WARNING: Unless treatment is supervised and implemented by professionals who themselves have a strong 12-Step background, any other treatment will be contaminated with subliminal inducements for recovering addicts to obliterate rather than solve problems or tolerate uncertainty.
Why this is so, I can explain biologically.
After four years, I must update my understanding: A"cure" is relative only to specific symptoms of alcohol or opioid dependence. Over the past four years, since I set up EdwardsVoice, Inc. a private non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, I have observed at close range, hundreds of people with varying degrees of alcohol/opioid dependence and their responses to traditional treatments. For the most part, they have suffered in silence, relapsed and disappeared. Those who remain abstinent attribute their success to Divine intervention that they found through adherence to the same program that has not helped nearly all others. Epidemics do not respect people's passionate regard for a philosophy or a lifestyle choice. The dead have been heard.
Recently, the Institute of Medicine published a position paper that sanctions home induction of blocking agents, approves of the concurrent use of benzos, and suggests that brief counseling is helpful but might not be necessary. The paper will have a profound effect on the future of addiction treatment well into the 21st Century. The Institute does not speak with such authority unless there is a medical crisis. According to the Institute of Medicine, the only response that has a hope of success in combatting the current opioid crisis requires overturning decades of traditional thinking. Saving the lives of each and every addict is the goal that has not been reached by ANY currently available treatment.
Must we throw out the baby with the bathwater? How much do 12-Step programs currently matter? Consistently, 2 million people claim affinity with a 12-Step program. That amounts to one-half of one percent (0.55%) of the population. About 9% suffer from addiction. This means that 6% of all addicts have an affinity for a 12-Step Program. To achieve the same 65% remission rate that the Institute of Medicine proposes to achieve with home induction of blocking agents would mean that 12-Step programs would have to expand their membership by a factor of by 968%. Yet, the profound commitment that people (too many of them on their way to death) have for building spiritual lives cannot and must not be ignored. The transcendent devotion of the 12-Step adherent is the essential glue for sticking in gratitude where there was rancor and serenity where there was unrelenting turmoil. I have seen this happen in hundreds of recovering addicts under the care of a dedicated group of professionals with a firm grounding in 12-Step principles. Is this logical?
Addiction does not pertain to just one neurotransmitter. Evey level of cerebral function is affected, except for a small area in the parietal cortex that has increased metabolic output when the subject reports praying or meditating. The justification for the inclusion of and the necessity for 12-Step programs in sustained recovery is to preserve and expand the functioning of this small piece of tissue in the parietal cortex, which does not have any inputs from the mu opioid receptor and therefore is the seat of long-term recovery potential. Blocking the mu opioid receptor not only saves lives but also opens the door to cortical rehabilitation under the protection of a strong parietal cortex that can only be enhanced by a 12-Step program approach along with medical interventions for conflicting chemical imbalances such as major depression, bipolar illness, panic disorder/agoraphobia, attention deficits, and fits due to closed head trauma.
The Institue reasons that cravings result when the mu opioid receptor malfunctions. This is settled science. Unchecked cravings stimulate memory pathways that guide the addict back to her drug of choice. This "look, see, GO" reasoning is not subject to mid-brain moderation. Shortcuts result from the frenzied brain looking for the substance that has allowed functioning to be maintained despite chemical imbalances that have gone unrecognized or untreated.
This is fancy language that explains why low-bottom drunks and addicts will continue seeking drugs. Jackpots do not matter. Even the suggestion that this addictive pattern can be altered raises up powerful defenses - so strong that every current treatment has a "back door" to guard the mu opioid receptor against interference - of any sort.
Only in the throes of imminent death will the layers of biological protection drop so that another human can take over temporarily. Help comes only after the addict has a spontaneous remission - an event that permits the addict to cry out for HELP. Blocking agents keep the mu opioid receptor in a chemically-induced remission (similar to the alteration in cell growth factors that is brought about by chemotherapies that can arrest cancer.) The logic and the evidence are irrefutable. Blocking the mu opioid receptor ends cravings.
The prospect of millions of addicts recovering
with
only the learned behavior of addiction
to guide them
is horrifying.
Why this is so, I can explain biologically.
What matters is that I can prove it.
After four years, I must update my understanding: A"cure" is relative only to specific symptoms of alcohol or opioid dependence. Over the past four years, since I set up EdwardsVoice, Inc. a private non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation, I have observed at close range, hundreds of people with varying degrees of alcohol/opioid dependence and their responses to traditional treatments. For the most part, they have suffered in silence, relapsed and disappeared. Those who remain abstinent attribute their success to Divine intervention that they found through adherence to the same program that has not helped nearly all others. Epidemics do not respect people's passionate regard for a philosophy or a lifestyle choice. The dead have been heard.
Recently, the Institute of Medicine published a position paper that sanctions home induction of blocking agents, approves of the concurrent use of benzos, and suggests that brief counseling is helpful but might not be necessary. The paper will have a profound effect on the future of addiction treatment well into the 21st Century. The Institute does not speak with such authority unless there is a medical crisis. According to the Institute of Medicine, the only response that has a hope of success in combatting the current opioid crisis requires overturning decades of traditional thinking. Saving the lives of each and every addict is the goal that has not been reached by ANY currently available treatment.
Must we throw out the baby with the bathwater? How much do 12-Step programs currently matter? Consistently, 2 million people claim affinity with a 12-Step program. That amounts to one-half of one percent (0.55%) of the population. About 9% suffer from addiction. This means that 6% of all addicts have an affinity for a 12-Step Program. To achieve the same 65% remission rate that the Institute of Medicine proposes to achieve with home induction of blocking agents would mean that 12-Step programs would have to expand their membership by a factor of by 968%. Yet, the profound commitment that people (too many of them on their way to death) have for building spiritual lives cannot and must not be ignored. The transcendent devotion of the 12-Step adherent is the essential glue for sticking in gratitude where there was rancor and serenity where there was unrelenting turmoil. I have seen this happen in hundreds of recovering addicts under the care of a dedicated group of professionals with a firm grounding in 12-Step principles. Is this logical?
Addiction does not pertain to just one neurotransmitter. Evey level of cerebral function is affected, except for a small area in the parietal cortex that has increased metabolic output when the subject reports praying or meditating. The justification for the inclusion of and the necessity for 12-Step programs in sustained recovery is to preserve and expand the functioning of this small piece of tissue in the parietal cortex, which does not have any inputs from the mu opioid receptor and therefore is the seat of long-term recovery potential. Blocking the mu opioid receptor not only saves lives but also opens the door to cortical rehabilitation under the protection of a strong parietal cortex that can only be enhanced by a 12-Step program approach along with medical interventions for conflicting chemical imbalances such as major depression, bipolar illness, panic disorder/agoraphobia, attention deficits, and fits due to closed head trauma.
The Institue reasons that cravings result when the mu opioid receptor malfunctions. This is settled science. Unchecked cravings stimulate memory pathways that guide the addict back to her drug of choice. This "look, see, GO" reasoning is not subject to mid-brain moderation. Shortcuts result from the frenzied brain looking for the substance that has allowed functioning to be maintained despite chemical imbalances that have gone unrecognized or untreated.
This is fancy language that explains why low-bottom drunks and addicts will continue seeking drugs. Jackpots do not matter. Even the suggestion that this addictive pattern can be altered raises up powerful defenses - so strong that every current treatment has a "back door" to guard the mu opioid receptor against interference - of any sort.
Only in the throes of imminent death will the layers of biological protection drop so that another human can take over temporarily. Help comes only after the addict has a spontaneous remission - an event that permits the addict to cry out for HELP. Blocking agents keep the mu opioid receptor in a chemically-induced remission (similar to the alteration in cell growth factors that is brought about by chemotherapies that can arrest cancer.) The logic and the evidence are irrefutable. Blocking the mu opioid receptor ends cravings.
