The problem I have with the method is if I was vomiting after drinking a few beers I would know that it was because of the medication and stop taking it. You cant get past memories. Vomiting is not odd, its unpleasant. The re-uptake also is a serious consideration. As you accustom yourself to the medication while drinking, the brain adjusts the sensitivity to alcohol upwards. I have a few classes under my belt about neuroscience. That is, the brain amplifies the effects of alcohol while on Naltrexone because the drug block the response.(Thats why eventually a few drinks get you the same buzz as a lot) It acts as a reuptake inhibitor. That is not a cure, but ampliflying the problem of increased synapse signal degredation cause by the alcohol in the first place. Altering brain electro-chemistry is a primitive start, and a start in the right direction. But its basis is in genetics.

Incorrect. Naltrexone functions as a reuptake inhibitor due to increased intolerance of ethanol. Naltrexone is indeed an opioid receptor antagonist. The problem, which you just stated, is the brain compensates for this by up-reregulation of the opioid receptors, thereby incrasing the total amount of receptors available to ethanol(alcohol). Taking an antagonist that blocks them increases the number as the brain compensates. This drug effects the limbic system primarily, and corto-stem fucnctions, where alcohol has the greatest effects.

I didnt realize the implications of this drug until I investigated further in regards to addiction medicine. This drug essentially amplifies the effect of alcohol is persons with the disease. Its is essential that anybody who ever uses this method, never come off this drug, as it will exaerbate the disease in the first place. This drug actually deepens the primary disease. I would hope any physicians reading this understand the implications of this drug in regards to addiction disease. And I intend to post this on the other forum.

The result of this will be that those who's minds are already made up will think exactly what they thought before (as they always do), but possibly some people will decide to take a look at TSM and decide for themselves. In the music business we say there's no such thing as bad publicity. There is a very vocal minority with a large (time, money, ideology) investment in TSM's not working, but there is a much larger group of people who are very likely to find TSM appealing. It was actually negative publicity that brought me here from MWO - so post away my friend, you may be saving more lives than you know.

Dreadnought repeatedly offers up his opinions as undisputed fact, which is problematic, especially when his conclusions are way off the mark. The up-regulation of opiate receptors is temporary, as AJ correctly stated. It is also entirely inconsequential so long as you continue to take the naltrexone, which is a critical fact that even dreadnought concedes. Moreover, alcoholism is primarily a learned behavior with genetics playing an undetermined, contributing factor in whether one becomes addicted. The notion that only those with the gene can become addicted is entirely unsubstantiated. Where is the wikipedia quote for this baseless opinion? Not surprisingly, dreadnought, who likes to provide links to back up his specious claims, offers NONE in support of his opinion that alcoholism is purely "gentetical." It is not a "genetical" disease. The entire theory of TSM rests upon the premise that alcoholism is a learned behavior. If you reject that premise, then there is absolutely no basis for TSM to work for anyone because the entire essence of TSM is extinguishing learned behaviors.

The assessment of whether dreadnought should try TSM comes down to this: his theoretical (and inaccurate) concern about up-regulation versus the undeniable damage he is wreaking on his body every day he consumes 14 beers on the weekdays and more like 20 (or more) on the weekend. Try doing some medical research on how long an average person will live on 110 drinks (or more) per week -- it won't be long for most people. And try examining the total undeniable havoc all of that alcohol is having on every major organ/system in your body -- the inevitable, disastrous consequences will not be open to debate.

So, the "choice" for dreadnought is the potential for temporary up-regulation rendered inconsequential by taking naltrexone, a benign, FDA-approved drug, versus a slow, agonizing death. You make the call.

PS

I just re-read dreadnought's last post. The vomiting phenomenon is not typical and only happens to the few who have reached the cured stage after many months on naltrexone. No one here started taking naltrexone and then vomited early on. What FB and N101CS and others are talking about is what happens to the cured: they think they can drink at their old levels and when they do, they pay the consequences of a "normal" person and throw-up. Their tolerance is no longer as high as it was when they were addicted. And BTW, naltrexone does not reduce your tolerance (initially). Personally, I, as well as others here, have to drink more to get a buzz on naltrexone. However, this experience varies very much from person to person on this board.

Welcome again, dreadnought54321.

If you take the time to read through my weekly progress thread from addiction through de-addiction (I don't blame you if you don't have the time and energy to do that), you'll notice that I never ever had nausea, although it is a common side effect. The side effects that bothered me were night sweats and bad dreams, something that was I apparently did not subconsciously associate with taking the Naltrexone.

My psychiatrist explained that when he was an intern and they had overdosing heroin addicts in the ER, they would inject them with Nalfamene (sp?), and within seconds they would be "sober" (and angry because their buzz was gone). He said that this related compound "plugged" the opioid receptors, and it was always amazing to him how it took only seconds to work. With the Nalfamene (sp?) molecule acting as an opioid antagonist, it blocked the receipt of the heroin molecule. Nalfameme (sp?) and Naltrexone are not RUI's, they are opioid antagonists.

Regarding "As you accustom yourself to the medication while drinking, the brain adjusts the sensitivity to alcohol upwards", that may be true while taking Naltrexone which has just a 12 hour half life and is non-addictive. However, as the pharmacological extinction progresses slowly over time, the amount of alcohol injested is reduced and the days you desire to drink decrease and thus the overall intake of Naltrexone is reduced. In my case, I take Naltrexone only about 1 day per week now, when I have a few units if and when I feel like it. Each week that passes though, I feel like drinking less and less, contrary to my 29 attempts at sobriety in the past.

It is quite likely I will become abstinent or virtually abstinent. I have no idea, nor do I care what road I go down. I have complete control over my life now. No fear of driving drunk anymore. No fear of any more severe injuries. Suicidal thoughts are gone now. This medical solution has saved my life and I had a strong desire to share it with others, not realizing the quasi-religious zeal and bigotry I found elsewhere. The irony is that I am "cured" (I still don't like that word), and people didn't want to even entertain the fact that I am no longer addicted. To say that this was discouraging to me is an understatement. For a time, I felt that if people don't want to know, that's their problem. My problem is solved. But after reconsideration, I decided otherwise. There are too many suffering people out there, that could be helped with this medical method. It doesn't hurt to try it and the worst it could do is not work. There is nothing to lose.

Bob

The violent sickness was a one-time thing; the result of pushing my body past where it was ready to go, and it taught me a quick lesson.The last thing in the world I would do now is drink without nal! I don't even have the slightest inclination to do that. Most nights now I don't take nal and I don't drink. I have other things to think about. When I do drink, I do so in pretty small amounts, and I do enjoy it. And I enjoy whatever it is I'm doing while I'm sipping that beer, because really, I have other things to think about now.

I think as time goes on I probably will drink less and less, not out of some moral compunction, but because life has become so rich and beautiful lately that I just kinda forget to go to the beer store.

That is so awesome, Firebird!

Bob, great post and I am so very happy for you. How great it must be to only drink one day a week if that. I can only hope. You are so kind and honest and an asset to this community and a success with tsm!! I am so glad you are still posting as it brings hope and understanding of what this is like after being c....d!!!!

Thanks! You really turned my day around.

I was contemplating the last few days about my reason for posting here. It's harder to go to any recovery site once you're recovered. I was feeling kinda useless. There are so many new things to do and so much time now to enjoy life, now that I'm not in a stupor every night. I've been stopping here sporadically mostly to see how my friends here are doing (like you LaBear). Occasionally, I see something I think I could comment on, and that's what I have been doing.

I have not requested that soberrecovery.com lift my ban. I don't see the point for me to do it. I don't enjoy arguing and I see that it's pointless to argue about something that has worked for me and others here, even when I believed in my heart that it wouldn't even work. Then to have people tell me about my specious reasoning? It's like someone telling you how to improve your bowling style after you've bowled a 300. It makes absolutely no sense to argue about success, especially when there is no financial or other incentive for us, other than altruism. I have become disgusted with other people's self-imposed blindness. I am almost to the point at saying if they don't listen, then they deserve what they get; but I'm not there. That would be unkind and wouldn't do anyone any good.

[/end of ramble]

Bob

Echo , echo , here, here .
Gosh, yes Bob , do stick around . I wish some others would too . And I hope Tom Maclanet will indeed come back too . I wish Q had not gone and rather did his other site as well as not instead of .
I've been around about as long as you and hope to get to your state and as I'm not there yet I'd very much apreciate putting a couple of questions to you shortly to help clarify something .So I'll do that shortly on your thread .
So glad you're getting an enjoyable life again . Nothing beats experience just too bad if people won't listen , I understand the frustration re your posting on soberrecovery.com . The best you can ever do is put information in front of people but they have to choose , that's the essence of education . Otherwise put you can lead a horse to water but ....
Something on the radio today made me chuckle they said giving credit to people in financial difficulty is like giving alcohol to an alcoholic to cure them , see in the general world the penny has far from dropped yet .