World Alcoholism Mess: Section 3

Continuation of the last post


ESTABLISHMENTS ALCOHOLISM
DIOGNOSIS & TREATMENTS

Establishments Principle Failure In Finding the Cure: ‘Alcoholism Cannot Be Cured’ etc. Dogmas of Total Abstinence Dictum

Now let us turn our main attention towards the principle issue of this paper i.e. the establishment’s research, prevention and treatments for the alcohol “dependence” its syndrome or the alcoholism. With all their available advanced science, sophisticated technology and the huge resources, they could not find not even a single therapy treatment that could ‘infallibly’ enable the alcohol dependent person in general to cut down, moderate or control their alcohol consumption and completely come out of their alcohol dependence while still continue to drink alcohol! All their known alcoholism prevention and treatments miserably fail in this task, therefore they arrive at the ultimate conclusion that the alcohol “dependence” or its syndrome (alcoholism) is chronic disease to which ‘a cure is not yet available’ [7a, 9] Therefore the only available solution for the alcoholics is to completely stop drinking and to adhere to the ‘Total Abstinence’. Meanwhile, they promptly warn the alcoholics that it is only a “recovery” solution and not a complete cure!

The main question now we ask is; why alcoholism (syndrome) is not curable? What really causes it? Why, all the establishments’ alcohol ‘dependence’ preventions and treatments fail majority of the times? The Establishments already have some ready-made answers! They claim it is a genetic, neurobiological, opioid, neurotransmitters, chemicals etc. deficiency; all of which basically points towards; their obsessive preoccupation with the ‘psychoactive drug desire’, which they say “often strong, sometimes overpowering”[18b]) compounded with the psychosocial maladapted behavior! So far their sciences have not advanced enough to develop an effective medication (drugs) or any comprehensive therapies that could provide a complete cure for the alcohol dependence. However then they also claim that they are getting more and more success in their new advancement in alcoholism pharmacotherapy treatments! [8d, 10b, 10c]. The alcohol aversion drug Disulfirum (Antabuse) could effectively prevent the drinkers from consuming alcohol thus enable them to maintain abstinence. The more advanced and much safer medications or drugs (Opioid- antagonist) like Naltrexone, Acamprosate (Campral) and those Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) Fluoxetine (Prozac) Sertraline (Zoloft) Paroxetine (Paxil) and many more which targets or inhibits the specific chemicals neurotransmitters, in the specific regions of the brain may one day achieve full success in it! However so far the efficacy and safety of these drugs remains highly controversial and questionable as it fails prevent alcoholism majority of the times! Even though, the alcohol aversion drug Disulfirum could effectively prevent most of the people from drinking alcohol, nevertheless its effects are most disgusting or repugnant (aversive) it also posses dangerous health risk or side effects ! Therefore, the compliance to this drug therapy is much less forth coming, as most therapist and patients alike reject that drug! So, in that sense all of their medication drugs used in the prevention and treatment of alcohol dependence fails in most of the times, even to achieve total abstinence! There are others who believe that the dependence is not all that neurobiological but mainly caused by the psychological, social, or environmental causes therefore they devise their own innovative psychosocial, cognitive behavioral therapies (CBT) Motivational Enhancement Therapy (MET), Twelve Step Facilitation (TSF), coping-skills training, interaction therapy etc. However, they also fail most of the times attaining even the total abstinence, let alone the cure for the alcohol dependence syndrome or alcoholism!

So the establishment sets out a major research investigation called the project MATCH”[8m] to scientifically determine which specific treatment matches or suits which specific clients characteristics! But for their total dismay they could NOT find any specific therapy or treatment that could be significantly successful in the treatment of any character specific alcohol dependent person. In other words, so far they have not found any specific treatment that could basically work well with any specific client characteristics. So they smartly conclude that ‘all treatment works,’ which latter raised huge controversy! [20h, 20i] However such pragmatic, tactful positioning in the front is most important for the establishments because they don’t wont to be accused of pursuing or favoring only their genetic, neurological, neurotransmitters, chemicals deficiency oriented drug medication, prevention, treatment agenda! They would also like to accommodate the other psychotherapy (CBT) prevention treatment approaches (Except the ZAD practice!) in the prevention and treatment of alcoholism. Therefore the 10th Special Report to the U.S. Congress on “Alcohol and Health” [13] in its Treatment Research Chapter endorses; “both psychological approaches (such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, motivational Enhancement therapy and 12 step program such as Alcoholics Anonymous) and medications”[Pp 429 ] in the treatment of the alcohol dependence! However none of these treatment programs could enable the alcoholics to control their drinking and remain within the low-risk, controlled, safe drinking levels and to get completely cured of their alcohol dependence! So they all candidly admit to this fact and all most all of them (baring those controlled drinking proponents[20q]) simply jump into the bandwagon of the age-old Total Abstinence (sobriety) oriented recovery solution and most of their effort energy and the resources are channeled into it! Even then, all of their research, therapy, treatments programs, however well they may combine; miserably fails even to achieve this total abstinence (let alone safe drinking levels) in majority of the times, as the establishments all the alcoholism prevention/treatments turns out to be, not really much (significantly) better than the non treatment outcomes!


‘Establishments’ Drug Desire Bigoted Alcoholism Diagnosis Doctrines
ICD-10 & DSM-IV also AUDIT CAGE MAST etc.

To remind the readers once more; it is fundamentally because of the establishments total disregard for the humans drink desire satiety involved in the alcohol dependence, or the total absents of it in their diagnosis and treatment doctrines, we basically reprove them as “drug desire bigoted” alcoholism doctrines or dogmas. Otherwise we fully acknowledge the validity of the drug desire part of the alcohol dependence syndrome or alcoholism when it is rightly placed in combination with the drink satiety in which a complete cure for the alcohol dependence can be achieved!

Having said that; most importantly; in this section of this paper we primarily expose and indict the ‘establishments’ principle alcohol “dependence” diagnostic research doctrines their screening instruments, Brief Interventions preventions and treatment as entirely based (build) upon the before mentioned alcoholism doctrines and dogmas! The alcohol dependence syndrome [18b] and its related part in the WHO International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10)[1], its extended versions described in their ‘management of substance abuse’ publications[18] those alcohol drinking sites [3a] their Expert Committees Reports on alcohol dependence, Lexicon[18c] and almost every documents or publications that deals with the alcohol “dependence”, its prevention and treatment fronts all these have been totally hijacked or corrupted by the same narrow-minded(one-sided) psychoactive drug (alcohol) desire bigoted dogmas! Similarly, the NIAAA principle documents on alcohol “dependence” starting with its FAQ[5], Alcoholism Getting the Facts[7a], its diagnostic guidelines given in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual(DSM-IV)[2] their extended version described in their alcohol research and Health [10]Alcohol Alerts[8] and almost every document, publications of the NIAAA[6] that deals with the “alcohol dependence” (which is my main focus) has been totally contaminated by that alcoholism doctrines which totally disregards the humans natural biological drink satiety need or desire primarily involved in the alcoholic beverage drinking, its dependence syndrome or the alcoholism.

The same fundamental alcoholism dogma contamination prevails in the establishments alcohol Screening instruments, AUDIT[3b], CAGE, MAST etc, [3ca, 8b, 8k,] employed in the Brief Interventions [3c, 3ca, 8c, 10b,10e], accompanying their prevention and treatments [8d, 13]. For example; when the professional, doctors or the health worker inquire about the ‘amount’ or quantities of the alcohol drink the alcohol drinkers consume, they exclusively mean it by how much amount of the alcohol (substance) they consume to get ones drug “high,”. They don’t give any importance to the total amounts, quantities, qualities, tastes properties of the drink that the drinkers usually consume to achieve their overall biological drink satisfaction or satiation! Because under their drug desire bigoted alcoholism dogmas they can never even imagine that basically the drink satiety has any thing to do with peoples habit of alcohol drinking and its dependence, its prevention and elimination! Finally it all gets manifested or culminates in their perilous formulation of “a standard alcohol drink,” prescribed ‘in their low-risk, safe, moderate, controlled (how to cut-down your drinking) drinking guideline modules [3b, 3ca, 3cb, 8o, 7a,..9] It is among the most dangerous of their alcoholism doctrines which contains treacherously high amounts of alcohol percentage compared (relative) to the inadequate total amounts (quantities) of the drink that standard drink contain, which totally fail to provide the drink satiety for the person within that limited two or three standard alcohol drinks! It could potentially work as the “priming dose” [10aa] and lead the vulnerable segment of alcohol drinkers-even though their having all the good intentions or desire to conduct controlled moderate drinking but having the natural instinctive biological tendency or urge for drink satiety, due to their genetic, voluptuous, cultural, youthful or whatever predisposition- to dangerously drink more and more of such relatively high alcohol content with drink deficient standard alcoholic beverages to attain their drink satiety, so they end up with excessive alcohol consumption, the so called bingeing or boozing! The “Alcohol policy”[3k, 8q, 10g] makers of the establishment also totally obsessed with the drug desire aspect of the alcohol drink, remain totally blind to the positive natural biological drink satiety aspect involved in the alcoholic beverage! They injudiciously’ or callously allow such a high alcohol content (percentage) generally in all the alcoholic beverages (including those standard beers that contains around 5% alcohol). for the public consumption under their own ‘alcohol policy,’ which could prove to be dangerously high particularly to the segments of alcohol drinkers who are vulnerable to the problems of alcohol use disorders, abuse and dependence! The two or three (women’s are allowed only one!) counts of such kind of standard alcohol drinks would not be really enough to satiate their natural biological drinking need (desire) especially when it is taken in the form of that distilled-spirit! Overall all these screening instruments, Brief Interventions totally immersed with their psychoactive drugs, pharmacological effect, never bother to investigate into the drink desire satiety aspect involved in the peoples habit of alcohol drinking and its dependence!

Establishments Treacherous ‘Standard Alcohol Drink’ And Dangerous ‘Safe Drinking Levels’ Formulations

Let us now analyze little deeper into the establishments formulations of “a standard alcohol drink,” laid down in their moderate, controlled, safe drinking alcoholic beverage measurement standard levels. It basically reflects the same narrow-minded psychoactive substance alcohol drug desire bigoted mind-set that blindly assumes that the people drink alcoholic beverages almost entirely (resolutely) to satisfy their drug desire, thereby totally disregard the drinkers natural or biological drink satiety desire involved in their drinking! Therefore, they don’t bother to see the basic difference between consuming two different quantities and kind (properties) of alcoholic beverages as far as the beverages contain basically one standard alcohol drink i.e. around 10 grams of alcohol or 13 grams of ethanol! Therefore they conclude a 1.5-ounce 40% of distilled-spirit (liquor) and a12ounce 5% of beer both of which equally containing the same amount of alcohol not any safer than the other or equally dangerous, when it comes to causing the alcohol dependence! For example; the NIAAA pamphlet warns; “Beer and wine are not “safer” than hard liquor. A 12-ounce can of beer, a 5-ounce glass of wine, and 1.5 ounces of hard liquor all contain the same amount of alcohol and have the same effects on the body and mind”![7c] . They don’t see that ‘A standard alcohol drink’ contained in two different quantities and qualities (properties) of drink packages can have two fundamentally different kinds biological, neurological and psychological effects or impacts! For example; people who drink a standard 1.5 ounce of 40% alcohol content liquor (even after adding some mixer into this liquor) immediately would get their biological drinking appetite systems (taste, thirst and stomach) aggravated particularly their thirst getting triggered! and the taste getting activated! It would quickly make them to need or desire for the second drink (they go for it or not is a different matter) and as sooner as they finish the second; if they don’t control enough (they may call it ‘impaired control’ or ‘loss of control’) it would tempt the person to go for the third, fourth and more within a short period of time and end up in drinking excessive [18c] or binge drinking, especially if the person have the instinct (impulsive, voluptuous young appetite?) predisposition towards the alcohol “dependence syndrome or alcoholism! On the other hand, drinking one standard drink (12 ounce) of the beer would have quite a different biological/neurological/psychological property and impact! First of all, it will take longer time to consume (finish) a12 ounce beer and at least for the time being and to some extent it will satisfy the persons overall drinking desire so there will be a longer time period between the first and the second drink! Let me put it this way; it would be quite easy and plausible to those impulsive or instinctive young alcohol drinkers ( especially for the alcoholics) to finish up their given safe or low risk drink quota of 2 or 3 standard drinks of distilled-spirit liquor (3 to 4.5 ounce) quickly, say within 15 minutes and probably few more drinks on top of it without much time delay. On the contrary drinking three standard drink of beer (36 ounces) even for an alcohol dependent (alcoholic) person conceivably will take much more time! Moreover, completing 3 to 4.5 ounces (approximately 80 to 120 ml.) of the volatile liquor in the stomach can still aggravate the biological appetite or desire (as well psychologically loosen the minds inhibitions) in a dependent as well as in a non-dependent person (if they not exercise their minds strong restraints or controls). On the other hand, after finishing 24 to 36 ounces (around 660ml to 990ml.) of the beer in comparison will provide the people with the solid ammunition to physical/biologically and psychologically defend, prevent or guard against themselves from substantially consuming any more of that standard alcohol drink! Most important of all; the overall biological drink satiety will generally dampen their drink interest and tame-down, subdue or dissipate their drug desire or craving at least for a long enough time period!

Therefore the establishments who have laid down such a injudicious standard alcohol drink formulations and its low-risk, safe drinking levels drinking standard number counts in their controlled or moderate drinking modules (this should also include the controlled drinking intervention models[20q]) which callously disregard the alcohol drinkers drink satiety desire aspect involved in the alcohol drinking and its dependence have unwittingly committed such a dangerous basic error that could treacherously lead the vulnerable or predisposed segments or the alcohol drinking population into the fatal alcohol dependence, its syndrome or alcoholism.

Different Alcohol Drinking impact Even within A Standard Beer Drink

The most important thing now to know in the matters of lower alcoholic beverages (beer, wine cooler, alcopops etc.) drinking is; even in choosing between the higher and the lower alcohol percentages beers could make a fundamental difference between becoming dependent or coming out of it! While opting for the higher alcohol percentage beer drinking can dangerously lead a vulnerable person into the alcohol dependence that could ruin their life and lead into their tragic death. On the contrary opting for the lower alcohol percentage beer bring them the immense drinking pleasures and joy of a renewed life and in the process infallibly prevent also eliminate their alcohol dependence and get completely cured of their alcoholism. For example take a standard alcohol drink of beer, packed in two different quantities of beverages. One in a standard 12 ounce 5% alcohol beer and the other in a delicious 40-ounce of 2% (or less) alcohol containing beer both basically containing equally the same one standard alcohol drink! Nevertheless, the first 12 ounce standard beer could dangerously lead the predisposed or vulnerable drinkers into the alcohol dependence, while the second delicious 40 ounce beer can safely guide them into safe, moderate or controlled drinking that undeniably prevent and eliminate the alcohol dependence! Undoubtedly the 40 ounce beer packed in a standard alcohol drink could be the safest kind of alcoholic beverages, better if one could add some more appetizing or delicious (alcopops?) taste flavor to make it much more appealing! This would be the ideal alcoholic beverage that contains the harmless alcohol percentage (less than 2%) that under the ZAD alcohol policy should be recommended to every segment of alcohol drinkers as the safest kind of alcoholic beverage to use. Especially if the alcohol dependence or alcoholic people opt for such low alcohol percentage delicious beers, wine coolers or the alcopops, then they will definitely guard against themselves from the alcohol dependence and get completely cured of it!

Replacing ZAD with Higher Alcohol content: Argument Against ZAD

Replacing their high alcohol content (percentage) beverage with the lower alcohol content beverages has been perhaps the oldest way (form) of alcohol drinking, probably as old as the alcohol use-disorders and its dependence (alcoholism) itself! Perhaps this was the most ancient alternative to the alcohol total abstinence! However in the emerging modern age of the alcoholism research, the establishments authorities started dogmatically arguing (perhaps influenced by the AA) that it is not possible to reduce the overall alcohol consumption of the alcohol people by opting for lower alcohol content beverages because then they will drink more and more, far too much of that lower alcoholic content beverages that finally will end in excessive alcohol consumption! Alcoholics quick diagnosis [20c] seems to build on such assumptions! Of course in the olden days this argument stood on seemingly unassailable or invincible grounds, simply because unless one adopts a comprehensive ‘step by step’ alcohol “minimizing” (tapering) lowered alcohol beverage drinking ‘satiety’ strategy, then it will become most difficult for the alcoholic people to reduce their overall alcohol consumption and come out of their alcohol dependence in such alcohol tapering down method like this ZAD way!

However now suddenly seeing this comprehensive alcohol tapering down ZAD technique in place, the establishments authorities may quickly realizing that it would be now impossible for them to repute this ZAD therapy/practice by their old argument now “may” suddenly change their century old tracks and start newly claiming; that the alcohol dependence people would not like or go any further into this lower alcohol percentage beverage drinking, due to their ‘often strong and sometimes overpowering drug (alcohol) desire’. However they then contradict their own alcohol dependence diagnostic research criteria that they mainly stand upon which candidly states; “a persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to reduce or control substance use”[18b]. There are many such alcohol dependence diagnosis documents, that basically contends that the alcoholics indeed earnestly try to reduce or cut-down their alcohol consumption. For example; the first question in the CAGE asks: Have you ever felt you should cut down on your drinking?”[3r, 7a, 9] Apart from the establishments these documents, it is commonly known that the alcohol dependence alcoholic people genuinely try every available alcohol tapering down techniques or strategies to cut-down or reduce their alcohol consumption but all these techniques strategies or the treatments end up in total failures to reduce limit or moderate their alcohol consumption! Therefore it is preposterous to say that the alcoholic would not like to adopt this ZAD practice because they would not like this alcohol tapering down strategy! The history has proven that Alcohol dependence people will generally accept any plausible alcohol tapering down strategies (this should include the ZAD therapy/practice, if it is give as an alternative to their total abstinence option and included in their prevention treatment programs) as long as it proves that it can infallibly reduce their alcohol consumption to a given safe levels thereby subsequently eliminate and completely cure the alcoholism!

Now let me take up one more important point in this connection! It is very well known that the establishments in their advanced alcoholism treatments programs fully support and promote some opioid antagonists pharmacotherapy drugs, mainly the Naltrexone (REVIA tm) [9a] the Campral (acamprosate) [20s] and now the “Topiramate” [20r], which is said to reduce the psychoactive drug desire or craving, thus enable the people to reduce or completely stop their alcohol consumption. No-where in here the establishment’s people argue against these opioid antagonist medication, saying alcoholics don’t like or accept them because these drugs reduces or prevents them from enjoying the pharmacological pleasures of the drug getting high! They indeed eagerly endorse this drug therapy in their alcohol dependence prevention and treatment programs! However the alcoholics mainly give it up mostly because (apart from its side effect and high cost) majority of the times this pharmacotherapy treatment does not enables them remain within the safe levels of consumption or prevent them from falling into the excessive alcohol consumption while they drink! It is when every such treatment, strategy of moderate drinking fails to reduce or cut-down their alcohol consumption the alcoholics said to opt for total abstinence! Now the ZAD practice provides a simple, safe, inexpensive and a better natural alternative to all those opioid antagonist drugs! In fact ZAD practice and its therapy is far superior to the Naltrexone, Acamprosate, Topiramate or any of those pharmacotherapy and other Behavioral Therapies (including the controlled drinking interventions[20q]) used in the prevention and treatment of alcoholism in every respect; in the sense the ZAD therapy/practice is infallible, simple, safe, natural, inexpensive and above all is pleasurable!

By the way, some people may argue if the drink “satiety” desire involved (cause)in the alcohol drinking and its dependence syndrome (alcoholism) then why majority of the people are able to control their drinking without resorting to drink satiety? The short answer to this is also a question first! If the drug desire (pharmacological effect, high, reinforcement etc.) is involved (cause) in the peoples alcohol use and its dependence syndrome (alcoholism) then why majority of the alcohol users able to control their alcohol use without resorting to the total abstinence? So, the answer for both is; it may be due to some biological, genetic or some sort of psychological, social, behavioral or whatever (drink satiety desire?) may be the theoretical reason! However, the most important matter in here for us is; mainly going for (or finding out) a irrefutable or the “fail-safe” practical solution when the alcohol dependence problem arise! It is at this critical juncture arises the need of the “total abstinence,” which if followed infallibly prevents and eliminates the alcohol dependence. (whatever may be its theoretical cause). It is this what really matters and the same applies to the ZAD therapy/practice model.

The principal point that I am making in the above first of all is; despite all these years of the establishment’s colossal research projects they have not yet come to agree on any certain conclusion that what really causes alcoholism! The majority claims it is caused a malevolent disease ( biological, genetic, opioid etc. deficiency etc.) but their opponents (minority) claims it is caused by some what like “maladapted behavior”[19i] (psychological, social, behavioral etc. disorders) However, the greatest tragedy in both of them is so far they could not find any “cure” for the alcohol dependence syndrome (alcoholism) except the only recovery option “Total Abstinence” which they both accept! Same way keeping all its causes aside we primarily claim to provide a complete cure indeed, for the alcohol dependence syndrome (alcoholism) by our ZAD therapy/practice model and the fact of the matter is that which if followed is as infallible, invincible, impregnable as the total abstinence therapy/practice!

Fundamental Difference Between The ZAD And Establishments
Moderate, Safe Drinking Levels Principles

Here, first of all I must clarify that, there is no controlled or moderate drinking limits for the alcohol dependent people in the establishments doctrines! All of them are strictly reminded (directed) to remain total abstinent. However for the rest of the alcohol drinkers in general and for the problem drinkers in particular they formulate some basic safe (low-risk) drinking levels or limits in their standard alcohol drinking doctrines [3b,3ca, 7a,7b, 8o, 10h…] under the banner of ‘how to reduce or cut-down your drinking’, in which finally the establishments narrow-minded psychoactive drug desire bigoted promulgations comes out very clear! Horribly enough, the standard alcohol drink percentage measures presented (stipulated) in all those doctrines professed by their Professionals, Scholars, Experts, Specialist under the banner of the moderate (controlled) or “safe (low-risk) drinking levels” (limits) in a sense is NOT SAFE or “low-risk” at all! Especially for those vulnerable segment of alcohol drinkers, such standard alcohol drinks with its limited or deficient drink (substance) quantities can potentially trigger the biological impulse, instinct, appetite (thirst, taste and the stomach) voluptuous satiety desire! Therefore, these segment of people in the population due to their natural drinking “predisposition”, (young adults with the powerful, voluptuous appetite, ethnic, genetic, cultural, psychosocial environmental etc., backgrounds) even though usually having all the intentions and desires to control their “drinking” nevertheless become unsuccessful or fail in their attempt of controlling their drinking if they choose the establishments such moderate, safe, low-risk standard alcoholic drinks and fall into drinking excessive, binging, boozing! To whom the establishments latter classify or categorize as alcohol dependents or alcoholics!

One important clarification that I would like to make in here about the establishments “moderate”, “safe” “low-risk” levels of standard alcohol drinks number of counts is that; we certainly agree that making the alcohol drinkers extremely aware of the “dangers” involved of their drinking beyond these limited number of standard alcohol drinks, would warn them to be prudent, mindful and not to indulge into drinking more! This could help depending upon their “resolve” after the consumption of their prescribed standard alcohol drink! However our fundamental opposition to it is, its underlying drug desire bigoted, injudicious formulations, of “a standard alcohol drink” which inexpediently disregard the drink satiety (thirst, taste, stomach) aspect involved in the peoples alcoholic beverage drinking and its dependence! The overall notion of drink quantity or amounts stipulated in their moderate, safe, low-risk levels, standard alcohol drink number counts simply does not consider (care) to provide the overall drink satiety especially for those vulnerable, voluptuous young alcoholic beverage drinkers and the other predisposed segment of drinkers. If they start drinking the establishments prescribed such ‘standard’ alcohol drinks which critically lacks the sufficiently enough drink quantity so callously fail to provide them enough of the overall drink satiety that will certainly impair or loosen their control over their alcohol consumption, it could also work as the ‘priming dose’ and dangerously carry them into the excessive alcohol consumptions and potentially lead them into the fatal alcohol dependence its syndrome or alcoholism!

The fundamental difference between the establishments and the ZAD controlled moderate or safe drinking levels or limits [3b, 3ca, 3cb, 8o, 7a,..9, 10h, 25, 26, 27 etc.] principle guidelines is that; the establishment ‘how to reduce or cut-down your drinking’ formulas strictly restrict the peoples alcohol drinking to some safe (low-risk) drinking limits NUBER counts of the Standard alcohol drinks! It strongly insists that the people should firmly exercise strict self-control over their drinking and remain within this stipulated safe drinking levels and to strictly follow abstinence some number of days in a week! If they are not able to follow these alcohol safe (low-risk) drinking rule, limits or guidelines, then they strictly warn them to stop drinking and to opt for total abstinence! On the other hand the ZAD practice entirely ‘do away with’ the establishments systems of measuring standard alcohol drink safe (low-risk) drinking limit (level) NUMBER counts resolves or the self-control and to follow the abstinence days in the week! It never ask people to control limit their drinking to such and such standard number counts in a day and to strictly to remain alcohol drink abstinence in two days in a week etc! It requires no self-control over the amount of the alcoholic beverage consumption! For the ZAD binging drinking don’t necessarily mean excessive, harmful, hazardous alcohol consumption! Under the ZAD simple and safe alcohol consumption principle guidelines people are absolutely free to consume any numbers, counts or amount of the alcoholic beverage as much as they want, every day in a week or years together if they want! Its only condition is to; ‘always drink sufficiently enough lower alcohol percentage at the consumption levels! To be precise, the ZAD practice has only one principle safe, low-risk, drinking formula guideline, strategy or condition that is: “ALWAYS MIX (OR SIMULTANEOUSLY CONSUME) ‘PROGRESSIVELY ADEQUATE PROPORTION’ OF APPETIZING NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES WITH THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE. AND DRINK IT STOMACHFUL, FOR SATIETY”! IN OTHER WORDS, NEVER TO DRINK HIGH ALCOHOL PERCENTAGE BEVERAGES (ESPEDIALLY WHILE IN THE ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE) INSTEAD ALWAYS DRINK SUFFICIENTLY ENOUGH LOWER ALCOHOL PERCENTAGE BUT HIGHLY DELICIOUS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES THAT PRIMARILY PROVIDES THE FULL DRINK SATIETY!

TOTAL ABSTINENCE VS. THE ZAD PRACTICE

We fully acknowledge that the “total abstinence” dictum on its one side, is infinitely beneficial to the people and for the society as a whole, whoever willingly embrace to it! However, on its other side it could turn terribly wrong or ugly and cause immense damage, loss, suffering (mayhem) and bring tragic death upon people especially when for one reason or the other the alcohol dependent people not willing or fail to adhere to the total abstinence and fall into the tragic “relapse”! Moreover, the total abstinence dictum is essentially build on the alcoholism dogma which profess that people with the alcohol dependence (alcoholics) cannot cut-down, reduce or control their drinking , “alcoholism is “not curable” (chronic) disease”, so for the alcoholics “total abstinence” is the only recovery possible! Therefore, first of all; the ZAD therapy/practice proves such establishment’s alcoholism decrees or dogmas fundamentally fallacious or wrong! Secondly, they make the alcoholics inferior, brainwashing or subjecting them into thinking that they have this incurable chronic disease or condition that makes them incapable of controlling their alcohol consumption and therefore have to make an essential sacrifice to find their salvation or recovery in Total Abstinence! Such indoctrinations can be very harmful especially to those who for some reason fail and fall into that tragic relapse; (“Abstinence Violation Effect”) especially when a simple, safe, inexpensive and pleasurable alternative, a complete cure solution for alcoholism is made available by the ZAD practice[19c]. The Total Abstinence in itself can become an obsessive-compulsive AA [20e] addiction or passion! Analogically, the total abstinence dictating models can be compared to “autocratic” rule (which could have its own benefits) whereas the ZAD drinking model can be compared with “democracy”! What we really argue in here is; by giving equal priorities, or choices of total abstinence as well as to the ZAD therapy/practice in the prevention and treatment of alcohol use disorders and its dependence, the ‘Establishments’ can basically solve or eliminate most of the alcohol dependence, alcoholism problems.

Analogy Between Total Abstinence and the ZAD Practice Also As An Alternative

“Total Abstinence”(TA) is the exclusive and ultimate vision and goal that implicitly or explicitly expressed in almost every ‘Establishments’ “dependence” prevention and treatment endowments! It can be seen in their document, publications, or promulgations [1,2,..3..6...7...8...9...10...18...etc.] doctrines as a whole! Surprisingly however, despite having some fundamental difference with the TA,’ the ZAD practice has some deep analogical rapport with the total abstinence practice! The basic analogy between the ZAD practice and the Total Abstinence practice is that, as we all know, when people don’t drink alcohol (not imbibe it in any form) as the people always do while observing or practicing total abstinence, then they will never fall into this alcohol “dependence” at all! This is the Irrefutable, Infallible and impregnable primary physical fact, truth or the evidence of the “Total Abstinence” practice. In reality it is simply impossible for any one to refute, disprove or deny this. Owning to this concrete fact (probably also due to its apparent simplicity) the entire establishment of the alcoholism prevention and treatment totally hang on to this most ancient solution! No one who has followed the total abstinence so far has been proven to be having the alcohol dependence! Same way like the TA practice we argue that if people follow the ZAD practice (which is also a form of the ancient alcoholism prevention strategy) and drink the very low (sufficiently enough) alcohol content delicious beverages, then behind a certain physical/ biological limit or barrier they will not be able to drink any more (substantially) of it in a given period of time! ‘Satiation’ is the natures own effective way to successfully prevent the impaired control (loss of control) and to totally dampen, subdue and remove the craving (Total Abstinence prevents drinking but it can not dispels the craving like the ZAD practice do.) for a safe enough longer period of time! This indeed is the concrete infallible, unassailable, impregnable principle fact, truth or the evidence behind the ZAD practice. So analogically in principle, much like the TA practice, no one can question the basic physical/biological ability of the ZAD practice to prevent and remove the alcohol impaired control and the alcohol dependence!

ZAD Not Against The TA Neither Complacent With It

The most important point that I would like to make clear once again at this juncture is that; we do not oppose the Total Abstinence (TA) practice. In fact we fully support it for those people who willingly embrace that option and succeed in it. Most of all we fully agree that the total abstinence is the simplest way or approach in the prevention and the treatment of any of the substance “dependence”! However our main opposition is: to the “Establishments” dogmatic indoctrination of ‘total abstinence,’ as the “only” recovery option or solution for the alcohol dependence and their zealous claim that there is no cure so far available for alcohol dependence syndrome, alcoholism! Nonetheless, the ZAD practice has some basic thing in common with the TA practice. First of all the ZAD could successfully lead and end up into the Total Abstinence! As a matter of fact we suggest that the ZAD practice therapy is the best approach or prudent way to any alcohol dependents to naturally get alcohol detoxification and gradually attain the abstinence instead of suddenly stopping or quitting the alcohol drink! Most importantly in this way one could successfully avoid the dreadful “relapses” that happens in the TA, most of the times! Nevertheless we are not complacent with it either! In fact our main criticism against the establishments TA in the first place is based upon the establishments fallacious, preposterous dogmas and it essentially keeps, sustains and carries forward the “incurable” state or condition (seed of the disease?) of alcoholism inside the alcoholic people dormant that in effect totally prevent them from getting cured out of it for life long! This will always intimidate to wreck havoc in their life threatening if ever they take a few drops or a gulf of alcohol drink that will trigger their alcoholism that burst out into the full blown alcoholic disease, which could cause immense suffering and many times the tragic death in their and others life! Secondly, under the ZAD perspective the TA unjustly deprives those “alcohol dependence” diagnosed [1, 2] people, the life long pleasure, delight, enjoyment of the delicious drink of alcoholic beverages and also the health benefits of moderate safe drinking without them falling into the alcohol dependence!

The ZAD Practice and the TA Practice are Fundamentally Different

Alcoholics Curewell first of all seriously contends that the ZAD practice is far better and superior to all the establishments Total Abstinence oriented prevention treatment therapies! It is indeed most natural far safer and could be more desirable compared to those medications such as the alcohol aversion drug disulfiram (Antabuse®) or the opioid antagonist drug Naltrexone, Acamprosate and the other pharmacotherapy treatments[8d], including the psychosocial or the behavioral therapies (CBT, MET, and 12 steps) all put together, basically for the simple reason; none of these can completely cure (by their own candid admission) the alcohol dependence (its syndrome or alcoholism); while the ZAD practice could completely cure it (enable ‘safe , low-risk drinking), which is the fundamental difference between the ZAD and the TA practice in the first place! Secondly; none of the establishments above mentioned Total Abstinence targeted medications therapies could provide a clear cut guaranty to the people that these therapies totally prevent them from drinking alcohol and thus enable them to remain total abstinent. (unless the availability of the alcohol drink has been totally prohibited or blocked or the drug Disulfirum has been administered as they do in the ‘inpatient’ alcohol detoxification hospital treatment facilities.) On the other hand we promise every single alcohol dependents those who follow the ZAD therapy/practice will infallibly come out of their alcohol dependence completely! Especially we guaranty any one with ‘A1100$ Alcoholics Reward’ if they prove that they (or their alcoholics) have not been able to come out of their alcohol dependence by following this ZAD practice![19c]. The third major difference or advantage of the ZAD therapy/practice over the TA is that the former is more “desirable”, pleasurable and enjoyable than the latter (If the TA any desirable at all!). Therefore, there is a great possibility of this innovative ZAD practice succeeding over the TA practice! The ZAD therapy practice could save billions of dollars of cost burden to the nations and prevent millions of humans suffering including the tragic death caused by alcoholism, even if the establishments employ it even in a small scale in their alcohol dependence (syndrome, alcoholism) prevention treatment therapy endowments!

The most important point to know in here is; it is not about whether the alcohol dependence people will succeed* in following the ZAD practice! As we all know the facts about the Total Abstinence models to which the establishment fully subscribe and put most of their effort and money; yet, majority of the alcohol dependence people fail to follow the TA in majority of the times! The crucial point in here is that; even though the establishments TA therapy treatment programs succeeds only in minority of the cases nevertheless it accounts for saving hundreds of billions of dollars of the cost burden to the nations and prevent the sufferings and the death of millions of people. Likewise the ZAD practice, which comes as an alternative to TA practice at least could also achieve more or less the same results, if not more especially in the cases where the TA models miserably fails!

Yet we caution our readers not to basically compare the ZAD model with the TA model as its direct opposite! Unlike the ZAD model, the TA model requires some other pharmacotherapy or the behavioral, psychological (spiritual) therapy to accomplish it. However the ZAD therapy/practice is in it self is a therapy. As a matter of fact, the Controlled Drinking (CD) models in general [20q, 39]can be compared with the TA models as its direct opposite! The TA models have many pharmacological, psychological, behavioral and other therapies (Disulpirum, CBT, MET, TSF etc.) to accomplish the TA practice, likewise the CD models have therapies like BSCT, MOCE, GSC, MM, HR and now the ZAD therapy/practice is just a newly added therapy into the CD arsenal! Yet the ZAD practice/model fundamentally different from all the previous CD therapies as it is infallible (among other things) compared to them!

Since five years I am desperately trying to bring this new ZAD findings and all its information to the establishments authorities attention, notifying (one can see its evidence in our website, section) that the ZAD method can play such a vital role in the prevention and treatment of the alcohol dependence. However, despite my relentless effort in putting forward these irrefutable, infallible, and impregnable ZAD primary physical facts, or evidence before the concerned establishment authorities, so far they have not expressed any of their opinions on these primary ZAD physical facts at all! Probably because if they admit to its concrete physical fact, then they are compelled to conduct the study research, experiments which somewhat they are not ready to accept! As a result we believe millions of people continually being deprived of the benefits of this ZAD therapy/practice due to the establishments drug desire bigoted alcoholism dogmas! This is the main reason why we indict the establishments promoting the Biggest World Health Blunder, responsible for the alcoholism mess and its mayhem in our world today! Another main reason why they are not interested with the ZAD practice is perhaps; it is so simple and the guy who proposing it so incredible (under-qualified!) and his biological drinking need satiety treatment, cure for alcoholism, they have never imagined before!

Will be continued in the next post Section 4
…………………………..