I understand your point. I also am aware that there are countless ways to quit drinking. I think any way someone can get it done is completely fine. I am definitely not one of those people who judge others on how they do it or if they follow a program or not. I definitely don't do the standard AA thing, but I don't badmouth the program either. Like I said whatever works for the individual is great.

My comment was directed at a previous poster who said something to the effect of "just go get a script from a doctor for valium and take care of business".

I'm sure there are a few doctors that would do this and I'm sure there are many alcoholics that would genuinely try this too. I just have trouble honestly thinking this method would have a high chance of success for someone with an addiction. Severity of the alcohol dependence is a huge factor to take into consideration when someone is withdrawing as well. You can die from quitting cold turkey. Valium won't keep you alive.

Right, I understand where you're coming from, but I think you need to be monitored closely by a physician for an out basis treatment. It's not give the patient a 14 day supply of benzos and wish them luck, but instead see them every day for at least a week. That said, I agree that inpatient is best - safest and foolproof.

However, are you sure you're right about Valium? Aren't benzos precisely what prevents DT's from alcohol in the first place? I understand that once DT's begin, no benzos are effective and hospital care is urgent, but aren't benzos taken preemptively what prevents DT's?

BTW, congrats on your sobriety!

I think I might have misunderstood your earlier post where you quoted me and then quoted the doctor from another post in the same post. We(you and I)are basically in 100% agreement.

About benzos: Again I think you are absolutely correct. In fact I was given Librium when I was detoxing. However I wouldn't have known this had I not asked the nurse who was administering my meds what it was that she was giving me. They didn't exactly tell you what they were giving you or why. I wouldn't have remembered it either had I not written down a lot of what was going on in there so I could remember some details after the fact.

I guess my comments were based on how I might have handled the situation if a doctor gave me benzos on an outpatient basis.
I never had a problem with prescription drugs but obviously over the course of drinking for many years I had experience with everything basically. Plus a doctor is trusting a person who can't control their original addiction with another highly addictive and commonly abused substance in which they of all people must use safely and responsibly

By doing it inpatient I was checked by the nurse three times a day to have my vitals monitored, my blood pressure needed to be regulated, they checked for the presence of DTs from each previous visit and so on and on. In fact I had something really weird happen to me while I was detoxing and if freaked me out. If there was not someone there to tell me what exactly was happening to my body at that moment I definitely would have gone to the emergency room anyway.

I did a lot of research about detoxing(probably too much) before I decided to quit and with all the things that can happen I just figured it was a good idea to do it inpatient. Personally, I wouldn't want to be doing it at home alone with 11 Valium, a digital thermometer and a Wal-Mart blood pressure monitor. But I was a very heavy drinker over a pretty long time.

I just don't comprehend how someones alcohol dependence could be so great that they would require a benzo to avoid DTs, however not serious enough to be monitored closely by a doctor throughout the process.


Oh and thank you very much for the congrats.

Nevermind, WVUskinsfan is getting current and better info in a different thread that includes the post quoted from the Dr. above. It also appears that I was correct. If he was in northern Nevada it seems likely he'd get the help he wants today. There isn't any reason to think he couldn't do that wherever he may be.

Yeah, that thread is loaded with current and wonderful information. It appears that you are correct.

So I went to the hospital last night and was discharged a couple hours ago.

Back to square one. Looking to call a few places and get to a detox. I'm pretty upset the hospital wasn't much more helpful.

I have been pretty good at everything I have ever tried to do in life.

However, alcohol and other drugs simply own me. I think/hope I have finally accepted that.

I love this thread. Congrats to all who have been able to beat this.

What were you in the hospital for?


I've observed at least two kinds of people in this thread:

1) People who drink a LOT all the time, and actually have physical problems. There is no question about the alcoholism, and recovery actually requires physical withdrawal and psychological help.

2) People who drink a LOT only some of the time. They can plan on not drinking, but once drinking, they CAN'T plan on stopping. I fall into this category. After a week of not drinking, I've had no urges or physical problems. If anything, I'm way better physically and mentally than I was two weeks ago.

Group one (if they are in this thread) knows they need to stop, but the underlying problems and addictions are so great that it can actually be a medical issue.

Group two wouldn't have that big of a problem stopping, but it's so easy to say, "Look at how easy it is for me to stop! I don't actually have a problem. I'll just take some time off and then I'll be fine moderating myself." It's a trap, and lots of people in group two will eventually join group one.


Sorry, just rambling, but glad to be ITT.

I was in group 2 for a while and I had consequences, both with the law and social, it didn't change my desire to keep going.

Eventually, I had a seizure. Now im scared as hell and convinced that I can't continue.

Was the hospital able to give you any help or suggestions? What is your next step?

They only gave me list of numbers to call.

I am in Palm Beach County, FL which happens to be the Mecca of recovery.

I am still drinking right now, but looking to get into a detox today.

I was in the same boat as you two years ago. I was sitting alone drinking just staring at a list of phone numbers people had given me.

I just said wtf and started calling every single one of them. I don't remember all the details but I do know one of those numbers is why I am alive today.

I was just honest with everyone I spoke to and somehow I was pointed in the right direction. It took a couple of days to get the oppurtunity to talk to an intake counselor for a treatment center with a very limited number of "beds". I was put on a waiting list for an available bed. The intake counselor told me to have a bag packed so I would be ready to go when they called. They called 3 or 4 days later at lunchtime and I was on my way.

Good Luck.

Ha, I j just had to quote this cuz I posted it on my birthday when I was in Sydney Australia (pg. 9)

I ended up leaving the land down under after calling my mom telling her I was and going to treatment in PA then heading to FL.

I have stopped before, but when it comes to staying stopped, I seriously have no clue.

I have worked the steps and everything. Honestly and thoroughly, I don't like a lot about AA, especially the whole "you need God" cuz I don't really believe in God. Maybe its cuz I was raised Roman Catholic and from an early age was thinking "this is a bunch of ****"

But, im pretty convinced that I don't have the answer to live life without chemicals right now.

God, yoga, meditation...I think I am gonna need to find something.

Yea, well I would challenge anyone who has problems with AA to read the Big Book and then come back and talk.

AA, while I don't care for a lot of it, saves lives and gets families back together.

The way i see it if its easier to OD on then its more dangerous.

One thing i didn't consider which goes against my argument is home brew, if its dodgy and/or too strong that stuff can be very dangerous.


I don't get it, your essentially agreeing with me that alcohol is less dangerous then a lot of illicit substances.

Also theirs the fact that booze mostly makes people do stupid stuff that isn't going to threaten their lives, meth for example on the other hand basically fries peoples brains and makes people psychotic.


crashjr - my age is irrelevant, but seeing as you couldn't rebut what ive said with logic or facts its obvious i am far more mature and intelligent then you.

What the hell are you talking about?

Ok I figured out who you are. You posted some ******ed **** on the internet a week ago, then came back out of nowhere to call me out. I assume that your mommy found out that you were using the internet again and you got grounded for a week. Welcome back.

So then, you've never heard of a person dying at a party from acute alcohol poisoning. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=acute+alcohol+poisoning There, now you can read all about it. If I had to google something for every ****** that posts his mental excrement on 2+2 I wouldn't have time to do anything else.

Christ on a stick you are an idiot. There is nothing dangerous about homebrew unless you are speaking specifically about a home distillery for moonshine. Yeast can't tolerate alcohol above a certain level depending upon the strain, and human pathogens can't survive in beer for more than a few hours. I'm not going to google that for you, look it up yourself.



This thread is about quitting alcohol. Every so often it gets bumped either by someone who is considering quitting drinking or by LFS with an update. This latest time after a bump a guy came along and said basically that he is an alcoholic, is in crisis, and is ready to stop right now. The people in this thread for support or advice should get it. I hope WVUskinsfan gets the help he is looking for. I'm happy for LFS and the others who posted in this thread that have alcohol problems and have quit drinking. The people who tard up this thread with particularly dangerous stuff, like ooooh meth is worse than alcohol -hint: this isn't the quitting meth thread, so what if meth sucks worse than alcohol - are doing a disservice to those that are looking for help.

I was going to move this argument to a new thread but it's not substantive enough, but as crashjr said this isn't what this thread is about. Stop it. If anybody wants to argue about the relative lethality of various drugs, start a new thread. Any further derailing posts will be deleted and the poster punished. Thank you.

Grunching, apologize if this has been covered before:

WVU Fan: look into Naltrexone.

I'm sure you'll find it when you do, but seriously consider the book The Cure for Alcoholism

The subtitle of the book (Drink Your Way Sober Without Willpower, Abstinence or Discomfort) is slightly misleading, as everything requires some commitment, but this approach is working for a lot of folks, and does not require, as in AA, a "spiritual awakening." The method (Sinclair) and results are covered in the book, but essentially, using double-blinded research the method covered results in +80% success for participants, success defined as "long-term control of their alcohol consumption to abstinence or acceptable levels ("social")."

Good luck. Feel free to PM if you have questions.

80% sounds absurdly high. I found this reference

http://journals.lww.com/psychopharma...t_Prior.6.aspx

suggesting Natrexone plus "coping skills" training resulted in 27% effectiveness after 32 weeks. I believe this is comparable to AA.

The title of that book is ridiculously misleading and potentially dangerous.

Here's a brief quote from a recent journal article, by Stuart Gitlow, MD a noted athority in addiction medicine rebutting some of the recent claims about Naltrexone and Alcoholism. Please visit this link for more info:
http://www.counselormagazine.com/col...interpretation

"Naltrexone was noted to reduce drinking days by 4 percent. If an alcohol dependent patient reduces the number of drinking days within a 100-day timeframe from a 50- to 48-day timeframe, would you consider that to be an improvement?
The big finding in the review comes when the authors note that the effects of naltrexone on return to drinking missed statistical significance. That is, the impact of naltrexone failed to show any difference from placebo in terms of leading the alcohol dependent patient to maintain sobriety. Since sobriety, abstinence, and recovery are our goals for the treatment of addictive disease, naltrexone is demonstrated here not to work.

Importantly, this is not a harm reduction versus abstinence discussion. There is no evidence that naltrexone results in harm reduction either. For that to be present, one would first have to demonstrate that alcohol dependent patients have a reduction in morbidity or mortality secondary to either a 4 percent drop in drinking days or an almost negligible, though statistically significant, alteration in frequency of heavy drinking days. Note, for example, that an individual who decreases drinking days and days of drinking heavily might still actually be drinking a larger volume of alcohol over a period of time than he or she was imbibing prior to the change."

I keep coming back to this thread because it inspires me. The personal stories, not so much the books or arguing about stuff.

Last Tuesday I was looking at this thread and decided I was going to put in to practice what I'd been telling myself I'd "eventually" do. I had some friends over that Monday to watch basketball and just kept pouring every time my glass was empty. They had beers in their hand, and in my mind if everyone's having a couple beers then no one will notice that I'm on my sixth whiskey/coke.

From last Tuesday until last night I had maybe 5 drinks total, and only on Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Never more than 2 at a time. I would think about this thread and the fact that I wasn't really sure why I was drinking. It didn't taste the same, and it didn't taste good. I felt great about that, too. Physically I felt a huge difference. I don't know if it was a placebo effect or what, but I liked it. Telling myself I felt great because I hadn't been drinking combined the good physical feeling with a sense of accomplishment. No reason to rationalize that away.

Then came last night. Basketball was on again and I distinctly remember thinking, "I've been doing great all week. Tonight I'm going to get smashed." And this morning I had to lay in bed for 45 minutes before I could drag myself out. I felt horrible. Also I don't like what comes out of my mouth when I'm drinking. It's just dumb.

I don't think basketball really has anything to do with it, it just happens to be the common theme between the last two times I've gotten drunk. And there's certainly plenty of times recently where I've gotten drunk and didn't need a social gathering as an excuse. I was at my parents' this weekend watching football. My mom had a glass of wine and offered me some. I asked for whiskey and received a nice whiskey/7up. It tasted ok, but halfway through it I was asking myself why I was going to drink this when I didn't plan on getting drunk - I had to drive home later. So I stopped drinking it halfway through and switched to water. I was proud of myself and kept looking at the glass thinking - There's half a glass of whiskey over there and I'm not going to drink it

And in writing this post I think it's the first time I've been honest enough with myself to admit that I don't see a point in drinking unless I'm going to get drunk. I think that makes me an alcoholic

Anyway, I hope that gets this thread back on track.

Hey Duerig, I'm not an expert, but this appears to be a different method than Sinclair's final product, by using naltrexone as an anti-craving drug in combination with supported abstinence. The study is cited in the The Cure, and is used in the book to exhibit a component of the program (drinking+naltrexone>abstinence+naltrexone). The Sinclair method actually requires the participant to drink according to his regular schedule, which (almost definitely) would include sessions of "heavy" drinking, at least in the first stages of treatment.

AA's success rate is estimated (by various sources, in both the treatment industry and in public) @ around 5%, but it's really difficult to say if that's accurate, because it is a spiritual program. The measure of success for AA is different than for the Sinclair method: spiritual awakening (for lack of a better term) vs pharmacological extinction of alcoholic tendencies. The "success" requirement for AA is abstinence & a spiritual awakening ("We will comprehend the word serenity and we will know peace"), while the Sinclair method defines success as control over drinking. Due to the nature of AA (anonymity) does not lend itself to tracking participants, and the enigmatic nature of the terms of success, it's difficult to imagine how one would accurately measure AA's success rate.

The success rate for the Sinclair method does seem absurdly high, granted. The subtitle, as I mentioned, is misleading (IMO), as well. However, the method does offer distinct advantages, and appears to be dramatically more effective than supported abstinence (like AA).

FYI, here is the study you referenced in full text: http://www.erowid.org/references/tex.../7449docid6596 . This is not a study of the Sinclair method, though.

I understand you're skeptical, and I hope I don't come off as a shill because I am skeptical, too. However, I have looked into it, and think it is worth passing the info along to those interested.

Well it's definitely interesting because it's two different ways to go about it.

Sinclair/others like it: we can cure you by teaching you to overcome the obsession of craving.

AA: it's hopeless, abstinence is the only answer, your life sucks with it, give your life over to a higher power.

Rather than delve into the politics of one versus the other, the most important thing is that problem drinkers find something for them which works. Regardless of success rate it has to be true that one of these programs will work for some people but the other(s) won't and vice versa.

There is probably an undercurrent to some degree in AA which says "this is the only way to stay sober" and a feeling that if someone doesn't adhere they are ultimately doomed to failure and repeating the cycle of insanity. And some of that is probably due to insecurity over there being a totally different way to succeed.

Regardless, what every drunk aspires to is to merely be a social drinker "like everyone else", and thus is the allure of a lot of the non-abstinence programs. I don't know what the answer is but it's compelling and hopefully there will be more discoveries in coming years.

FourthWin,

Fair enough. I found this link:

http://smartpopbooks.com/cureforalco...ds/nxtlist.doc

which is the list of citations used in the book. I don't have time to dig through these, would love it if someone could point me to the relevant study for the 78% success rate. I don't think you're a shill but I am very skeptical of that number.