The Truth about Naltrexone

[Ne/Neva Eva]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Dear Terryk,

First of all, I want some of whatever your taking. Oh, wait.

Second of all, I think I love you. I mean, that was very concise. Thank you.

Third of all, um. That's enough.

Ne

ps. Fuck

[Murphyx]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Fuckitty fuckitty fuck fuck.

ps Fuck

pps I love you too Terry

ppps Fuck

[SlipperyPete]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Wowzers

[redhead77]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Here's the thing Otter. You start a thread bashing Naltrexone. You then go on to start a thread bashing SSRIs if one is an alcoholic. You site two people who are doctors, and either doing research or treating alcoholics. The two physicians you list in the SSRI bashing thread, are either researching or using naltrexone to treat their patients. I was planning to copy and paste your link to remind you, but you've deleted your posts. How do you expect anyone to take you seriously when you state Naltrexone doesn't work in one thread, and that you believe what the docs have to say in the other thread, regarding SSRIs. You stated they are highly credible. Do you not believe they are credible regarding Naltrexone? They are both proponents of the drug, and they didn't write much about bac, FTR. You focus on one thing from what you read and neglect to see or mention the rest of what's written.

[Greg]

The Truth about Naltrexone

All I can say is that there are always some people who benefit from any particular drug, but also some who don't benefit, and still others who have negative results. This applies to every drug I can think of. Focusing only on the negative results is an unrealistic view, although I admit that many positive-sounding reports about drugs do suggest a greater level of efficacy than is really the case. This has happened with various antidepressant types, and various alcoholism treatments. It is almost certainly also the case with numerous other classes of drugs, and also non-drug treatments like CBT, AA, and rehab.

[Heavy Fuel]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Greg, naltrexone, used as Dr Sinclair has outlined, has a much higher rate of positive outcomes than AA or rehabs. This is easy to prove by simply going to the NIH website and following the link to the Journal of the American Medical Association's online like to the Combine Study. 78% is a pretty solid outcome, which has been replicated in multiple studies. AA works for 5-15% of people, depending on the study one looks at.

That said, the Sinclair Method isn't for everyone. First off, 22% of people need another method to stop. Second, TSM should only be used by those who are actively drinking and wish to stop. A common misconception is one takes naltrexone and immediately stops drinking. That is not the case, one must drink. Therefore, if someone has used another method and is successful, they should keep using that method. There is more than one way to what we all want: our lives back.

In so far as negative side effects from naltrexone, I think the negative side effects from drinking are much higher. There are the obvious health issues. There are the things we lose: wives, husbands, girlfriends, boyfriends, family, children, our very lives. Let us not forget the almost inevitable trip to the drunk tank for alcohol related crimes. Or the hospital when we either harm ourselves or someone else harms us. I would say alcohol has a million times more side effects than 300mg a day of naltrexone, which is six times the recommended dosage for TSM and the level liver damage begins from naltrexone (in most people.)

I want whatever works. I don't care what that something is. I want my life back. I don't want to lie on my death bed and all I remember is shame from blackouts and hangovers. The worst thing I can do is mispend my life. I can only prove that I have one life. I should live it well.

[Otter]

The Truth about Naltrexone

.

[Otter]

The Truth about Naltrexone

TK

terryk;1173147 wrote:

You went on to (FALSELY) proclaim that baclofen is metabolized by the liver. I pointed out to you that it is not.


Whether this is coming from another *doctor* or your own head, the information you post *quite* often falls short of reality.

If you can't get the basic biochemistry right why should anyone trust you on anything else you say?

I recommend you stop being such a ninny.

-tk

p.s. fuck

This forum has descended to a new low. It seems that foul mouthed bullying is the way to get ideas across.

TK, YOU say that YOU pointed out that Baclofen is not metabolized by the liver:

Here we go:

Baclofen is a classic medication for spasticity management. It exerts its clinical effects by interacting with neurons that use gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) as a neurotransmitter. It acts both pre- and postsynaptically to inhibit spinal reflexes. Baclofen is rapidly and completely absorbed following enteral administration. It has a mean half-life of 3.5 hours. Baclofen is metabolized by the liver and eliminated by renal excretion. Because baclofen readily crosses the blood-brain barrier, sedation, fatigue, dizziness, lowering of the seizure threshold, and cognitive dysfunction are common adverse effects. The typical starting dose is 5-10 mg two or three times per day, and the dosage can be increased by 5-10 mg per week. Although 80 mg per day is a commonly accepted maximum, dosing up to 200 mg per day has been used safely and effectively. A baclofen withdrawal syndrome can occur with rapid cessation of usage


Source: Medscape: Medscape Access


Seriously Terry, "If you can't get the basic biochemistry right why should anyone trust you on anything else you say?"

[tiptronic_ct]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Otter,

You're only 15% right.

Approximately 15% of Baclofen is metabolised in the liver, whilst the remainder is mainly excreted unchanged through the kidneys.

Your very same source states it: 7 Dec 2007 ? Baclofen is a gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) B-receptor agonist that has low liver metabolism (about 15%) Source: Medscape: Medscape Access

A cursory internet search will confirm it: we piss out most of what we take in.

Now piss off, will you?

[Greg]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Heavy Fuel;1173310 wrote: Greg, naltrexone, used as Dr Sinclair has outlined, has a much higher rate of positive outcomes than AA or rehabs. This is easy to prove by simply going to the NIH website and following the link to the Journal of the American Medical Association's online like to the Combine Study. 78% is a pretty solid outcome, which has been replicated in multiple studies. AA works for 5-15% of people, depending on the study one looks at.

I was actually speaking in support of naltrexone, and other methods, by saying we should not only focus on the negative stories. Like you, I have also seen the reports of low recovery rates in AA and rehab, and have witnessed first-hand the extremely low percentage of people who continue with AA for any length of time. At the meetings I have been to, most newcomers seemed to find it unhelpful, and therefore didn't come back regularly. I am one of those myself.

[Ne/Neva Eva]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Ne/Neva Eva;1173195 wrote: Dear Terryk,

First of all, I want some of whatever your taking. Oh, wait.

Second of all, I think I love you. I mean, that was very concise. Thank you.

Third of all, um. That's enough.

Ne

ps. Fuck

These sentiments, at face value, are heartless and cruel. I was (am) impressed with Terryk's summation of the issues with previous posts. I appreciate the fact that, unlike the post I deleted, he was able to quote specific issues and previous posts.

In general, terry's mind is something to admire, and it was that I was referring to, not necessarily or directly aimed at the fact that the terry's post was aimed at showing another person's inconsistencies.

Dangerous inconsistencies/fallacies/suggestions they were though. I'm glad that seems to be over for the moment.

And Otter, if you're around, could you do something about the thread you started named "Best of the Bac Boards", please. Even without the one you deleted, there are a couple of others that are anything BUT the best of. (The one concerning OA comes to mind. A minefield of misinformation there. If you really respect the guy, or read the thread, you'll see it's anything but informative--or respectful.) And that thread, because of the title, is likely to be a perennial favorite. If nothing else, you could edit it to make sure that it's understood that it is from your perspective, alone.

[Otter]

The Truth about Naltrexone

tiptronic_ct;1173347 wrote: Otter,

You're only 15% right.

Approximately 15% of Baclofen is metabolised in the liver, whilst the remainder is mainly excreted unchanged through the kidneys.

Your very same source states it: 7 Dec 2007 – Baclofen is a gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) B-receptor agonist that has low liver metabolism (about 15%) Source: Medscape: Medscape Access

A cursory internet search will confirm it: we piss out most of what we take in.

Now piss off, will you?

Tip

Metabolism only takes place in the liver. The kidneys excrete the waste. So, you got your terminology wrong.

You think language like that makes MWO a credible site?

Foul mouthed bullying!!!

[Otter]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Greg;1173350 wrote: I was actually speaking in support of naltrexone, and other methods, by saying we should not only focus on the negative stories. Like you, I have also seen the reports of low recovery rates in AA and rehab, and have witnessed first-hand the extremely low percentage of people who continue with AA for any length of time. At the meetings I have been to, most newcomers seemed to find it unhelpful, and therefore didn't come back regularly. I am one of those myself.

I completely support Naltrexone treatment. What has happened is that UKBlonde has been on this site saying how Baclofen has huge side effects for her for a year now. She pops up everywhere decrying it and now has taken up the cause of Naltrexone without any mention of any side effects at all. I had no idea what the SE's were or that it only has a 50% success rate after 3 years, according to Escapa himself. I don't know what the demographics of the figures are and whether usage is confined to a certain type of drinker.

If you want to have a site which is honest and reliable then you have to look at both sides. I know what the side effects of Baclofen are and that many people don't take to it. I am not an apologist for it and have no interest in seeing it "triumph" over some other form of treatment or therapy. Same with AA. Whatever works!

Reasoned, informed decisions should be made with full knowledge of the benefits and risks of treatments and medications. That is what I was trying to bring out. Instead it just brought out a lot of pretty vicious attacks from people who I had thought better of.

My own "personal opinion" about TSM which is based on no medical evidence at all is this: I think that Naltrexone works for a certain type of drinker who is able to control their drinking to a degree. Baclofen works for a wider range of problem drinkers and is more appropriate for someone who has a more serious chronic problem where they are not able to engage in Naltrexone treatment because they are drinking 24/7. It is these drinkers who are more likely to die from drink and for whom Baclofen, in my opinion, holds out greater promise than anything to date. I just happen to be involved more with serious chronic alcoholics than with less serious alcoholics and I think that fewer of the more serious progressed alcoholics come to this site, simply because they are unable to because of their progressed situation. People still in work have to seriously weigh up whether the side effects of Baclofen are manageable and for them Naltrexone may be a better option.

What on earth do people think they are achieving by using gutter language. Yes, maybe what I say sometimes is provocative and maybe I don't cite my sources. Sometimes I get things wrong and forget to add a B to a Gaba so I look like the non-scientist that I am. Sorry!

But to come back with swear words in a supportive environment! My God! What is in these people's minds? Free speech means dealing with things on the basis of some sort of respect. I have always supported UKBlonde in her search for an answer. Frustrating as her experience with Baclofen has been, I am really happy that she has found a better way of dealing with it that enduring the SEs of Baclofen.

I have used Baclofen up to nearly 200 mg per day for long periods so I have experienced the worst sypmptoms of it. I do use Propranolol. It does work. I also use vitamin therapy. I suffer from severe, sometimes crippling, anxiety and I used to drink every day of my life for over 20 years. I had a hell of a struggle stopping but did it without any therapy or medication. It can be done...by some. So, I know, Baclofen is not the answer for everyone.

The point about SSRI's is that doctors are prescribing them for the anxiety underlying alcohol. One is prescribing on top of HDB and the result has been a spectacular relapse. Why would I not bring this to the attention of this forum so that others know about it. The result has been that I have now found out that this is "possibly" not the fault of Baclofen at all but "may" be the result of the SSRI's. And for that, I get abuse heaped on me that I am potentially going to cause someone to die. Seriously!!

Well, I have seen it all on this forum. Kind supportive words. Healthy discussions. Humour. Bullying and intimidation. Swearing. And of course, Ne is right, I am not an alcoholic, nor am I a doctor or a scientist. I suppose the thing that has happened most recently is that I feel that I have woken up. I can see that it isn't right for people like me or anyone to be posting on sites like this about medical issues. Needs must though and I have done what I did with good, if sometimes misunderstood, intentions.

So, yes, I will "piss off" to use Tip's colourful language and hopefully the door will not whack me on the ass as I go out.

[Guest]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Completely agree HOWEVER I have not been posting about Baclofen for "a year" because I didn't even try the stuff until the end of December last year.

I do feel baclofen is suitable for certain types of drinkers, and Naltrexone for others and in fact do know of a few people myself who would probably benefit enormously from baclofen treatment.

So not sure why your anger is directed at me, I'm as supportive as anyone finding their way out. It was merely seeing so many threads on here mentioning baclofen side effects that started getting me down. There are many options for getting sober out there and I don't knock any of them.

For the record the only side effect I've ever had with Nal was initial nausea which passed after approximately 1-2 weeks, I often do warn new users about this strong effect either by pm or in my posts and have indeed discussed this at length with at least one member here. There is one other, tiredness but that isn't anywhere near as strong as the tiredness I felt on Baclofen or in the past when taking other meds such as antihistamines or sedatives known for their drowsy effects. Also the tiredness only really occurs when I have a drink, and I do believe most normal people do also often feel tired after drinking alcohol - it is a sedative/depressant itself. So apart from sometimes feeling a bit tired if I have a drink in the evening I do not suffer any other side effects at all.

[terryk]

The Truth about Naltrexone

Otter;1173322 wrote: TK





This forum has descended to a new low. It seems that foul mouthed bullying is the way to get ideas across.

TK, YOU say that YOU pointed out that Baclofen is not metabolized by the liver:

Here we go:

Baclofen is a classic medication for spasticity management. It exerts its clinical effects by interacting with neurons that use gamma aminobutyric acid (GABA) as a neurotransmitter. It acts both pre- and postsynaptically to inhibit spinal reflexes. Baclofen is rapidly and completely absorbed following enteral administration. It has a mean half-life of 3.5 hours. Baclofen is metabolized by the liver and eliminated by renal excretion. Because baclofen readily crosses the blood-brain barrier, sedation, fatigue, dizziness, lowering of the seizure threshold, and cognitive dysfunction are common adverse effects. The typical starting dose is 5-10 mg two or three times per day, and the dosage can be increased by 5-10 mg per week. Although 80 mg per day is a commonly accepted maximum, dosing up to 200 mg per day has been used safely and effectively. A baclofen withdrawal syndrome can occur with rapid cessation of usage


Source: Medscape: Medscape Access


Seriously Terry, "If you can't get the basic biochemistry right why should anyone trust you on anything else you say?"

Take a look at: https://www.mywayout.org/community/f2...ml#post1157076

Yes, I made a mistake in my recent response to you (not in my original post), I can admit it, I'm an adult. I made a correction to my response, while *all* of the misinformation you've posted remains. Instead of rectifiying (or even *trying to defend*) the blatant nonsense I've called you out for posting, you've deleted all of *your* bullying posts and continue to wild around here like a four year old who is afraid that his head will burst if his mother catches him reading a web page with the word "fuck" on it. Grow up. -tk