Hi Dr. Eskapa,

I have been trying to understand the difference between the half-lives of naltrexone and nalmefene. Many sources say nalmefene is superior because of its longer half-life. There are 2 things about this statement that are really confusing me:

1. Why would someone using TSM want a longer half-life? I haven't started TSM yet (I am waiting for my naltrexone order to arrive from India), but I envision taking naltrexone in the evening, an hour before I have a drink, and then having 1-3 drinks and going to sleep. I want to wake up with all of my opioid receptors working again, so I can have a normal response to normal activities the next day. A longer half-life seems like it could be a bad thing!

2. When you consider naltrexone's active metabolite, does nalmefene really have a longer half-life? Several sources I looked at said that naltrexone's half-life is about four hours and nalmefene's averages around 11, but naltrexone apparently has an active metabolite with a half-life around 13 hours. The metabolite is a weaker antagonist, so is it safe to assume the clinical effects of naltrexone don't last as long as nalmefene's?

Thanks!

Receptors are not clear of Naltrexone for 48 hours.

Yes, but generally a half-life is a better estimation of how long a drug will have a noticeable effect. If naltrexone continued to have a significant effect for 48 hours, the Sinclair Method theoretically wouldn't work very well.

That depends, it would mean that endorphins were continuously blocked, not desireable state but you'd become deaddicted to alcohol plus a lot of other things!

The new drug is supposed to have less side effects, and the longer half life might suit those who drink for long periods at a time.

The clarity of the damage is introduced for the people. It has been rightly followed and australianwritings rating is done for the humans. The differentiation is done for the humans for all good and vital parts for the humans.