Hello
I have been pondering the Phil debate and it has reinforced my commitment to pushing forward with my site Baclofen for Addiction - Baclofen UK. I set it up to provide as much information as possible for those starting to seek help with alcoholism and also to push for change. I have a job which I like and I cannot do this for profit in case you wonder.
OA suggested an approach like that of the French site Baclofene and that is what I have tried to model the site on.
I would like to redesign the site so that it has better information and more facilities so that MWO can get on with being what it should be, a forum for people to help each other, and we all spend less time bumping and grinding our way through thousands of posts to find the information we want.
I also feel that the ideas I have put on the site provide a way forward in terms of dealing with addiction generally. If any addiction can be negated by an "antedote" then it gives the addict back his free will. It puts moral responsibility back in the hands of the addict and renders the addictive agent harmless, provided the addict knows about the antedote and has access to it as easily as he can get hold of the poison. (oh and alcohol is a poison- is there a thread for that?) It is already being done with opiate addiction but with methadone and naltrexone, not baclofen.
At present governments are going round in circles with debates over legalization of drugs. Why are drugs a problem if there is a treatment which almost immediately makes one indifferent to the drug? If someone wants to take a drink or a drug in their own home or gets hooked on heroin but can get a cure at the local pharmacy why get involved with him? If that person starts committing crimes or acting badly because he becomes addicted then he can be made to go to the local pharmacy and if he just ignores that help then he can and should be punished, primarily with a regime which includes effectively dealing with the addiction, which until now has not been available. And, it doesn't mean drugs have to be legalized or reclassified or that we have to find designer drugs which mimic existing ones to give people a safe high. Balcofen as a treatment for addiction opens up a whole new way of looking at the way we deal with addictive drugs and alcohol.
The problem that Phil has raised is that if anyone is going to push Baclofen forward they have to be taken seriously. It is the quality of one's ideas which will make people listen and act in relation to Baclofen and none of us can do that alone...not even me. What we don't need is for side issues to detract from the main aim of everyone here.
Life is too short.
Any ideas are welcomed.
Oh, and if it works, then discussions like this can take place over there and not here so people here can get the help they want from the people on this site who understand what they are going through and people like me can go elsewhere with the tedious and sometimes annoying debates about whether baclofen is a cure or a treatment and whether it is right to be in it for the money etc. etc.
Otter
I have been pondering the Phil debate and it has reinforced my commitment to pushing forward with my site Baclofen for Addiction - Baclofen UK. I set it up to provide as much information as possible for those starting to seek help with alcoholism and also to push for change. I have a job which I like and I cannot do this for profit in case you wonder.
OA suggested an approach like that of the French site Baclofene and that is what I have tried to model the site on.
I would like to redesign the site so that it has better information and more facilities so that MWO can get on with being what it should be, a forum for people to help each other, and we all spend less time bumping and grinding our way through thousands of posts to find the information we want.
I also feel that the ideas I have put on the site provide a way forward in terms of dealing with addiction generally. If any addiction can be negated by an "antedote" then it gives the addict back his free will. It puts moral responsibility back in the hands of the addict and renders the addictive agent harmless, provided the addict knows about the antedote and has access to it as easily as he can get hold of the poison. (oh and alcohol is a poison- is there a thread for that?) It is already being done with opiate addiction but with methadone and naltrexone, not baclofen.
At present governments are going round in circles with debates over legalization of drugs. Why are drugs a problem if there is a treatment which almost immediately makes one indifferent to the drug? If someone wants to take a drink or a drug in their own home or gets hooked on heroin but can get a cure at the local pharmacy why get involved with him? If that person starts committing crimes or acting badly because he becomes addicted then he can be made to go to the local pharmacy and if he just ignores that help then he can and should be punished, primarily with a regime which includes effectively dealing with the addiction, which until now has not been available. And, it doesn't mean drugs have to be legalized or reclassified or that we have to find designer drugs which mimic existing ones to give people a safe high. Balcofen as a treatment for addiction opens up a whole new way of looking at the way we deal with addictive drugs and alcohol.
The problem that Phil has raised is that if anyone is going to push Baclofen forward they have to be taken seriously. It is the quality of one's ideas which will make people listen and act in relation to Baclofen and none of us can do that alone...not even me. What we don't need is for side issues to detract from the main aim of everyone here.
Life is too short.
Any ideas are welcomed.
Oh, and if it works, then discussions like this can take place over there and not here so people here can get the help they want from the people on this site who understand what they are going through and people like me can go elsewhere with the tedious and sometimes annoying debates about whether baclofen is a cure or a treatment and whether it is right to be in it for the money etc. etc.
Otter
Comment