Well written, good research, but ultimately irresponsible, December 14, 2010
By Zero_nine - See all my reviews
This review is from: The Cure for Alcoholism: Drink Your Way Sober Without Willpower, Abstinence or Discomfort (Paperback)
The Sinclair Method needs medical oversight.

Do not buy tablets online, get a medical professional (addiction specialist preferably) to oversee your treatment. Truth is, you should not sell medical treatment in the popular media. This is a medical treatment, and needs a medical doctor to objectively oversee your treatment. The title of this book is irresponsible, and the content even more so. Naltrexone removes some of the high from alcohol. In this book it is proposed that naturally occurring opiates reinforce alcoholism & its strongly suggested in this book that blocking these opiates will result in cure of excessive drinking. The book refers to several studies that support this view- some of them do, some of them don't. But its irrelevant- your doctor is already aware of this drug, has read the studies, and is not cashing in- she will suggest the best treatment based on the evidence provided, and based on examining you personally and determining what would be best for you.

I am not saying that Naltrexone doesn't help people, it does (incredibly so in some cases-at least read up on it) but keep in mind that our Google society does not suppress the skill of a competent and well trained doctor. If you read this book and want a prescription, by all means go for it- but don't lie about it. Come clean that this is where you obtained your info. Thats all the advice I can give. I have completed this treatment, and I do commend the work done, but with constraint and criticism.

0.9.1, honestly I have to disagree with your review. I bought my nal online and it works fine. Every doctor and addiction specialist that I have seen has either not heard of naltrexone or says that it doesn't work (it is working for me). Yes, this book may exaggerate some things, but at least it makes people aware of the Sinclair Method. I've known many doctors who are ignorant and stuck in their ways. Don't put them on a pedestal. If it weren't for my own research in my "Google society", I would not have the success I am having today.

While I recognize that the book probably played a very significant role in popularizing TSM and that TSM is probably a valid and somewhat efficient treatment protocol, my view of the book itself is simple:

It's a junk. Classic cheap cure-all sensationalist self-help book written to make a quick buck from a gullible audience. It's a pure co-incidence that TSM seems to work.

This is one of those mornings I have to do a good lot of apologising. Yes Naltrexone does work (dramatically in limited cases), but further clinical trials are needed to support the claims made this book. Not all the trials referred support the claimed 78%, one does but that was a very limited sample size and its worth mentioning that the placebo in that case had a success rate of 50%.

I am not coming here to rag on TSM really and I am not trying to flame anyone- if you are doing well on it I am delighted for you- it has shockingly high efficacy in some cases. I do largely stand by the review I wrote last night (well I think I do, I haven't read it yet this morning). I don't agree with people buying meds without consulting their physician from companies that charge extortionate prices. I don't want to continue this discussion, I will leave the review intact as a word of warning for people. If I get rational feedback, or if anyone allays my concerns, I will amend the review to reflect this new info. But right now I think it is fair.

In all charity, I'm shocked at what you did. Millions of people read Amazon reviews. You have effectively said that The Sinclair Method does not work, that Escapa's book promises pie in the sky, and that one should not by drugs on line.

Really? Shame on you. If one person is turned off trying this method and suffers needlessly what will your responsibility be?

Naltrexone helps EVERY SINGLE USER. No, not everyone gets 'cured' but the fact that this method opens minds to treatment other than the AA model makes it a HUGE success.

Please, please let's be careful what we say. Those who read that review do NOT have the background we here on the board do. They now will NOT bother to read anything. I'm very sad about this as I know you had the best of intentions.

I've removed it. I was drunk when I wrote both the review and the original post on this board. I don't know if I can delete a thread though. I still think that most of what I said was true. However, people will probably benefit from reading the book. They may reach the conclusion I reached eventually too, but then again they maybe completely cured. Discouraging people is risky,and I don't want to be responsible for someone's deterioration. I have my own views but what is the value in saying them here where they won't be heard and they won't be useful. Nobody here seems to be interested in actually looking at the actual evidence supporting or undermining what was written in the book. It seems that if it doesn't fit the TSM narrative, all bets are off.

My take:

1) I think this review is overly harsh, especially coming from someone that claimed the method cured them.

2) Eskapa is not solely responsible for the contents of his book in my view. Read the forward to the book by David Sinclair. In it Sinclair provides a hearty endorsement. It is also obvious from interviews that Sinclair holds very similar opinions and claims as the ones Eskapa makes in the book. Eskapa is the cheerleader of Sinclair's views more or less.

3) Some of the criticism above is overly harsh. The book is repetitive and does not provide the scientific evidence it claims in support of the method. Most of the studies cited at best only inferentially support the claims of TSM.

4) But, who cares? The method works for a lot of people even if not exactly or easily as claimed! The TSM is a huge breakthrough. It is working for me. This book was extremely valuable for me. It has been perhaps one of the most valuable books I have ever read for that reason. I am thankful that Eskapa has written the book. I think people are too critical of him and his book. The book is helping get the message out and giving people hope and leading them to a 'cure' or solution to their problem drinking.

5) Finally, I disagree very much with the idea that you shouldn't do this own your own if that is the path you choose. NAL is more or less harmless for most people. Make sure you get a liver tests done before taking NAL. If your liver is okay and you stick with 50mg dose per drinking session, you should be okay in my non-expert opinion (always consult a doctor if in any doubt.) The meds are actually far cheaper online for many people and the ones I have taken appear of high quality.

.

I was disapointed when I read the review. I read back over your thread and cant really believe that both were posted by the same person. TSM has helped you enormously as it has done me. I only know of less than a handfull of people who tsm has not helped at all. Yea I wasnt overly impressed with the book either and thought it was a bit on the hog washy and simple side, that said, TSM is a lifesaver for many many people and I think we are the ones who should be shouting it as loud as we can. There are thousands and millions of alcoholics out there who need tsm and many of them may find it though reviews of the book. Of course we know its not factually correct in its suggested timeline but if reading the book gets people started on tsm in my opinion thats a good thing.

By the way Ive done a hell of a lot more daft things than posting in an internet site while under the influence.

Its completely unethical to misrepresent scientific literature, especially if you will profit financially from it.



Naltrexone maybe harmless but giving people a free licence to drink problematically is not.



Thanks for that DOMD. Criticism of TSM on this boards is hugely unpopular. I am not doing it for my own entertainment, I am genuinely concerned. Another thing is that on basis of this book, I have recommended it to other people who have followed the instructions and have not had success. I basically got someone's hope up for nothing. It made me question well if it didn't work for me and it didn't work for them, maybe I need to go back to take a more stringent look at the evidence. Thats what I have don and that why I am talking about this now. Its not a cure-all solution, its not a 78% cure. The sample size in that paper was tiny and also, the "cure rate" for the placebo was 50%, and for CBT was also ~78% (looking at the graphs). People will hate me saying this obviously, but put it this way, if this cure purports to be based on science, then it should stand up to scientific arguement, since thats all science is: arguments.


Yeah, I claimed that I was cured by the method. Unfortunately, "the wish was the father of the thought" in this case. Again, I am delighted that you (esp cos you're also Irish)(and anyone else) have had success with this book. I myself am back to the drawing board. I could draw it out longer but I really have completely lost faith.




I have suffered adversely because of this method. I know of other people who have also. There needs to be some rationality amongst the fanaticism. This method has a high potential to be iatrogenic. I've developed internal bleeding because I've switched to whiskey (so I can extinguish that trigger or so I thought.). I read another report today from Gyorgy Thats insane. How many thousands of people may have been harmed or even died because of this method? Who can say? Shame on me? The only shame I have is that I withdrew my review. On that basis I have decided to repost it. The book is completely unethical. Read the evidence dispassionately and you'll see why. You haven't because it has worked for you.