Indifference

[Ne/Neva Eva]

Indifference

I've been given a reprieve in the form of someone else canceling my 1030am appointment. Thank goodness. I was starting to feel that my schedule was a little hectic.

Teddy, you're points are well taken. Thank you for the compliments, but more, thank you for the explanation. I had actually forgotten that Dr. Chick did that. I owe him an apology, at least mentally, for thinking he was one of *them*.

You are the third person on this forum that I know of directly that he has helped. And for that I owe him much more. So forgive, again. I'm so glad you found him and so grateful that you're free. Everyone of us that finds a way, any way, to find indifference, is to be celebrated.

Thanks, finally, for allowing me to vent a bit. That was definitely a reflection of my own rankling and not you.

Good luck with the proff! I'm quite sure that anyone that knew you that will continue to know you, will be impressed with the change. That has been true for me. Especially since it's inexplicable. :H

[Murphyx]

Indifference

Theodore;1127555 wrote: As far as I understand, it is illegal for him to supply prescribe more than 100mg in the UK, and it would be fairly futile for him to agitate against the law at this point. Nope it's not illegal. ?Doctors can prescribe Baclofen to treat alcoholism; they don?t need approval, but if any problems with patients that arise, the doctors would be liable.? - Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)

bleep;1127557 wrote: What does he say are the risks associated with higher doses?

He doesn't. When asked in an interview why he wouldn't go over 100mg he replied" I do actually have some concerns about unwanted effects in larger doses. I don't want to give details to you" which isn't terribly helpful. An unkind person might suggest the real reason was because of the liability issue raised by the MHRA.

He's helped some people who were able to get off the booze on low dose, but he only has a 50% success rate, presumably because of the low upper limit he'll prescribe. Oh, he also doesn't believe in SEs: ?It seems there are no dangerous side-effects, only a slight discomfort for some people who don?t tolerate the medicine.? I think there's been an awful lot of people on here who have complained of more than just a "slight discomfort" even on Dr Chick's low level doses

[Theodore]

Indifference

This is true. It is legal to prescribe Baclofen in Uk- something that GPs for some reason fail to grasp- but not at doses in excess of 100mg.

You can hardly blame Chick for not wanting to discuss his concerns to the media- just look at the way some of OAs statements were misinterpreted in some respected scintific magazines. It is also likely that Chick did not want to cause panic or undermine OA when he knew that Baclofen could be effective. And I doubt any of us would disagree with his statement that there are some 'concerns' about unwanted side effects at higher doses. He does discuss these issues with his patients, and I'm sure that he would be more than happy to do so with anybody who contacted him via phone or email. It's not that people who have found indifference at higher doses are at risk; it's just that some people- probably because they have gone up to fast- have encountered some very unpleasant side-effects- i.e. pyschosis.

Chick is one of the great unsung heroes of all this; he is what Mr Darcy was to Elizabeth in the Hollywood version of Pride and Prejudice- initially maligned and misunderstood, but ulitmately intelligent and compassionate. He also tried to get a Baclofen trial started in the Uk. He failed, but given what we know about the pervasive presence of C.U.N.Ts in the scientific community, I very much doubt that it was his fault.

My proffesor got caught up interviewing a new lecturer. Nevermind. There's always tomorrow.

[Theodore]

Indifference

And if Dr Chick were to be found liable for unwanted side effects, he could loose his job, and that would mean a large segment of the British contingent of this site, including myself, would be out for the count.

[Theodore]

Indifference

Murph- he most certainly does belive in SE's- though I wouldn't say my own SEs ever constiuted anything more than slight discomfort. Also- that's an interview from a while back- I'm sure he's revised his thinking since then. He's allowed to make mistakes- this is a new drug after all and he's one of the only pioneering doctors who pesrcibes it.

[Murphyx]

Indifference

Theodore;1127617 wrote: Murph- he most certainly does belive in SE's- though I wouldn't say my own SEs ever constiuted anything more than slight discomfort. Also- that's an interview from a while back- I'm sure he's revised his thinking since then. He's allowed to make mistakes- this is a new drug after all and he's one of the only pioneering doctors who pesrcibes it.

But that's the point Teddy, he doesn't prescribe it, well not to the correct therapeutic levels. Yes, 100mg will work for some people. It will definitely help a lot more by reducing their cravings, but the majority of alcoholics require a much higher dose and Chick is refusing to give it to them. Sorry mate, but he's no hero to me.

[Theodore]

Indifference

I fear I may never convince you Murph, But I have to say again- he simply cannot prescribe it, for risk of prosecution, in doses higher than 100mg. If he did, he could loose his job, and then there would be no doctors to champion the baclofen cause. I can understand why you find his refusal to prescribe in higher doses a little strange- I did too before I spoke to him- but he is on our side, I promise, Direct your righteous indigance towards the C.U.N.Ts

[Murphyx]

Indifference

Teddy, I didn't want to continue this discussion, there seems little point, but I can't leave future readers with, what I believe to be, the mistaken impression that it is illegal for a doctor to prescribe baclofen at over 100mg. Can you point me to the legal statute, act of parliament or order of a cabinet minister that states it is illegal to prescribe bac at over 100mg/day? If not we're just left with a doctor who either doesn't really trust this medicine or is just so scared of being sued he's covering his arse.

I believe there is nothing stopping any doctor from prescribing baclofen at therapeutic levels except the fear of civil litigation in case it all goes wrong.

I'm pleased it worked for you at such a low level, and it has worked for a few others at the same low dose, but that is not the case for the majority. Any doctor who fails to act on that knowledge is neglecting the majority of sufferers of this disease.

Again, Chick ain't no hero to me.

[Theodore]

Indifference

No, I can't Murph. And to be honest I don't have any real understanding of medical law. I only have Chick's word for it. I really think it highly unlikely that he would lie directly to me or anyone else, but more evidence would be good, and I'm sure it could be found easily enough. In any case, I would say to, what I said to Ne (more or less). Your good humour, straight talking, and formidable intelligence have been an inspiration to many, not least myself. Keep up the good work

[bleep]

Indifference

Hmmm, I have to side with Murph here - at 100mg's I didn't feel a thing, and would have thrown baclofen away without getting to where I am now. A champion must be prepared to risk prosecution, amongst other things, to be labelled as such. He is doing more than most, true, and for that deserves some credit, but that's about it.

It is certainly not illegal to prescribe at doses exceeding 100mg's. I think at best you have misunderstood what Chick said to you Ted.

[Theodore]

Indifference

Also- as we know, just because doctor's may not be willing/able to prescribe in higher doses, we can still get baclofen from the internet and take as much or as little of it as we want. Clearly, it is a sensible decision for some people, especially seasoned, heavy drinkers to take more than 100mg. But as Murph and many others have said- just be careful and take it slow.

[Theodore]

Indifference

Not in the US, but perhaps in the UK. But yes, maybe I have misunderstood what he said. I'll ask him on Friday during my appointment.

[Theodore]

Indifference

I'll also quiz him more thoroughly about side effects etc. But for now, it's time to take my tattoo to a party. Have a good day/evening everybody

[beatle]

Indifference

This is a very useful discussion for me. I don't have anything to add or give atm, but I'm getting a lot out of it and wanted to thank you all for that.

And especially Theodore (is it Ted or Teddy -- or perhaps Theo?) for starting this and contributing so much.:thanks:

[Theodore]

Indifference

Hi Beatle.

All of the above I think