Re: Re: How translatable is this response?

May 4, 2004

thanks cub for raising the level of discussion a bit.

If blockading one thing works could it work in other areas?

btw: have you checked out my page of reading on ldn?

I'd love to add any cool new papers you find.

> Legal but risky. Doctors have their governing bodies to answer to,

> and it

> was made painfully clear by one of the best people in the province

> here that

> any doctor prescribing a substance typically used only in clinical

> opiate

> detox would not be viewed favorably by his/her peers.

>

this person should have it made clear to them that being a stale yes-man

to knee jerk powers that be, is really not viewed favorably by

patients. And yes

the patient's opinion DOES matter.

> LDN could be a truly marvellous way to improve the

> function of managed heroin addicts...

aren't you mixing up ldn and standard naltrexone use here?

> either LDN or ULDN promises the

> opportunity to dramatically reduce dose requirements and improve the

> health

> of managed addicts. It could also be a cheap, safe godsend for perhaps

> hundreds of thousands or even millions of alcoholics who are resistant

> to

> cognitive or " spiritually-oriented " recovery programs.

I'm not sure we're on the same page. ldn is 3 or 4.5 mg. It really has

no effect

on addiction at all.

> If it shows any real

> promise in either area, watch for the backlash to hit not long after.

Don't believe too heavily in conspiracies on naltrexone. The fact that

it's patent

has expired means that I could fly to India tomorrow and start a

factory to make it...

dare to try it, learn about it, and see it's other uses.

Recommended Posts