Again I do not want people lurking thinking that they would be covered for days on the 50 mg. Since we are all different and protocol is 50 mg, I would hope that everyone agrees that 50 mg is what everyone should try. It is uncertain why others see results with low dose, like you Steve, or Paddy who has gone up to 100 mg because the desire is still there, for is it the 1/2 life, the amount of receptors, genes...who know. BUT, until someone does the research to prove that .02-.04 mg of nal will work, I will stick to my 50 mg, for in this process I feel like a lab rat to begin with, I am not going to experiment on myself (and I hope the newbies feel the same).

I most definitely do not agree. In specific cases like Exlogger1 and in the case of someone with active cancer, we may be giving very harmful advice to recommend High Dose Nal. I had this conversation with Joanna and while she was impressed with some of the research, her bottom line was the same as yours. "I don't know so I stick with what Eskapa/Sinclair says". I would recommend everyone concerned to do their own tireless research and NOT depend on the I Don't Know default answer. A lot has happened since Sinclair. ESPECIALLY in the field of LDN. Again...for what it's worth. But this is not just MY opinion. Google High Dose Nal and cancer. In the LDN world, anything over 4mg is considered to be counter-productive.

Steven,

I do not have the energy to carry on a debate with you about this; but please please please realize your theory may do more harm than good. I am not speak of the MS case or a cancer patient, I am speaking about a normal alcoholic with no other issues but alcohol. For every research you that you pull up with that theory (which are few when alcohol is concerned), I can pull up a ton of research theories that suggests differently (I can even find research that debunks TSM, but we know differently).

I do not want you to find a "GUINEA PIG" to prove and test out your theory, at least not here. Maybe the Options Saves Lives Forum might allow you to persuade someone there to try it out.

I believe in letting the experts lead the way. So we are at an impasse and will have to agree to disagree.

No disrespect to you or your theory. I think you have made yourself clear in numerous posts through out this forum, BUT until someone with the access to do a double blind study, the protocol should be suggested and followed (in my point of view). If anyone agrees with what Steve is saying, please chime in.

I am not saying that it cannot help/work with others; I am merely saying that theory is the unknown. In a way, TSM is the unknown. And I cannot believe that Sinclair did not start with a lower dose in the beginning. For a true scientist starts out with the lowest amount and works up to a higher dose, but I maybe wrong. Dr Roy may have that answer.

AGAIN, everyone is different, and different doses work on different people (just like different strengths of antidepressants), but to suggest for everyone to be on LDN for TSM is a very reckless statement (in my opinion).

Fair enough but I was speaking directly to those special cases. I think you put a couple paragraphs of words in my mouth. And as to TSM experts, researchers...who? Eskapa?
Respectfully,
Steve.

Steven-

I noticed you are on 4 mg of NAL. Do you take more before you drink or do you just do the 4mg daily? Not that I want to try, but it is iinteresting and because my GF has bone pain that has led to her using amitriptyline... I have been wondering if low dose NAL maybe a viable option.

I take the 4mg one hour before my evening beer.
I have no knowledge of bone pain. LDN is considered effective in most diseases related to immune system disorder and most types of cancer. I can and do get away with using LDN for AL control mainly because my imbibing is done well within the 4hr coverage time. If I think I may drink over a long period, I take 12.5 or 25mg. Simply googling LDN will get you TONS of info. Is GF doing TSM? Drinking? If not it would seem to be unquestionably worth a try. Please research and decide for yourself. And do NOT just give her your 50mg pill. It could well have an adverse effect.
Steve.

I would not give her a whole pill unless she was on TSM... She is a heavy drinker so that is a concern.... I am somewhat convinced her bone pain. Is due to drinking. She has very low vitamin dd. Alcohol just robs the body of this and other nutrients.

But the drug she takes is an older tricyclic antidepressant. As such, jsi g it for bone pain. Is an off label use, but they do use it for ms patients and for people with fibromyalgia so there is a lot of overlap.

There is still the lurking concern (as discussed earlier in this thread) about the saftey risks of giving a ldn to a heavy drinker.... But it is worth investigating.

Also as you indicated you drink in compact periods of time, she does not... That is the biggest red flag to her using it into she has more info and discusses with the doc.

You will find basically NO research on LDN and AL abuse. The danger, I would think, is that drinking after the Nal is worn off could give a more than normal endorphin rush and reinforce the pleasure effect of AL. NOT what you want. If I plan on partying for an extended period, I definitely up my dose to 12.5 or 25mg. I don't see LDN as a safe solution here until AL much more controlled if at all.
Sorry.
Steve.

Hi Steve, i hope you can see this reply, or anyone who could help me here, i was looking for every single post in the forum for the exacly same question, what about it naltrexone effect is worn off?
If the naltrexone effect is worn off, is the risk only in drinking itself? What about the cravings? If the effect is worn off, the craving of the drink itself, could cause a endorphin rush and thus the cyle of nocontrol would begin. On this precise moment, the person would not even think in taking the pill one hour after, knowing that the "buzz" is available now? So im am confused about the 1 hour after drinking, and no one can explain me, because if the person has bad luck and doesnt notice or forgets to take the pill after the effects of nal warns off, when the craving comes, he is, in fact, a "dead man walking" right? So if taking it every day, as no effect as the experts say, but only 1 hour after drinking, why does everyone here in the sinclair method forget that, 24 hours after the 50 mg is taken, naltrexone HAS ALSO NO EFFECT, BUT ACTUALLY PLUS MORE WORSENING EFFECTS, like worse craving and worse anticipation endorphin rush of drinking??

So my question is: When naltrexone warns off, even if i dont drink, i will have the craving to drink, the same craving when i drink, the anticipation craving that mimics the same craving while drinking. So why would sinclair method work if it depends on my voluntary decision of taking nal 1 hour before, since the same decision would be overrided/repressed with the craving? I am seeing here a no way out cycle, except if taking it every day to prevent cravings.

1 HOUR + NAL + DRINKING = CURE. Are we forgetting 24 HOURS + NONAL + CRAVING = GREATER GRAVING AND HEAVY DRINKING??

sinclairhope, you do have to be mindful enough to take the pill, and it only covers you for 12 hours, not 24 hours. If you're not going to comply with the necessary dosing, then TSM likely won't help you get the results that you want.

Does that answer your question?