he said, but I can see why his choice of words would have rubbed you the wrong way.

N101CS,

I hear what you say but there have been plenty of times when death would have been preferable to the continuous mental torture that I have experienced over the last 33 years. Because I drank very little throughout the first 10 years of that period, I have a good idea how many of my problems are alcohol-related and how many are not.

I can assure you that I have no intention of beating anyone up on this forum. However, if I hadn't pointed out SR's choice of words and my resulting upset, I would now be beating myself up for not having said anything!

V.

Gotcha. Well I'll leave it to you to react and/or handle it the way you think best. We're starting to notice individual personalities come out a bit... Interesting (in a good way).

The point I am making is that drinking and alcohol addiction are two different animals. People choose to drink for as many reasons as there are people. But once we cross into addiction (conditioned learning), all those other issues are moot. That is why resolving the deep rooted issues has little effect on people who have become addicted. It the homuncus/non-homuncus thing that Sinclair talks about. The addiction is driving by forces that just don't care what we think or feel.

Now if you are talking about why people drank abusively that got them to the dance, then you are spot on.

Sorry to offend. If I am a little to abrasive, I will rescind.
The brutal point I am trying to make is that the addiction mechanism is independent of the mental/emotional state. It is a chemical process. It does not care what you thinnk or feel.

As far as my candor, it is who I am. I too had(have) issues and paid through the nose for couch time. But some time ago, I decided I was going to grab life by the throat and quit aplogizing for being alive. From there on out, it became a lot more fun.

Interesting maybe. Mealy mouthed? Never.

Oh Virgil, I hope you know what a valued part of this community your are.

I'll try to put it in more neutral language; I've said this before, both here and on MWO:

I think it helps to think of alcohol addiction and mental health issues as two separate and distinct problems. For my alcohol addiction I am doing Sinclair. Sinclair's own studies show that many show resolution of depression symptoms after three months on Sinclair based on the Beck depression inventory. For many of us, our life issues will resolve as we get our drinking under control. For others, it may mean something as simple as as a self-taught crash course in cognitive behavioral therapy, available for free on a site called MoodGym. (google it). For those of us who need help from a mental health professional, Eskapa says (as do I) by all means do that.

I don't pretend to speak for SR but I think he was just expressing how many of us are pissed because we have had others assume we automatically have mental health issues because we are addicted to alcohol.

One of the main reasons we started this site was to have a place where we feel safe to share and grow together. I got your back, friend! Keep showing up. -- Lena

N101CS -
I can't begin to tell you how impressed I was with your letter. You nailed every point so matter-of-factly. Absolutely awesome in the most simple and straightforward of terms. A++ :-)

Although this instance is extreme, I question whether or not we need to circle the wagons and stock up on our NAL. Unless Oprah gets involved or some sort-of HUGE grass roots movement takes hold (us???)...this book and it's effect on our alcohol addicted world will probably take some time to make a real impact. Like you pointed out, Springer...yes, we have the stats of the success rates in the book, but it is still sometimes hard to get a grasp of the reality of what we are doing - whether or not we are going down the right path - without a flesh & blood person(s) telling us how it worked for them long term/over years.

I think about this alot. I think about "us" alot. I know that I am getting so much from just having this support group - have never used an online support group-type thing before, and all I can say is in the last month or so when I stumbled upon the book and this group...my life has had added value...real hope. I think that in itself adds to my potential for success. And is also my therapy!

Your comment, RV, to the guy that had the book been taken off the shelves before you'd gotten it, the negative effects in your life had you not gotten involved in this treatment; I found very powerful. In my business, if even one life is changed...it is worth it. Same with this one book. If it makes a difference in even one life..and even if we are just a few here, are we not worth it?? - a shot at hope??

I think yes - the book banning thing on this subject is absurd. Thanks for your letter to that moron, RV. Bravo! Made my day.

Okay... I'm not going to post this guy's emails because I didn't ask him if I could and I want him to be able to engage me without worrying about his messages being distributed to a larger audience. I'm not even sharing them with Drs. Eskapa and Sinclair. But here is my response to his latest. It's two e-mails separated by a couple hours due to my commute:


Hi Mr. XXXXXX,

I am going to respond more fully once I'm at the office (I just woke up and need to get ready and out the door). I would like to mention one thing and that is that there is no $3500 cost associated with this...? The book costs $10 at Amazon and the treatment can be supervised by a primary care physician. In contrast to rehab clinics (one quoted me $16,000), nobody is making significant money from this - which I suspect is one of the reasons it hasn't been embraced by the "rehab establishment".

As I said, I can engage further once I'm at the office, but I've got to run...

Best,

XXXX


XXXXXXX,

Okay, I'm at the office. I do need to work so any emailing will be between other things. I apologize in advance if my writing becomes disjointed or if ideas are out of order. I'm going to be writing very quickly.

I think you must be referring to Beverly Rayfield and her site sinclairmethod.com. I am aware of her "clinic" but wasn't certain what she charged - I see now that it is indeed $3500.

She is completely unaffiliated with Dr. Eskapa and BenBella books. In fact, she sells her own version of Dr. Eskapa's book for $250 and calls it her "comprehensive program". I'm torn on what I think of her. On the one hand, if she is helping people it's difficult to be too critical; on the other, she does seem to be profit-driven. I'm all for ekeing out a living - we all do it - but I have a particular distaste for the rehab industry and at $3500 for a treatment that has so far cost me < $500 (doctors and medicine) I consider her a run-of-the-mill rehab doctor.

Along those same lines, I contacted two rehab doctors to see if they would supervise The sinclair Method for me (do some liver function tests and prescribe the naltrexone). They both were willing but one wanted $100 per week and the other $150 per week, plus the cost of naltrexone. They both insisted on "counseling," which would consist of 15 minutes of giving them a status update and their writing me a new 7 day prescription for naltrexone. Inasmuch as naltrexone is a harmless unscheduled drug with no known serious side effects (especially at the dosage recommended by Sinclair) - and given the results of the COMBINE study in the U.S., which concluded that naltrexone is equally effective with and without "counseling" - this is shameful on their part. In fact, I consider it malpractice. Withholding a known-effective treatment unless a patient also pays for a proven ineffective (but expensive) treatment is malpractice, plain and simple.

The only expense that should be associated with this method is the cost of a physical exam by a family doctor along with some liver function tests, naltrexone, which is available in cheap generic versions, and the book, which costs a whopping $10. While I'm sure Eskapa wants the book to succeed, everyone knows that unless you're John Grisham or Stephen King, writing books is a lousy way to get rich. I sincerely believe he wants to help people more than anything else.

AA leaves you relying on willpower and appeals to a "higher power" to get through alcoholism on a day-to-day basis. Now I have no problem with higher powers - I have my own - but having been through the cravings, I can only say that this is an exceptionally cruel thing to impose on someone. Who wants to go for the rest of their life bouncing between horrible cravings and health-destroying drinking? That is precisely what AA and traditional rehab offer and their abysmal success rates bear out the fact that the cravings eventually do most people in.

The thing that sets The sinclair Method apart from all other treatments, bar none, is that it extinguishes the craving. This is huge because the craving is really what defines alcoholism. If you don't crave alcohol and thus can refrain from drinking (even if you do drink occasionally), are you really an alcoholic anymore? That's where the title of the book came from.

As for the reviews you've read online, are you reading reviews from people who have tried The Sinclair Method and failed - or reviews by people who are speculating on whether or not it can work? I suspect the latter. I have yet to meet one person for whom The Sinclair Method hasn't worked, though I do know of one man who so far has only had a partial response. His drinking is way down and hopefully continues to decrease. But even he is only about five months into treatment and it's too soon to throw in the towel.

Best,

XXXX

Now, one last item...

I invited this gentleman to come here and discuss/debate (whatever) with us. I want us all to be polite and civil when and if he comes. I hope Lena, Marbella and I don't need to do or say anything beyond what I just said.

RV