Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hi everyone from Bill.P.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #46
    Hi everyone from Bill.P.

    Ha, Ill stop there too!
    I just wrote a lenthy retort in response for the 5% number but deemed it far too arrogant lol
    So like you, I'll stop there until I find the research which normally I could whip out at a moment's notice. Half of things in one city, the other half in another.
    But I do stand by my stats, just dont want to appear like a butthead without my research

    Comment


      #47
      Hi everyone from Bill.P.

      A lot of very interesting points you raised, Bill. I look forward to clarification on several fronts, but won't add to the tumultuousness with more direct questions. Instead I'll just be clear that a lot of the points you make are things that are not reflected in my own experience, both with baclofen and on MWO.

      It will be fun to suss it all out.

      Ne

      Comment


        #48
        Hi everyone from Bill.P.

        Ne/Neva Eva;1119427 wrote: A lot of very interesting points you raised, Bill. I look forward to clarification on several fronts, but won't add to the tumultuousness with more direct questions. Instead I'll just be clear that a lot of the points you make are things that are not reflected in my own experience, both with baclofen and on MWO.

        It will be fun to suss it all out.

        Ne
        No worries mate,
        So just to clarify. I think I have wrote extensively on buth the non-unique spectrum in terms of people's response to the drug. Meaning there is a full continuum from both users who report quick response at low dose all the way up to users who do not respond in the slightest. Of which, I have found out of a few thousand correspondences online to be approximately 3.5% disregarding other obvious or suspected reasons. This matches quite well with the 5% of users on I believe the continuum I am speaking of who do not posess the ability to respond to baclofen in terms of muscle spasticity in terms of its GABAb response. Since GABAb response is the mechanism strongly theorized behind the mechanism in which baclofen works to ameliorate response. With both understanding why the mechanism is not working in patients with spasticity and understanding why it is not working nearly the same number in internet correspondence with is admittedly is somewhat subjectively controlled in terms of rejection based on what I deem obvious confounders to avoid obvious spurious relationships with causality of side-effects. But the n-value is well over a thousand in my subjective criteria of email correspondence. It is our single best guess as to the potential of my theory of BRE-MACRO coupled with the studies on resistance in intrahecal baclofen at the same rate
        Which is Baclofen REsistant- MAlignant Central Reward-system Overactivity
        Or BRE-MACRO for short
        I will clearly outline my support for this and I am not trying to be arrogant on this point.
        I dont see how you cannot fall into the spectrum which runs fully useful and easily controlled to the opposite end. Fully non-useful with no control of which 5% fall into upon my experience.
        As to not having the experience of side effects which is really meant to assure people it does not exclude people as it describes most people as no side effects and at the other end of the continuum in this small spectrum a wide array of very individual responses to baclofen in the less than 5%. It is varied, primarily female, I would estimate 80% which is female
        I have been quite clear. I state the side effect profile is slim in comparison to most drugs based on evidence based medcinine However given the large n-value of users who are using baclofen on this site. No doubt people will be posting true baclofen side effects. There is no doubt about that and no one online can tell another person they have not met, that they are feeling side effects> If you are feeling side effects, the first clue is the patient saying "hey, I am feeling side effects" and is the gold standard for assessing if in fact, they are feeling side effects.

        So I guess Neva, my response is towards you as you never mentioned side effects. What I am trying to say in my long, unreadable and as my friend zenstyle says is still excessively wordy posts is that. "Yes side effects occur and Yes there is a continuum of baclofen responders, it is not absolute".
        Look, 3 years ago, I got way more heat when I came here when there were like 5 baclofen posts before me. I had more than a few hate PMs from AA people saying I was a heretic. That AA was the only way. I actually got a few drunken death threats on email. I think they were drunken because AA has such a piss-poor rate of success which is proven by evidence-based medicine.
        Thats the only thing I can hang my hat on, you can probably read my posts and find I am consistently couching my language is terms of, probable, maybe's, continuum's spectrums.
        Its because that is the NATURE of the human organism! There is no one right key to this little creature.
        With the success of AA estimated at 3-5% some suggesting that is the rate of spontaneous remission of alcoholism. It actually doesnt work according to evidence-based medicine.
        Using my intuition and my experience, I know that it does as I know baclofen does not work in some individuals. Can I point to a few studies, yup, will do soon.
        Can I say what the best program I believe is for baclofen use, its a combo of motivated infidivuals who go to meetings like AA or what I have dubbed baclofen anonymous with the same principles as AA with a focus on health rather than coffee and cigarettes.

        So Neva, I dont understand where you cannot fall into my approach. That whatever you experience in side effects is real. However, the side effect profile is 3-5% to where a person probably should quit taking baclofen. VERSUS the horrible deathly grim prognosis if you continue to keep drinking in which the next best accept thing is Alcoholics Anonymous in which the success rate is 3-5%.
        My message is 3-5% dropout rate due to side effects is a helluva lot better than the alternative which is 95-97 failure rate of Alcoholics Anonymous.

        Again I am not bashing AA. When AA is discussed, a meeting consists at a minimum two drunks getting to quit drinking. I object to the rather know-it-alls Ive met at meetings and THANKFULLy with you Neva and you Bleep, you injected reason and contested some of the dogma that I have not seen here when reading recent posts. I must stress that, it is a most refreshing change from my critical response a few years ago. Very refreshing
        So not a bashing. I am applauding you for asking. But answering in a spirited way. I just think at some point I should stop dancing on making a forceful point about whether there are side effects and whether everyone can be helped with baclofen. I believe the number at best is 24 people out of 25 people can be helped based on their genetic response to baclofen.

        Comment


          #49
          Hi everyone from Bill.P.

          skeptic101;1119452 wrote: After lurking for awhile i am quite certain Bill.P. is actually Dr. Ameisen, you are full of shit if you dont post under your real name asshole. You spew the same garbage as his verbatim and you don't back it up as he doesn't. Piss off with your theories
          You're just very wrong on several levels friend. Bill P will not be responding to you, nor should he, nor will anyone else. It would be a waste of time.

          Why did I? :H


          :nutso:
          :nutso: I take pride in my humility :nutso:
          :what?:
          sigpic
          Graph of My Drinking From July '09 to January '10

          Consolidated Baclofen Information Thread




          Baclofen for Alcoholism and Other Addictions
          A Forum
          Trolls need not apply

          Comment


            #50
            Hi everyone from Bill.P.

            skeptic101;1119452 wrote: After lurking for awhile i am quite certain Bill.P. is actually Dr. Ameisen, you are full of shit if you dont post under your real name asshole. You spew the same garbage as his verbatim and you don't back it up as he doesn't. Piss off with your theories
            Oh dear... :H:H:H

            Maybe .25 of Xanax will help you chill.
            I'll do whatever it takes
            AF 21/08/2009

            Comment


              #51
              Hi everyone from Bill.P.

              haha, Dr Ameisen if French by his own admission. I am an Irish Citizen and 100% of that genetic heritage meaning I am doomed from that perspective.
              I was talking to my mom and she related after her brother died as to the family on my father's side how she could not believe they actually thought that drinking was good for you. Any problem, have a drink. My uncle Denny died begging for beer to be poured down his feeding tube which they did.
              IF that is not alcohol and genetics mixed together I do not know how possibly they could think that. My father's side of the family are all complete and profound alcoholics and Irish

              I guess anyone can be convinced of anything with the recent Apocalypse Billboards and people selling their things and prepariing for 6 pm on May 16th as the end of the world. No one could reason with some 250,000 people by estimate thought this past weekend was the end of it all with earthquakes. I guess nature didnt help out their psychosis with the tornados but 300 dead dead is a far cry from 6 billion dead
              Replying to LoOp of course and I am not at all Dr A
              I think Sceptic101 is having a good laugh at the moment. Lets not encourage the troll. Thanks tip for the help. Obviously someone saw the AA reference and my quixotic allusion to the best therapy combining the two and had a bit of fun with it. It make me laugh. Zenstyle is that you?

              Comment


                #52
                Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                Please allow me to put an end to this fuckwitery once and for all.

                I am Dr. Ameisen.
                Yes. It's me.

                There. Done.

                Comment


                  #53
                  Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                  lol
                  THOUGHTS become THINGS
                  choose the GOOD
                  ones!

                  AF since 5/22/11 :boxer: Life begins at the end of your comfort zone.............

                  Comment


                    #54
                    Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                    tawnyfrog;1119468 wrote: Please allow me to put an end to this fuckwitery once and for all.

                    I am Dr. Ameisen.
                    Yes. It's me.

                    There. Done.
                    lol, Dr A. you dont call, you dont write...no mo

                    Comment


                      #55
                      Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                      Morning, Bill.
                      Thank you for your extended and thoughtful response.
                      We haven't had the chance to get to know one another. I'd like to start this conversation with some sort of mutual understanding. It seems that you are held in some esteem by some people around here whose judgement I trust, so I'm just going to assume the rest is simply based on that misunderstanding.

                      That said, I take umbrage with a number of assertions that you make. It always concerns me, in both real and in virtual life, when people make assertions based on science, research or fact, without supplying the actual science, research or facts.

                      Bill.P.;1119236 wrote:
                      I have to tend to agree with you on the manufacturing side-effects, however, they definitely feel real to them. That's why a physician is there in an ideal situation to reassure the patient, assess them, change dosing etc...
                      People are manufacturing side effects? And a doctor would be able to figure this out and allay their fears? I'm pretty sure that I'd fire any physician who suggested that the physical symptoms I was experiencing in response to taking a medication off label, one without a single study related to my disease and taken at 3 or 4 times the FDA approved amount, were in my head. The recent study commissioned in the Netherlands has capped the dosage of baclofen prescribed for the patients at 200mg/day at the most because they are unsure of the side effects of going any higher. I presume that they are basing this on scientific research. There isn't any, of course. Addolorato was recently quoted saying that he would not prescribe more than 90mg/day and he is one of the original researchers who made the connection between baclofen and craving reduction. At 30mg/day.

                      Bill.P.;1119236 wrote: I said its probably psychological reaction ... So I am loathe to tell anyone online that what they are having going on is not real. Guess what the response would be, yup, Id be an asshole. It does seem that sideeffects occurs at a much higher percentage on chatboards than in the research. But although small. there will be people with real side effects as well. Online, it would be impossible to separate the two populations, so we could easily be wrong by saying its in their head and not only be wrong Theyd just call us assholes, which would be correct as we are assuming that they arent part of the real population experiencing side effects.
                      Guess we should just keep our mouths shut on that topic
                      And yet you DID
                      suggest that what they (we) have going on is not real. I'm not name calling, not by any stretch. I'm intrigued. I'm also very wary. Lots of people come around here making assertions out of the blue without the information to back it up. I've learned to ignore them. However, you come recommended and have some interesting ideas. Doesn't mean I'm not wary, though.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote: No worries mate,
                      So just to clarify. I think I have wrote extensively

                      I'm worried. Where exactly have you written?

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote:
                      I have found out of a few thousand correspondences online to be approximately 3.5% disregarding other obvious or suspected reasons.
                      Again, where?

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote:
                      This matches quite well with the 5% of users on I believe the continuum I am speaking of who do not posess the ability to respond to baclofen in terms of muscle spasticity in terms of its GABAb response. Since GABAb response is the mechanism strongly theorized behind the mechanism in which baclofen works to ameliorate response. With both understanding why the mechanism is not working in patients with spasticity and understanding why it is not working nearly the same number in internet correspondence with is admittedly is somewhat subjectively controlled in terms of rejection based on what I deem obvious confounders to avoid obvious spurious relationships with causality of side-effects. But the n-value is well over a thousand in my subjective criteria of email correspondence. It is our single best guess as to the potential of my theory of BRE-MACRO coupled with the studies on resistance in intrahecal baclofen at the same rate
                      Which is Baclofen REsistant- MAlignant Central Reward-system Overactivity
                      Or BRE-MACRO for short
                      Your point is taken that there will be a certain percentage of people for whom baclofen will not work in terms of combating their addiction. One doesn't need, necessarily, to find a correlation in scientific research to assume that fact. That said, I have no idea how many people are able to be helped with high-dose-baclofen treatment for addiction. Do you?

                      "It is our single best guess...of my theory..." hmmm. Based on what? For whom and for what purpose is your theory created?

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote: I will clearly outline my support for this When? I've seen quite a few verbose responses, with more than a few suggestions that you will back up your information when you have time. None have been forthcoming. I too can write a long, wordy and inane response in mere minutes, so I understand that perhaps your time is not being spent simply responding, but full of other things that life entails. However, and this is a big but, you make A LOT of assertions, suggest a lot of conclusions, and couch them in scientific language based on research that you have not provided. I am wary, Bill.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote:
                      as it describes most people as no side effects and at the other end of the continuum in this small spectrum a wide array of very individual responses to baclofen in the less than 5%. It is varied, primarily female, I would estimate 80% which is female
                      I have been quite clear. I state the side effect profile is slim in comparison to most drugs based on evidence based medcinine However given the large n-value of users who are using baclofen on this site. No doubt people will be posting true baclofen side effects. There is no doubt about that and no one online can tell another person they have not met, that they are feeling side effects> If you are feeling side effects, the first clue is the patient saying "hey, I am feeling side effects" and is the gold standard for assessing if in fact, they are feeling side effects.
                      And yet you assert, as fact, that people who suffer from side effects are likely suffering from an underlying psychiatric disorder. And you suggest that the nature of that disorder would be rather severe. (schizoaffective etc...) Again, without any back up or correlation from which we can draw our own conclusions.

                      You've even gone so far as to suggest to someone on here that they suffer from such a disorder or an underlying medical issue (low testosterone) without having any idea of what that person has done in the past or is experiencing now. Both of which are very relevant in that particular case.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote:
                      the only thing I can hang my hat on, you can probably read my posts and find I am consistently couching my language is terms of, probable, maybe's, continuum's spectrums.
                      ...
                      Can I point to a few studies, yup, will do soon.
                      Your hat, Bill, is without a rack. I cannot actually read your posts. They're gone. You did not couch your conclusions about side effects in terms of probables. You asserted them as fact based on your research. Which we have yet to see.

                      How soon is soon? Is that OA soon? As in never. Or is that soon as in, I need a day to look at my extensive emails and will post the links to the relevant information sometime today. Hopefully before we are subjected to more conclusions and assertions based on this research.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote: I say what the best program I believe is for baclofen use, its a combo of motivated infidivuals who go to meetings like AA or what I have dubbed baclofen anonymous with the same principles as AA with a focus on health rather than coffee and cigarettes. Agreed. And I can actually back that up with recent scientific research.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote: I dont understand where you cannot fall into my approach. That whatever you experience in side effects is real. However, the side effect profile is 3-5% to where a person probably should quit taking baclofen.
                      So you've couched your assertions in ways that are unimpeachable? That people who have debilitating side effects, for instance, are in need of psychiatric intervention? That 80% of them are women?
                      What are the side effects that would preclude someone from trying to take baclofen under any and almost all circumstances given the results of continuing to drink alcoholically? You state those facts, though I take issue with your numbers there as well.

                      Bill.P.;1119449 wrote:
                      My recent, and extended experience on these forums would suggest otherwise,
                      I'm not sure how recent your experience is, or how far reaching, Bill. There have been many, many people who have given up on baclofen very recently because of the side effects they experienced. Many of them men. There have also been a couple of instances where men who have reached indifference, but titrated down to little or no baclofen, are experiencing side effects unlike what they did the first time they titrated up.

                      Hi, Bill. My name is Karen. I was an alcoholic. I took baclofen for 7 months before I reached indifference. I had terrible side effects. Some of which I had never read about or heard about before I experienced them. That was much more frightening than the ones I experienced that I had heard about.
                      I have no underlying psychiatric disorders, prior to, during or since my baclofen titration. I have been to many mental health professionals in order to figure out what was "wrong" with me, and been diagnosed with depression and ADHD. I have not suffered from, or been treated for depression in a decade. The ADHD diagnosis was completely erroneous. It's very difficult to concentrate, or do well in school, regardless of one's IQ, when one is consistently drunk, I think you'd agree. Turns out that what ails me is the inordinate amount of booze i was pouring into my system on a daily basis for a couple of decades.
                      I also don't have any major physical problems that would explain the side effects I experienced. I have the tests to back that up, because I was determined to find my way out and needed to understand why I was struggling so mightily when for others it seemed relatively
                      effortless.

                      I understand that this is a very extended post. I hope you'll forgive if it's unnecessarily verbose. I felt that your comments deserved a thorough response.

                      Ne

                      Comment


                        #56
                        Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                        hmmmm.

                        Comment


                          #57
                          Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                          Well, well, well.

                          Says it all really. Please share your research Bill. I really hope you can find it, because there are some interesting nuggets amongst all you say.

                          Comment


                            #58
                            Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                            This is a GREAT post Ne. I don't know how you do it. Seriously.

                            I quoted it in full not because I am afraid you will delete it (I'm sure you won't), but because I want everyone to know what I'm referring to, and as a result, maybe more readers will be compelled to read it who may have been turned off by its length (not verbose in the least, I must add -- very succinct in terms of the ground it covered).

                            Thank you Ne. Everyone else, please read it carefully. And please read Ne's post, NOT this one, because the quote here leaves out the specific Bill P posts she responds to one by one.

                            p.s., I have been following all of this and all the other stuff Ne responds to -- so this is not just a spontaneous ra ra response to a great post. It is (IMHO) completely based on fact, including the history of Bill P, which I have followed from way back when, but he did leave and take his posts with him (I think -- if that is not the case, and anyone knows otherwise, please redirect me), and I can't remember them in detail. Well, hardly at all, actually, given the state of my memory. Referring to writing extensively about stuff after it has been erased is confusing to me, and probably a lot of other readers.

                            Plus, I'd like to note that the way I remember it (of course I have no way of going back to reaffirm or retract this statement) Bill P made some valuable contributions here and inspired me to start, or continue, baclofen (not sure which, since I can't go back and read his threads/posts to establish a date). I don't recall that he was so fast and easy with the facts, I recall more personal accounts of his journey and an extreme desire to convince others to try bac (which he obviously still has, and for that I still respect him). But, of course, that is just my memory and we all know how unreliable that it is.

                            Ne/Neva Eva;1119554 wrote: Morning, Bill.
                            Thank you for your extended and thoughtful response.
                            We haven't had the chance to get to know one another. I'd like to start this conversation with some sort of mutual understanding. It seems that you are held in some esteem by some people around here whose judgement I trust, so I'm just going to assume the rest is simply based on that misunderstanding.

                            That said, I take umbrage with a number of assertions that you make. It always concerns me, in both real and in virtual life, when people make assertions based on science, research or fact, without supplying the actual science, research or facts.



                            People are manufacturing side effects? And a doctor would be able to figure this out and allay their fears? I'm pretty sure that I'd fire any physician who suggested that the physical symptoms I was experiencing in response to taking a medication off label, one without a single study related to my disease and taken at 3 or 4 times the FDA approved amount, were in my head. The recent study commissioned in the Netherlands has capped the dosage of baclofen prescribed for the patients at 200mg/day at the most because they are unsure of the side effects of going any higher. I presume that they are basing this on scientific research. There isn't any, of course. Addolorato was recently quoted saying that he would not prescribe more than 90mg/day and he is one of the original researchers who made the connection between baclofen and craving reduction. At 30mg/day.



                            And yet you DID
                            suggest that what they (we) have going on is not real. I'm not name calling, not by any stretch. I'm intrigued. I'm also very wary. Lots of people come around here making assertions out of the blue without the information to back it up. I've learned to ignore them. However, you come recommended and have some interesting ideas. Doesn't mean I'm not wary, though.

                            br />
                            I'm worried. Where exactly have you written?


                            Again, where?



                            Your point is taken that there will be a certain percentage of people for whom baclofen will not work in terms of combating their addiction. One doesn't need, necessarily, to find a correlation in scientific research to assume that fact. That said, I have no idea how many people are able to be helped with high-dose-baclofen treatment for addiction. Do you?

                            "It is our single best guess...of my theory..." hmmm. Based on what? For whom and for what purpose is your theory created?


                            When? I've seen quite a few verbose responses, with more than a few suggestions that you will back up your information when you have time. None have been forthcoming. I too can write a long, wordy and inane response in mere minutes, so I understand that perhaps your time is not being spent simply responding, but full of other things that life entails. However, and this is a big but, you make A LOT of assertions, suggest a lot of conclusions, and couch them in scientific language based on research that you have not provided. I am wary, Bill.



                            And yet you assert, as fact, that people who suffer from side effects are likely suffering from an underlying psychiatric disorder. And you suggest that the nature of that disorder would be rather severe. (schizoaffective etc...) Again, without any back up or correlation from which we can draw our own conclusions.

                            You've even gone so far as to suggest to someone on here that they suffer from such a disorder or an underlying medical issue (low testosterone) without having any idea of what that person has done in the past or is experiencing now. Both of which are very relevant in that particular case.



                            Your hat, Bill, is without a rack. I cannot actually read your posts. They're gone. You did not couch your conclusions about side effects in terms of probables. You asserted them as fact based on your research. Which we have yet to see.

                            How soon is soon? Is that OA soon? As in never. Or is that soon as in, I need a day to look at my extensive emails and will post the links to the relevant information sometime today. Hopefully before we are subjected to more conclusions and assertions based on this research.


                            Agreed. And I can actually back that up with recent scientific research.



                            So you've couched your assertions in ways that are unimpeachable? That people who have debilitating side effects, for instance, are in need of psychiatric intervention? That 80% of them are women?
                            What are the side effects that would preclude someone from trying to take baclofen under any and almost all circumstances given the results of continuing to drink alcoholically? You state those facts, though I take issue with your numbers there as well.



                            I'm not sure how recent your experience is, or how far reaching, Bill. There have been many, many people who have given up on baclofen very recently because of the side effects they experienced. Many of them men. There have also been a couple of instances where men who have reached indifference, but titrated down to little or no baclofen, are experiencing side effects unlike what they did the first time they titrated up.

                            Hi, Bill. My name is Karen. I was an alcoholic. I took baclofen for 7 months before I reached indifference. I had terrible side effects. Some of which I had never read about or heard about before I experienced them. That was much more frightening than the ones I experienced that I had heard about.
                            I have no underlying psychiatric disorders, prior to, during or since my baclofen titration. I have been to many mental health professionals in order to figure out what was "wrong" with me, and been diagnosed with depression and ADHD. I have not suffered from, or been treated for depression in a decade. The ADHD diagnosis was completely erroneous. It's very difficult to concentrate, or do well in school, regardless of one's IQ, when one is consistently drunk, I think you'd agree. Turns out that what ails me is the inordinate amount of booze i was pouring into my system on a daily basis for a couple of decades.
                            I also don't have any major physical problems that would explain the side effects I experienced. I have the tests to back that up, because I was determined to find my way out and needed to understand why I was struggling so mightily when for others it seemed relatively effortless.

                            I understand that this is a very extended post. I hope you'll forgive if it's unnecessarily verbose. I felt that your comments deserved a thorough response.

                            Ne
                            Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life... And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.

                            Steve Jobs, Stanford Commencement Adress, 2005

                            Comment


                              #59
                              Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                              Beatle, if I may, here is a "permalink" to Ne's Post.

                              If I have I have anything to say it'd be that I'm hopeful, but I don't know why.
                              :nutso: I take pride in my humility :nutso:
                              :what?:
                              sigpic
                              Graph of My Drinking From July '09 to January '10

                              Consolidated Baclofen Information Thread




                              Baclofen for Alcoholism and Other Addictions
                              A Forum
                              Trolls need not apply

                              Comment


                                #60
                                Hi everyone from Bill.P.

                                I don't understand. If I click on that, I get the whole Bill P. thread, not just her post.

                                And what are you hopeful about? (in this specific instance, I mean)
                                Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life... And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.

                                Steve Jobs, Stanford Commencement Adress, 2005

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X