Indifference

[Theodore]

Indifference

Anyway- I probably shouldn't be posting on here during a party- but people are talking about shoes- I like shoes- but not enough to talk about them for half an hour straight. And apparently, I'm hitting the keys to hard

[Theodore]

Indifference

But I think that if your gaba system isn't faulty, using bac might not do you much good. I won't kill you, but could make you depressed etc (I think- not so sure)

[Theodore]

Indifference

It's also possible, I would suppose, that, even if you didin't have a fault with the gaba system in the first place, you could damage it with excessive drinking. Which might explain why bac helped you to break the cycle.

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Indifference

Allrighty roo.

I've just had a chance to catch up on this stuff. I take issue with this:

Theodore;1128825 wrote: Well, I have reached the rather humble conclusion over the years that mosts GPs know absolutely sweet fuck all about alcoholism or any other mental illness. Which is very frightening. But they do know more than me about THIQ syndrome I must admit. Say what?
And this:

Theodore;1128835 wrote: And In should add that it is impossible for the body process alcohol like an opiate. Sounds nice on paper, but it's not true.
And especially this:

taw;1128838 wrote: You are the resident expert....I cannot wait to tell you I hit my switch on bac...against all odds...

Oh, yeah, and this:

Theodore;1128857 wrote: Yes- it's very possible that in some people several systems are defective.

Oh, wait, there's this:

Theodore;1128860 wrote: But I think that if your gaba system isn't faulty, using bac might not do you much good. I won't kill you, but could make you depressed etc (I think- not so sure)

Let's sum up, shall we? You're studying China. A sinologist (not sure what synology is???) And you're a 24 year old binge drinker. With no background in science or medicine. And you're writing about gaba and other things that scientists (some of whom have spent more years than you have been alive studying and still don't understand) as though you're an expert.

You took bac as a patient of a doctor, you reached indifference at, what? 70mg? In record time.

You are now using your own, very limited, experience, to conjure up broad summations about baclofen, the gaba-system, why bac "works" and more importantly "doesn't work."

hmmmm. I call bull shit, Teddy. I'd ignore you, and this thread, except that I've already participated and given some measure of approval for your theories. And now one of my dear friends is involved and questioning her own experience. That leaves me with very few options, Teddy.

I want the facts. The research. The back-it-up with something other than opinions... Because EVERYONE has an opinion. (you know the adage, right? Opinions are like a*h*s, everyone's got one...)

Now shoes, we can talk about shoes. But baclofen? hmmmm. That, that is a stiletto of a different kind. or something.

Taw. KOKO. You rock. You're doing everything just right. :h
Ne

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Indifference

It's a very common impulse, I think, to want to help others with their progress, and guide them based on your own experience. Especially when the experience you are having is so profound and positive. I get that. But remember, support is just that. Analyzing is not support. Conjecture is not support.

You can have no idea what experiences other people are having, especially since you're so new to the forum and to baclofen.

But you might be jeopardizing someone's ability to find indifference. Or simply confusing the issues when you offer hypothesis based on a very limited data sample. (your own, and no one else's! That's limited indeed!)

So take care, Teddy. Of yourself and the other gentle people on here.

[Theodore]

Indifference

Yes Ne. And it is, at times, more than a little embarrassing, not to say very risky for me to talk about these things- given that, as you say, I am only 24 and have no formal backround in the medical sciencies. It is possible, however, to develop a sound understanding of any subject through reading and discussion with the relevant experts. Hence the traditional question asked of someone studying at university, 'what are you reading?'- not what are you studying, what background are you gaining, what are you being examined in, who is lecturing you, but 'what are you reading?' There are many people in the world with far more impressive and startling achievements to their name than mine- people who have developed expertise in a wide variety of subjects- they are called polymaths and are essential to scientific, techological and intellectual progress, because they are able to draw connections across a wide a variety of subjects areas, where experts in one particualr field are so emeshed in a narrrow band of facts and theories that they cannot see the wood for the trees. I would certainly not claim to be a polymath, but I would claim the far more modest and attianble achievement of having gained a good understanding of both the relevant aspects of medical science and synology/Chinese medicine. This is not so suprising given my experiences and interests: I have spent the last six years puzzling over and reading about my condition, because I knew, as we all did, that alcoholism is a matter of life and death. I have studied Chinese for the past four years, and spent a year in China talking to acupuncturists and qi gong practioners about the effect and benefits of their discplines on depression and alcohol addiction. During this time, and indeed, over past six years, I also read widely about the scientific mechanisms underlying depression and addiction. I am an alcoholic, who took baclofen to cure my addiction. I come from a family where depression and addiction are rife. And last but not least, I have a photogrpahic memory, an intensly curious, lucid mind and a desire to help people who have been through the living hell of addiction. We have reached a point in civilisation where opinions on this subject are barely even neccessary- the plethora of information from the world's two greatest civilisations- China and the west is almost all encompassing...when they are seen together, synergistically. I am not working, theorising, or pontificating on the basis of conjecture or opinion- neither hold up in the synology department of one of the world's most prestigious universities, and they certainly do not appeal to the esteemed experts with whom I have discusses these ideas.

Perhaps I should not have mentioned any of this, and the scepticism I've encountered and the confusion I have caused, probably help to explain why OA and Chick do not contribute directly to this site- not, of course, that I am claiming credentials anywhere close to theirs. But I am learning fast. I have already kept fairly quite for the past few months, despite a burning desire to share this information with fellow sufferers. But I cannot and will not simply distribute my article to everyone on this site. That would lead to enormous set backs for us all. It must go through the correct scientific and synological channels.

I'll leave at that, allow my thread to sink to the second or third page, and wait for publication. In the meantime, listen to Ne, Bleep, Murph and the many other wise senior members.

[bleep]

Indifference

Theodore;1127463 wrote: ...
But, in short, I am 24 and had been drinking heavily for several months before I started taking Baclofen.
...

Theodore;1115320 wrote: ...
Also, a question to you long term drinkers- how, on earth did you/do you do it??? I?ve been drinking for a week straight, for the first time in my life, and my body feels absolutely fucked! I can?t imagine living beyond the age of thirty at this rate.
...
Damn, I?m a full time alkie- so glad I?ve found some support.
...
And in the post above, you have been researching alcoholism for 6 years. Why did you bother? At 18 I was doing my best to become an alcoholic, proper hands-on research.

Theodore;1129108 wrote: ...
Perhaps I should not have mentioned any of this, and the scepticism I've encountered and the confusion I have caused, probably help to explain why OA and Chick do not contribute directly to this site- not, of course, that I am claiming credentials anywhere close to theirs.

I think you are overestimating any confusion you may have caused. The scepticism you are correct about. I don't think this is the reason why the people you mention do not post.

Theodore;1129108 wrote: But I am learning fast. I have already kept fairly quite for the past few months, despite a burning desire to share this information with fellow sufferers. But I cannot and will not simply distribute my article to everyone on this site. That would lead to enormous set backs for us all. It must go through the correct scientific and synological channels.

...

Not fast enough I fear. Baclofen has got absolutely nothing to do with synology(sic) (It's a pity your eidetic memory couldn't throw up the correct spelling). It is a drug that we take to remove the craving for alcohol. Nobody here had even heard of sinology, and a lot of us managed to find indifference. Same applies to qi gong, yoga, meditation, you name it. While they may help the process, they are by no means essential, and need have no role in any mysterious theory.

When it comes to high dose baclofen, you are unlikely to find a group of people anywhere in the world who know as much as the people on this forum. A better testing ground for your theory will be hard to find. We will put up with any "set backs" that may develop as a result of the unveiling of your theory.

Theodore;1129108 wrote: ...
I am not working, theorising, or pontificating on the basis of conjecture or opinion- neither hold up in the synology department of one of the world's most prestigious universities, and they certainly do not appeal to the esteemed experts with whom I have discusses these ideas.

...

Yes, you are. Who are these esteemed experts, and what is their field?

Concerning Dr Chick - he prescribes it in ineffective doses. Very few people will benefit from 100mg's of baclofen. I didn't even get side effects until the mid 200's and so if I had gone the Dr Chick route, I would still be a hopeless alcoholic right now. While he may be ahead of the curve here, he isn't making waves with his use of baclofen, and in this regard does not deserve your title of "champion."

A theory that you are unwilling to share is not one you can quote. Particularly in the annoying fashion you have chosen to do so - "yes, that fits beautifully with my theory." Either share this theory or keep quiet about it. I was quite happy to just let you be, and was actually enjoying the show, but when you started spouting unsupported nonsense on other people's threads and advising them based on this "theory", I felt I had to say something.

There is more I take issue with, but this has gotten boring.

[Theodore]

Indifference

- Dr Chick cures at least 50% of his patients and more are able to reduce their cravings with baclofen- at lower doses. Yes, I know that you did not find relief at lower doses, and that is why I have said time and time again, that some should people should take your very sensible advice and tirtrate beyond 100mg.

Sinology is, as I have said quit clearly in a previous post, the study of Chinese language and culture, a important part of which is Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM.) Have you ever studied Chinese Medicine/qi gong? mediation Bleep? If you have, you will know that all deal, quite explitly, with muscular relaxation- baclofen is, as we are all aware, a muscle relaxant. That is one of many crucial connections between TCM and this drug we all take to relieve our cravings. And If you haven't studied these things, what on earth do you think gives you the right to brand any suggestion of a relationship between TCM and Baclofen absolute 'nonsense'? Do you not think you may being a tad hypocritical there bleep?

What I said on another person's forum had little, or anything to do with my 'theory'- it's actually based as I have said, on a report written by Ka Kit Hui, M.D., F.A.C.P.
Professor, Department of Medicine, UCLA School of Medicine; Director, UCLA Center for
East-West Medicine and on and the work of Dr Servan Schreiber a neroscientist at the University of Pittsburg- he can be found, as I have said, reccomending the book The End of My Addiction on the back of the English eddition; It astonishes me, for that reason, that you have not heard of that man. Both these people have websites and their research is accessible to anyone curious enough to look for it. Regardless- don't worry- I will not make the mistake of posting anything on anybody's thread again. Since I am tired of being insulted, and patronised.

I have explained to you in no uncertain terms why it would be foolish for me to divulge my entire article on here. One good reason is that the citations are a mess at the moment and I could be accused of plagarism, which is a very serious offence in academia. I was just excited and wanted to let people know that there was hope for a better understanding of Baclofen's effects.

Yes- I appreciate that some of my comments were annoying- I was just excited- I'm sorry- but compared to some of the obscenities that fly around this site on a regular basis- saying 'that fits with theory neatly, is no more than midly annoying.'

And yes- you are absoltely right- it has gotten very, very boring, which is why I stopped posting on my thread, and hoped that it woud quitly slip away- it is you who rifled through my posts and brought it back to the top of the board again a few days later.

And yes, I do make spelling mistakes- I'm sorry.

[Theodore]

Indifference

please just leave it at that- and forget I ever existed.

[redhead77]

Indifference

Theodore;1128835 wrote: And In should add that it is impossible for the body process alcohol like an opiate. Sounds nice on paper, but it's not true.

I wanted to address this. It sounds nice on paper, and it is nice on paper. THIQ has been studied and written about. It is one of the PRIME disease models of alcoholism.

THIQ (tetrahydroisoquinoline), is a substance produced when acetaldehyde combines with dopamine. Acetaldehyde occurs from the breakdown of alcohol in the body. Taw is correct, when she says if you cut open her brain you would see what appears to be a heroin addict, rather than an alcoholic. I'm sure the same thing would happen if you cut open many of our brains. THIQ so closely resembles heroin, that when it was discovered in alcoholic brains, it was assumed the alcoholics also did heroin. It is strongly related to an opiate. After it was discovered, it was tested as a pain medication. It did very well for pain control, but was highly addictive. Much more so that morphine. The idea was abandoned.

There was a book written by Dr. David L. Ohlms titled "The Disease Concept of Alcoholism". He writes about THIQ in the book, if you're interested.

If you are also interested in theories on why baclofen may work, I wouldn't doubt if it interfered with this process in some way. This would be conjecture on my part, of course.

[Guest]

Indifference

redhead77;1129923 wrote: I wanted to address this. It sounds nice on paper, and it is nice on paper. THIQ has been studied and written about it. It is one of the PRIME disease models of alcoholism.

THIQ (tetrahydroisoquinoline), is a substance produced when acetaldehyde combines with dopamine. Acetaldehyde occurs from the breakdown of alcohol in the body. Taw is correct, when she says if you cut open her brain you would see what appears to be a heroin addict, rather than an alcoholic. I'm sure the same thing would happen if you cut open many of our brains. THIQ so closely resembles heroin, that when it was discovered in alcoholic brains, it was assumed the alcoholics also did heroin. It is strongly related to an opiate. After it was discovered, it was tested as a pain medication. It did very well for pain control, but was highly addictive. Much more so that morphine. The idea was abandoned.

There was a book written by Dr. David L. Ohlms titled "The Disease Concept of Alcoholism". He writes about THIQ in the book, if you're interested.

If you are also interested in theories on why baclofen may work, I wouldn't doubt if it interfered with this process in some way. This would be conjecture on my part, of course.

And does Naltrexone interfere with this at all?It is an opoid blocker, primarily it helps alcoholics by blocking the endorphins released when drinking alcohol - but does it block THIQ too?and what does that mean for the brain, and specifically mine now I'm taking Nal fairly regularly?

[redhead77]

Indifference

I don't know anything about Naltrexone UK. Although, I'm thinking of researching it. In theory it sounds good. Nal only works on certain people, and I wonder what they look for in this genetic testing they're doing. It is theorized that the genetic form of alcoholism, is a process where alkies have a faulty mechanism. Which allows more THIQ to build up the brain, than a nonalcoholic. Honestly, I really have no idea. Did you come across anything when you were researching?

[Guest]

Indifference

redhead77;1129925 wrote: I don't know anything about Naltrexone UK. Although, I'm thinking of researching it. In theory it sounds good. Nal only works on certain people, and I wonder what they look for in this genetic testing they're doing. It is theorized that the genetic form of alcoholism, is a process where alkies have a faulty mechanism. Which allows more THIQ to build up the brain, than a nonalcoholic. Honestly, I really have no idea. Did you come across anything when you were researching?

No all I've read is how Naltrexone works, and how to apply the Sinclair Method. The best explaination I've seen so far is that Nal fits into the opiod receptors like a key in the wrong lock. It prevents the opoids from engaging, but doesn't fit well enough to exert any opiod effects itself. I take Nal at least one hour before drinking. When you drink alcohol you release endorphins which are taken up by opiod receptors, and this can often drive drinking to excess in individuals. The idea is that Nal blocks the uptake of endorphins, so you don't get the excited buzz and this allows you to limit your drinking. Repeated over time this then goes on further to extinguish the link between alcohol and pleasure in your brain. So you don't look to alcohol for that release any more. I don't know if you've had a look at my thread "Naltrexone Works!" but it is looking quite likely I could be one of those people who take to Nal exceptionally well. I've been using it for 8 weeks now and can stop at 1 or 2 drinks every time I drink. Nal has also slowed down my binge-eating tendencies (I'm an ex-bulimic), and I'm no longer 'bothered' by chocolate. Conclusions I'm drawing is that a large proportion of my binge-eating and drinking is driven by endorphin release, but I do know I've had other mechanisms at play such as on the odd occasion over the years that I've moved into daily drinking.

So is THIQ there all the time for alcoholics, or is produced after a drinking session?Could this be why when using Nal I've never wanted to carry on drinking the next morning?Or am I woofing up the wrong tree?

[mario]

Indifference

Uk hi,
Can nal help people who binge eat ?, I have a sister who binge eats,she does not drink though ?,You think nal could help her,thanks

[Guest]

Indifference

mario;1130067 wrote: Uk hi,
Can nal help people who binge eat ?, I have a sister who binge eats,she does not drink though ?,You think nal could help her,thanks

Hey Mario

I have heard it can be used with eating disorders, and I think it could help but I don't think much research has been carried out.

I've just put "binge eating naltrexone" into google, and came up with a few articles and research reports that do suggest naltrexone reduces binge eating in those with Binge Eating Disorders (BED). I don't think you'll get it on the NHS though, but it might be an idea to look into it.

Here is something from the American Journal of Psychiatry website;

Ms. A was a 16-year-old girl who was hospitalized because of binge eating disorder with a complete loss of control of food intake and a severe major depressive episode including suicidal ideation and self-harming behavior (cutting herself). At hospitalization, her weight was 57.6 kg. Binges occurred at least once a day, and the amount of calories per day was about 5,000. Given the evidence that fluoxetine may be effective in reducing weight, Ms. A was treated with a regimen of fluoxetine, up to 60 mg/day, cognitive behavioral therapy, and dietary management. After several weeks, the depressive symptoms improved, but episodes of bingeing remained unchanged. Thus, we decided to administer, in addition to the described treatment schedule, the opiate antagonist naltrexone, at a daily dose of 100 mg. Within 14 days, we found a robust reduction in binge frequency and the amount of food consumed by Ms. A and weight loss. After discharge, Ms. A was treated with a regimen of fluoxetine (at 60 mg/day), naltrexone (at 100 mg/day), and psychotherapy. Follow-up data after 1 year showed that Ms. A's weight (49 kg) had remained stable, and she never reported more than 2 binges/month. No side effects were documented. After 1 year, the daily dose of naltrexone was reduced to 50 mg/day, which was followed within 2 weeks by an increase in binge frequency. When we increased the dose of naltrexone to 100 mg/day, the symptoms disappeared again.