World Alcoholism Mess. Sec. 4

Continuation of the last post

The ZAD Findings Facts Evidence
Alcohol Policy Clinical Therapy And The Practice


Finding Of The ZAD Practice: A Complete Cure for Alcoholism

After suffering from long years of alcohol dependence[19] believing in the establishments* doctrines of alcoholism; then in my despair I found (necessity is the mother of invention) that a simple safe and inexpensive but really pleasurable alcohol tapering down drinking method has completely eliminated my almost 15 years of alcohol dependence! My alcohol Craving, Loss of control, Physical dependence and Tolerance all its symptoms [9] syndromes [18b] have completely gone! And I got completely cured from my chronic alcoholism during the course of the year 1998. Since then I have been absolutely able to consume alcohol, to such a minimum levels [19], which is far below than the establishments moderate, low-risk or the safe drinking limits [3b,...8o..], nevertheless fully enjoy my alcohol drinking! In the year of 1999 I wrote my findings in this paper titled: A Scientific Method to Minimize Alcohol THE ZERO ALCOHOL DRINK THEORY’ and sent it mainly to the World Health Organization (WHO*) and other leading worlds health establishments, authority concerns. There was not much of a response. So in the year 2000, Alcoholics Curewell was born (mainly with the testimony of my friend Victor Pais) and published the book of the same title[19]. It was mostly a revised version of my first ZAD paper in the book form. Neither there was much response at this time except two book reviews. (Its web copies available in our Alcoholics Curewell book review section[19j].) Luckily then I got subscription in the Addict-L mailing list[20], which helped me to learn and know lot about the current addiction fields its politics and the people involved. In between the years 2000 and 2003 I wrote many ZAD perspective papers[19e]. In the beginning of the year 2003 the Alcoholics Curewell launched its website[19a] containing most of my ZAD literatures (book, papers, letters and many more) in it. However, the concerned establishment authorities so far mostly remained silent and entirely ignored my ZAD findings. Nevertheless I should admit that none of my previous ZAD papers and the book, in-line (compliant) with the establishments “alcohol dependence” its “syndrome” research “terminologies” given in their disease diagnosis documents, except this ZAD alcoholism research paper[19b] for the first time!

The Two Main Criticism Against The ZAD

Among the scanty response so far, there emerged, three main criticisms against the ZAD which I consider most important, they are; 1). The ZAD book or its papers lack the “terminologies”, therefore, the researchers are not interested in it! 2). The ZAD method (practice) remains very much entangles with its theoretical aspect, there is not yet any independent, concise or compact version of its concrete “practice”. 3). There is no independent research carried or empirical evidence to prove the ZAD practice. (Prof. David F. Duncan raised most of these criticisms in the Addict-L mailing list.)

Now to address the first criticism; fortunately enough in this paper, first time so far in my ZAD writing carrier, I found a way (thanks to the web) and able to carry out some basic research of the Establishments (“alcohol dependence”), publications and able follow and use those alcohol dependence research terminologies, its definitions, guidelines in the context of my present ZAD writings. So I hope now, I have cleared the first major hurdle so the researchers will be interested in it! Secondly, in conjunction with this paper we primarily bring its concrete instruction manual in the name of; “the ZAD practice papers series”[19c] which is the nucleus of this paper providing its concrete and practical instruction manual independent from all of its previous hypothetical or theoretical version! Of course the ZAD Clinical (alcohol detoxification and dependence removal) therapy is also as important practical guide presented in the last part of this paper [19c] itself! The third criticism however more contentious! First of all people will always question the validity of any given facts or evidence which they don’t agree! Nevertheless this paper also provides many empirical evidences research study, reports, documents ‘references’ that endorse the basic validity of the use of the lower-alcoholic beverages in the prevention of the excessive alcohol consumption! Of course the ZAD needs ‘independent’ and impartial research experimentations (animal, human, clinical, lab test etc.) basically to scrutinize the scientific validity of its claim under its stipulated parameters, which is nevertheless the responsibility of the concerned research establishments! Now in this paper its terminology question has been resolved together with its basic primary physical facts, empirical evidence has been presented in this ZAD alcoholism research paper; all this I hope more or less resolves the third obstacle (also because it is somewhat connected with the first) so I hope the concerned authorities in the establishment now come forward to scrutinize or investigate into this whole ZAD findings.

Another major criticism against the ZAD practice could be; (This I imagined myself and no one has mentioned this to me so far) ‘the alcohol users in general and the dependents in particular would not “like” this ZAD practice (please note: I addressed this question in this paper before in a different angle) so it simply would not work’! Of course this would happen in every other health medication, prevention treatment environment! If the affected people refuse, or not willing accept or to follow (undergo) the prescribed medical treatments or the therapies then obviously it won’t work for them! For example, the alcohol dependence people in general may not like to adhere to the ‘total abstinence’ practice because they think they are not alcoholics (alcoholics denial?) or it would deprive them from the pleasures of the drink! However the alcohol dependent people have to necessarily follow or accept such preventative measures if they want protection from the disease! The same rule applies to the ZAD alcohol dependence prevention and elimination clinical therapy and the practice, ironically for those who dogmatically believe that they have this chronic incurable alcoholic disease (Alcoholics Anorexia [20e].) and the drink satiety wont work (denial?) in these conditions! Nevertheless they have to necessarily follow the ZAD practice if they really want to get rid of their alcohol dependence syndrome or the alcoholism from their system and get completely cured of it! However the fundamental difference between the total abstinence and the ZAD practice is that; the ZAD never would compel the alcohol dependent people to stop drinking alcoholic beverages and deprive them from the pleasures or the enjoyment of their delicious drinking for life! In fact the ZAD adds or puts-in more pleasure (satiety) and tries using it strategically, (especially the delicious taste, flavor) to manipulate, reduce and replace the drug desire or its pleasure! In this way it provides a solid physical/biological empowerment or “self defense” to the alcohol dependent people that enables them to reduce, cut- down, and control their overall alcohol consumption well within (far below) the ‘safe drinking levels’ thus completely get cured from their alcoholism! Above all the ZAD practice is such a delicious pleasurable way of alcoholic beverage drinking, that could be much more appealing than the unappetizing old kind of alcohol drinking! Therefore, there is a huge chance of people liking to this new way of drinking and it will work far better than the total abstinence if the “Establishments” implement ZAD clinical therapy and its practice in their alcoholism prevention and treatments!

The ZAD Pioneering Alcohol Dependence Prevention and Treatment Landmark Frontiers

Now, this newly compiled ZAD therapy/practice model paper [19b] heralds, three pioneering alcohol dependence (alcoholism) preventions and treatment landmark frontiers, i.e. 1. The ZAD Therapy, 2. The ZAD Practice and 3. The ZAD Policy. The ZAD Clinical (inpatient) therapy comprises of the alcohol detoxification and its dependence prevention and elimination, which has been explained in details in the last part of this paper. The pioneering “Alcohol Policy” (third one) outlined in principle, in between in this paper, which is fundamentally different from the establishments alcohol policies! [3a, 3k, 8q, 10g] However, the “ZAD practice”[19c] (second one), which is the nucleus of this ZAD model, published separately or independently in conjunction with this paper. Another most important feature of this paper which I mentioned before is that, it takes major departures from all my previous ZAD literatures as it complies with the “TERMINOLOGIES” guidelines, expounded by the establishments [3, 6]) and along with it basically reproves and indicts the establishments entire alcoholism and particularly their alcohol dependence promulgations in principle as, “narrow-minded psychoactive drug desire bigoted doctrines, which totally disregards the drink satiety desire involved in the alcohol drinking and its drinking; therefore responsible for the ongoing alcoholism mess (Biggest World Health Blunder) and the mayhem that the world face today. It also most importantly presents a list of “references” including many valuable research study reports empirical evidences that could endorse the basic validity of the ZAD model! And finally the 1100$ Alcoholics Reward to any one who disprove or refute the ZAD practice.

The ZAD Empirical Evidence Surveillance

So far as I said, the concerned Establishments have not come forward to conduct an independent enquiry into the ZAD facts or evidences, obviously therefore I could not provide any such establishments ZAD research study, experimentations as its evidence for or against! (As a matter of fact one of the main objective of this paper is to obliging them to do so!) However, there are some well known pragmatic evidences, that I would like to point out in this regard is; people probably from ancient times have been following similar Alcohol Tapering Down Drinking methods or strategies (Did the Romans practiced it?) in order to reduce their overall alcohol consumption which remains popular even today! A very well known empirical fact is; today millions of alcohol drinkers (especially the young people) worldwide choose to drink the lower alcohol content alcoholic beverages specially the “beers” and succeed in it. One can find its ample evidences in many of the WHO and others alcohol beverages consumptions empirical research studies statistical surveys, charts, ‘Global Status Report’ [3L, 3m, 3n, 6a,12] etc. One of the Health Behavior News Service news survey reports; Teenagers drink "better-tasting" non-alcoholic drinks as a strategy to cut back their drinking! [20k] There are lots of research reports* suggesting that the human appetite (linked to food) is very much linked to alcoholism![20L, 20La, 20m, 20n, 20o, 20t, 20ta, 20tb] which basically endorses the ZAD perspective. There are major ‘animal models’ research studies, which reveals that the appetite (taste, stomach) plays significantly important role in the animals alcohol consumption [22]. By the way, the most valid research reference on this regard, I got is; from the Al Turners MS CADC post in the addict-L, Re: Alcoholic Anorexia, etc… [20a] its references are so important so that I am giving it in this foot note below itself! Particularly Prof. Herman H. Samson’s one of the animal model research has been explored in my ZAD perspective paper on Animal Models[19f]. However then these researchers suddenly recoil back in their reply letter (see my letter correspondence with Herman H. Samson [19k, 20aa]) at my ZAD suggestions!

ZAD Evidence in the Establishments ‘Non-Alcoholic drinks’ advice!

Most importantly, one can also find the ‘Zero Alcohol Drink’ similar ‘Non-alcoholic Drinking’ “tips” suggestions or advice given almost in every establishments controlled, moderate, How to cut-down (reduce, low-risk) you drinking advisory list [3a, 3ca, 3cb, 3r etc.] including the NIAAA [7a]! Some of the European Governments even de-classify these very low-alcohol content beverage as non-alcoholic* beverages and give them the tax benefits[20j]!. However the original source (research study) and the intentions of these suggestion remains very much obscure and ambiguous* and most importantly they fastidiously warn any one that this drinking tips or advice definitely NOT for the “alcohol dependent people” for whom they strictly advise to stop drinking, choose total abstinence as their only recovery solution! Nevertheless, one amazingly wonderful and major endorsement (support) for the ZAD kind of drinking method to reduce ones alcohol consumption, I came across in my web search recently,*** promulgated by the WHO Management of Substance Abuse Primary Care, ‘Alcohol Use Disorders’ web site[3cb]; its copy in the following : -

How to reduce your drinking

Quench your thirst with non-alcoholic drinks before having an alcoholic drink
Avoid salty snakes when you are drinking
Eat before drinking; it will make you more full and then you will drink less
Have one or more non-alcoholic drinks before each alcoholic drink
try to take small sips of your drink, avoid gulping, and if possible use a straw
dilute your drinks, e.g. add soda to wine and mixers to spirits

I have come across many such “How to cut-down your drinking”* tips of ‘non-alcoholic drinks’ suggestion advises**, in this web search, which are in fact far more extensive and elaborate! [26, 27]. However finding such advice in the WHO Management of substance abuse, gave me great hopes of finding the original source of its basic clinical experiments trials research reports, documents, books publications so that I can add them into this paper reference perhaps as the most valid of all the ZAD evidence. However unfortunately so far I could not find any of its original source research of this advise. So I wrote to msb@who.int to provide more information but so far received no reply from them!

Now the most important point is; if the non-alcoholic beverage drinking could reduce the persons overall alcohol consumption then it should also reduce the alcohol consumption in the alcohol dependence person. Here emerges the principle ambiguity of their “how to reduce your drinking” stand point. Virtually every one of these web sites, assiduously or diligently warn the alcohol dependent (alcoholic people) that these, ‘how to reduce (cut-down) your drinking’ tips or suggestions never meant to the alcohol dependence persons, they should immediately quit or stop drinking and strictly observe the total abstinence for life, which is the only recovery option available for them!

Now our main question is; is there any such alcoholism research conducted, in which it is been proven that consuming the non-alcoholic beverages or drinking lower alcohol content (percentage) alcoholic beverages shown to reduce or cut-down the overall alcohol consumptions of the persons having some sort of the “alcohol use disorders” but at the same time clearly did not reduce or cut-down the alcohol consumption of those persons having the alcohol dependence? As far as I understand there is no such alcoholism research findings (at least that has come to my notice) so far! In fact none of the establishments psychoactive drug desire bigoted alcoholism research findings such as; neurobiological deficiency, psychosocial, behavioral, spiritual disorders hypothesis or their basic moderate safe drinking levels (limits) standard alcohol drink formulations could support or justify any such biological drink “satiety” based prevention and treatment for alcohol use disorders or alcoholism! (Their vehement anti-alcopop stance don’t help it either!) Probably the researcher learned or picked up this non-alcoholic beverages drinking tips from their treatment research subjects themselves who reveal to them that drinking non alcoholic beverages is one among their strategies to quit or cut back their drinking![20K]. (I wonder does the ZAD had any influence over some of them lately?) Perhaps it is derived from the common knowledge and the popular drinking practice of the general alcohol drinking public! Whatsoever, the establishment totally oppose to this lower alcohol content alcoholic beverage drinking treatment suggestions in their prevention and the treatment of the “alcohol dependence” syndrome, or alcoholism but relegate it to the “safe” areas of the alcohol use disorder where it seems to sit mostly idle! Whatever may be difference nevertheless, the ZAD considers the establishments how to cut-down your drinking; ‘non-alcoholic drinking’ suggestions as most important and valuable piece of evidence that comes out of directly from the establishments (horse) mouth, which basically endorse the validity of the ZAD practice.

ZAD as an Alcopop: Establishments Deep Opposition

In contrast to our above mentioned lower alcohol content beverage drinking empirical and pragmatic evidences, some of the establishment mainstream alcohol dependence prevention treatment lobbies vehemently oppose any such deliciously tasting lower alcoholic beverages drinking suggestions for the alcohol dependent people which they claim could further tempt or appeal the alcoholics (or any one in general, teenagers in particular) to drink more of that kind of drink and obviously exceed their safe drinking levels so they end up in excessive alcohol consumption; loss of control, binging, boozing, getting drunk! The huge hue and cry raised by the ‘Centre for Science in the Public Interest Alcohol Policies Project’ [28] (CSPIAPP) that seems to be at the forefront of this battle! This entire lobby (including WHO) seems to ambiguously argue that these new kind of alcoholic beverages which they say disguised in a delicious taste and flavors which collectively known as “alcopops”[3d, 3L] posses far greater threats dangers or harms for the teenage drinkers (let alone the alcoholics)! Garry Slegg [29] who conducted the ZAD book review (2000) in the journal of ‘Addiction’[19j, 22a] in this connection quotes “Alco pops may actually lead to an increase in the level of consumption among young people” (BMA, 1999)! In general, the worlds leading health establishments mostly seems to foster this ‘alcopop’ position! It is due to such preposterous narrow- minded one-sided, ‘half-truths’, prejudices, propagandas against the delicious (appetizing) lower alcohol content alcoholic beverages dominated by such narrow-minded drug desire bigoted alcoholism doctrines and dogmas that plagues the establishments entire alcohol dependence, alcoholism prevention and treatments!

Establishments Bogged-Down Research On Low-Alcohol Alternatives Beer

Another most important research findings to the question of whether it is possible to reduce ones overall alcohol consumption by switching to low-alcohol beer comes from David F. Duncan Dr PH Post in the addict-L, (Alcopops Increase Consumption? [20ab, 20ac]) in which he points out that “on average drinkers do consume less absolute alcohol, when they drink lower alcohol content beverages” then he righteously points out; “That a great many alcoholics who try to do so (reduce their alcohol consumption by switching to beer or watering down their drinks) fail is also clearly established”! This is where all the establishments’ research on this subject matter gets bogged-down and ends up! It is mainly because, with the commonly available standard low-alcohol beverages, without reducing the alcohol content in it “sufficiently enough” and without carrying the step by step alcohol percentage reduction, and not giving the proper (or any) attention to adding the delicious taste flavor or in one word without taking care of all those important ‘drink satiety’ factors, (which should also include the ZAD ‘motivational’ factor) it is not possible to irrefutably prove (like the ZAD therapy/practice) that the alcoholics able to ‘infallibly’ reduce their overall alcohol consumption to a safe, low-risk levels! Therefore a great many alcoholics who try to reduce their alcohol consumption with such kind of establishments, low-alcohol content standard alcoholic beverages (leave their drug desire bigoted blunder propaganda alone) NO DOUBT will end up in drinking excessive[18c] that will far exceed their low-risk levels, moderate safe limits, standard alcohol drink number counts! Primarily because, it lacks fundamentally this ZAD infallibility thirst, taste, stomach satiety also factor! motivation! (pointed out in the ZAD therapy MDBCCAB) factor! This is what I have been arguing through out the ZAD model, having all these most important drink satiety factor, makes the ZAD therapy/practice infallible, impregnable, unassailable and therefore fundamentally different from all the previous low-alcohol contend beverage drinking!

The great piece of reaction of this letter [20ac] to the ZAD model, comes at its end, as the author concludes: “We don't need to do the research you are calling for because it was done ages ago and is confirmed daily in practical experience of the failure of such approaches that focus on the alcohol rather than on the behavior and the behaver”! (No doubt, he is [17] one of the staunch ‘Harm Reduction’ (HR) proponent!) This is what I have been basically pointing out through out this paper, as the ‘establishments (including the controlled drinking model) researchers narrow-minded obsessive psychoactive drug desire bigoted mind-set …… that has so far prevented them from finding this simple safe pleasurable and infallible “drinking” (satiety) strategy to completely eliminate the alcohol dependence!’ However, luckily by the way, it provided me with the great historical opportunity (call it a twist of fate or whatever!) of finding it! Nevertheless, I consider this authors post very important, as it also provides the valuable research finding reference that now I give in the following: -

Whitehead, P.C., and Szandorowska, B. (1977). Introduction of low alcohol content beer: A test of the addition-substitution hypothesis. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 38(11), 2157-2164; Geller ES, Kalsher MJ, Clarke SW. (1991). Beer versus mixed-drink consumption at fraternity parties: A time and place for low-alcohol alternatives. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 52(3), 197-204; Van Houten, R., Van Houten, J., Malenfant, J. E. (1994). The effects of low alcohol beverages on alcohol consumption and impairment. Behavior Modification, 1994 Oct;18(4):505-13.

A Pioneering ZAD Alcohol Policy

In the light of the ZAD alcoholic beverages drinking perspective in this paper, Alcoholics Curewell strongly urges the establishments alcohol policy makers [3k, 8q] in the first place; to bring in a pioneering legislations* that radically reduce or bring down the percentage of alcohol in all standard alcoholic beverages to its present half! According to which, the alcohol percentage in the distilled-spirits never should be allowed more than 20%, in the non-distilled strong brew (wine) the alcohol percentage never should allowed more than 10%. In the low-alcohol brews (beers) categories the alcohol percentage in it should not be allowed more than 2% or 2.5% at the most!

Following these above ZAD alcohol policy guidelines; the alcohol percentage in the distilled-spirit should be strictly reduced from the prevailing (general standards) 40% to down to 20% or lower! (10% would be ideal!) In the non-distilled category, the alcohol percentage in strong wine or beers etc should be strictly reduced from the prevailing 20% in general to 10% or lower. And most importantly, the alcohol percentage of the low-alcohol content beer, wine coolers, alcopops etc., should be strictly reduced from the prevailing 5%, down to 2% or less. Especially because the majority of the alcohol drinkers who consume these low-alcohol beverages assume that they contains fairly safe, low-risk, lower-alcohol content! Therefore, the alcohol percentage in them never should not be allowed to exceed more than 2% or 2.5% at the most! Most importantly the prices of the one standard alcohol drink beverages containing more than 2.5% alcohol should be strictly more (by taxing it) than the delicious quality beer contained in one standard alcohol drink of 36 ounce (1000 ml) which contains 2.5% and less alcohol content in it! In one word sternly discourage people from drinking the high alcohol content beverages and on the other hand promote or encourage the alcohol drinker to replace it with the very low alcohol content alcoholic beverages! The most important point to know in here is; Only the alcohol policy that strictly restricts the alcohol percentage 2% or below in the alcoholic beverages can be employed effectively or safely in the prevention and elimination of the alcoholism, the other reductions above this percentage can mostly (only) serve as a powerful message to reduce alcohol content while drinking it.

However the main obstacle to enact such alcohol policy probably is the drug desire bigoted mind-set of the alcohol policy makers themselves! For them, people drink alcoholic beverages resolutely to get its psychoactive drug pharmacological effect (positive/negative reinforcement) or the pleasure! So, if they reduce the alcohol percentage from the standard alcoholic beverage then they dogmatically assume that the people will simply drink more and more of the beverage to attain their required drug pleasures so there is no point in them enacting alcohol policy legislations to keep the alcohol percentage strictly below a standard limit, they would rather impose more taxes, increase the legal drinking age or ban advertisements on the alcoholic beverages! For them the ZAD drink satiety contention to prevent and eliminate the alcohol dependence may seem very naive that simply would not work under the strong indoctrination of their psychoactive drug desire obsessed alcoholism doctrines and dogmas!

The ZAD (Alcoholics Curewell) envisaged or pioneered alcohol policy in the prevention and treatment of alcohol dependence (alcoholism); to radically reduce the alcohol percentage from the alcoholic beverages is fundamentally different and could be far more effective and successful than all the establishments contemporary alcohol policies [3a, 3k, 8q, 10g] that aims to prevent the alcohol-related problem[18c] as a whole! For example; increasing the taxes would not be “much” successful in preventing the alcohol dependence people from buying their alcoholic beverages. Increasing the legal age limit of drinking (or strictly enforcing it) would also not much successful in its intention as the targeted young (below legal age) people will find some indirect ways of appropriating the alcoholic beverages and the beverage companies devise more devious ways to promote their products despite banning of its direct advertisement! Therefore, it becomes very difficult to strictly enforce or implement any such alcohol policies legislations due to their inherent flaws or the shortcomings! On the other hand the alcohol percentages in the alcohol beverage can be strictly monitored and enforced from the top manufacturing levels, down to the retail shop, pubs, bars, and other outlets, therefore much more effective successful in its strict implementations! This ultimately means advising the alcohol drinkers in general and the alcohol dependence people in particular, to drink lots and lots of the delicious alcoholic beverages, which contain sufficiently enough, lowest possible alcohol percentage, is far better and more prudent than strictly advising them to follow its total abstinence.

ZAD Clinical Therapy For Alcohol Dependence Treatment

(Authors Note: From this revised edition of this paper to the Addict-L List [onwards] I replace this section of this paper with my Zero Alcohol Drink- Alcohol Detoxification Clinical Trial [ZAD-ADCT] paper, which will be sent to the list some times latter.)

Will be continued in the next post Section 5
…………………………..