Well , I don't feel too bright here .....
Taking up on your point on the Dr thread you said I fell off the wagon when the NAl
started working ?? That sounds like the NAL caused me to drink , well maybe that's
true if you've a cure to do may as well get on with it (that's what I thought when I struggled against the desire and decided to cede ) but , point is , does the NAL do something biologic to increase the desire in early stages ?
I would go for this if I didn't feel worried about my liver , that's why I want to see more Drs in next couple of weeks , And if they say " you'd better give your liver a complete break .....I'll have to re embrace the abstinence best I can ( and it sux ! ).

Not sure if I am following you here. If I remember correctly, you said that you were using Nal to stay abstinent and then had slipped off the wagon. I noted that by virtue of having drank, you were migrating into the Sinclair Method.

Nal won't make you drink but Nal taking by itself does little to prevent you fromn drinking. Studies have shown that Nal, taken for abstinense, did no better than placebo. In some early studies where Nal was being used to abstain from opiates, a small group had cheated and used while taken Nal. As it turned out, they should the greatest reduction in use overall.

Thankyou . I'm glad to hear it , although from what I saw in the old forum some people do actually increase over there pre sm levels , so it's worth having your wits about you to watch that .
I was actually only about two days abst + NAL , as around end Jan I started reading around on SM but stayed largely abst . I misrepresent myself above actually I think Abst is v, v good its just the craving that sux to be precise .
You have probably experienced long periods of abst ( wish I'd managed to ) so does the craving diminish ?
You mention AA , what about RR ? Any knowledge of that ? I found that a great thing but the SM if it's to be really a sucess would challenge RR some .