Congratulations Professor Of Psychiatry John Strang. A Truly Profitable Result !

BUT FOR WHOM . . . . ?

AND ONLY IF YOU REALLY DID

INTEND A 39% INCREASE IN DRUG

POISONING DEATHS, WHEN YOU

SET OUT TO KILL OFF THE LAST

GOVERNMENT'S SUPERB 2010

DRUGS STRATEGY WITH YOUR 

PAYMENT by RESULTS “PILOTS” !

LASTING RELAXED ABSTINENCE is the RESULT for which the 2010 government's fabulous Drug Strategy would have given PAYMENT to successful addiction recovery providers if Strang had not managed to get himself put in charge of that strategy's test “piloting” programme, with the intention of seeing it fail.

“Payment by Results” essentially means that the provider of residential addiction recovery services receives up-front remuneration ONLY for an addict's 3 months of bed, board and toiletries, and NOTHING for treatment or training until the passage of time over 3, 6, 9 and 12 months has proved by medical examinations that that addict has been free of addictive substance usage for the relevant period under test.

Since the moment in 2011 when Strang persuaded the then government to let him start a four year “pilot” to test the viability of residential recovery of drug addicts to lasting abstinence - on a “Payment by Results” basis - not only have the number of U.K. addicts rocketed, but the latest 2015 report from the Office For National Statistics also announces a 39% increase in fatal drug poisoning, based on “cause of death” reports on certificates from doctors' across England and Wales.

But even these appallingly bad results are being called into question by regular observers of the drug addiction scene in Britain.

The first reason is because, over the years, it has become very apparent that iatrogenic deaths (i.e. deaths caused by the medical profession) are often under-reported to a marked degree for rather obvious reasons. No physician likes to admit on paper that the medication he or she (or one of his or her practice partners) was prescribing for the patient - is what killed that patient. So the disorder for which they were being prescribed their benzos, opioid pain-killers or other drugs, is naturally most often assigned as “cause of death”, rather than usage of the drugs themselves.

A second reason is the division in politicians' minds which has been cleverly orchestrated by the psycho-pharm fraternity between “addictive ILLICIT drugs” and equally or sometimes more “addictive (and / or hypnotic) LEGAL drugs”.

i.e. The psycho-pharm community have made it appear O.K. to be addicted daily and for life to pharmaceutical drugs, but a similar addiction becomes a serious problem which needs desperate and expensive measures IF, AS and WHEN the substance involved happens to be criminally produced or criminally obtained.

And the desperate and expensive measures the psycho-pharms have persuaded the Government to adopt are: TO TAKE THE ADDICTS OFF THEIR ILLICIT DRUGS AND TO PUT THEM INSTEAD ON TO LEGAL DRUGS PAID FOR BY OUR TAXPAYERS AND PROFITABLY SUPPLIED BY THE PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES !

In other words, the psycho-pharm answer to drug addiction, instead of being “CURE IT” - is “LEGALISE ALL ADDICTION” by letting “us” supply each addict with a free supply – paid for by U.K. taxpayers – at our usual profit !

So today, in the age bracket from 16 to 59 the U.K. and Wales together have just over ONE MILLION addicts on a range of illicit drugs including amphetamines, cannabis, cocaine and heroin, etc., some 200,000 legal O.S.T. addicts on legal methadone and / or buprenorphine, and 2.4 MILLION addicts on legal benzodiazepines plus uncountable other old people on addictive opioid painkillers, and school children on behavioural management drugs such as Ritalin and Prozac, etc.

Assuming that the painkiller addicts can have NON-OPIOID painkillers prescribed for them instead, and because more and more parents are learning to say “NO” to A.D.H.D. psychiatric labels for their kids, this still leaves us with at least 2.6 MILLION N.H.S. patients consuming 7.4 MILLION additive drug doses EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THE YEAR – and usually for life.

And, according to the Government's National Audit Office and University statistics, this costs the N.H.S. (i.e. the U.K. Taxpayers) £11.028 BILLION PER YEAR – EVERY YEAR – for an average of 30 years per addict.

Over that same period, for only £967 MILLION A YEAR (less than 1/10th of all current departmental annual “drug spending”), every single U.K. addict of every type – illicit & legal – can be put through a residential addiction recovery course on a “Payment by Results” basis (proven over 50 years at 98 charitable training centres and prison units in 49 countries) with a success rate of better than 69%.

But what was the result of Professor John Strang's four year “piloting” of Payment by Results at eight very carefully selected rehabilitation centres ?

From his interim report, we know that, instead of test piloting - as one might well have expected - with a selection of eight carefully separated DIFFERENT types of programmes, he chose only two – based mainly on Opioid Substitution Therapy, but which was also occasionally combined with some elements of the Narcotics Anonymous and Cocaine Anonymous “12 Steps” programmes.

Strang has for decades been a long term campaigner for Opioid Substitution Therapy which was quickly and optimistically cobbled together over half a century ago to try and “manage” addiction rather than to cure it.

He therefore knew before he started his “pilots” that it is totally impossible to bring an addict to long-term abstinence by feeding him daily doses of ANY addictive drug, because he knew beyond doubt that one cannot cure a drug addiction with doses of addictive drugs – as it is a contradiction, not only in terms, but also in science and technology.

But he also wanted to “buy time” for his pharmaceutical O.S.T. suppliers as he also knew before he started that if one cannot bring an addict to lasting abstinence THEN one can never deliver the abstinent result for which “Payment by Results” grants payment.

As the senior U.K. Psychiatric Professor promoting pharmaceutical prescribing above all other forms of treatment, addiction rehabilitation and residential recovery, he knew that his PbR “pilots” had to convince Ministers of the following:

1) THAT SUBSTANCE ADDICTION IS “BASICALLY” INCURABLE, and, that when this LIE is accepted, it can therefore hopefully follow:

2) That “Payment by Results” for the residential recovery of substance addicts to the natural state of lasting relaxed abstinence – should be abandoned as (in his opinion) “basically unworkable”, and that government attention should be focussed on “a more rigorous implementation” of the Opioid Substitution Therapy which he, and other psychiatrists and pharmacologists claim to have “proven over years !”, and,

 

3) That, whilst he acknowledges that addicion habt "management" by O.S.T methadone, buprenorphine, naloxone, suboxone and other drugs might not be the perfect answer (because they can never support a Payment by Results system of rewarding effective rehabilitation providers) – “they are the best we currently have Rt. Honourable Ministerial Ladies and Gentlemen”, and we must therefore “obviously drop the understandably preferred “Payment by Results” initiative in favour of continuing prescribed O.S.T.

No one seems sure that Tony Blair should be blamed for the Iraq conflict and if David Cameron should be blamed for the dysfunctional state of Libya today.  But, if we are allocating blame solely to individuals, there is no doubt that psychiatric Professor Sir John Strang is the man most responsible for the level of drug addiction and the mounting number of drug poisoning deaths in the United Kingdom today.

Strang did not include the international 50 year proven Narconon® Programme as one of his four year “pilots”, because he well knew, from Narconon's worldwide statistics, that its residential self-help addiction recovery training programme actually helps addicts to lasting relaxed abstinence in approximately 13 weeks, and so is a valid system for the delivery of addiction recovery on a Payment by Results basis – something he also knew NOT ONE OF HIS PET PHARMACEUTICAL DRUG PRESCRIPTION TREATMENTS COULD EVER ATTAIN.

So to allow Narconon to even be mentioned as a possible viable method of curing substance addiction is, for Strang, a “shot-in-his-foot” action AGAINST psychiatric prescribing and pharmaceutical drug sales.

Instead, across all forms of media and the world wide web, deliberate, totally undeserved, scurrilous and untruthful attacks are daily launched against Narconon and its Founder, in an attempt to slow down its escalating success everywhere – a success based on results and increasing government support in more and more countries.

Let's hope that Mrs May, with her sagacious & penetrating view of affairs in general, will see through the black propaganda directed against Narconon and its Founder -  expressly to keep influential politicians from talking to its executives and staff, and thus learning the truth about recovery from addiction.

This deliberate denial of face to face communication with Narconon is continuously perpetrated in every way possible, because the adoption by the U.K. Government of the Narconon Programme would, by virue of its considerable success, result in a truly massive loss of turnover, bonuses, fees, profits and dividends for psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies.  

(And incidentally also result in a similar massive saving for the National Health Service and U.K. Taxpayers.)

If you desire further information or to discuss the above, you may like to phone the writer on (01342) 810151 or 811099 after 11.00am and before 9.00pm on any weekday.

S.A.F.E. Is A Not-For-Profit Community Support Group Formed in 1975.

___________________________________________________________________

The Professor's Actions Speak Louder Than His Words.

FROM THE “U.K. DRUG POLICY COMMISSION” WEBSITE:

PROFESSOR JOHN STRANG: (Former Member of the Commission)

* John Strang is the Director of the National Addiction Centre (Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London) where he leads the multidisciplinary research activities including treatment studies, investigations of non-treatment samples, studies of overdose risk and analyses of public policy.

* He is also Clinical Director of the Drug, Alcohol & Smoking Cessation Services of the London & Maudsley NHS Trust and a member of the EMCDDA Scientific Committee, specifically responsible for methodological issues.

* He has worked in the addictions field for 25 years, in statutory and non-statutory settings, as trainee and trainer, as clinician as well as researcher, and in policy formation as well as practitioner capacity.

* In his capacity as Consultant Advisor to the Department of Health, he chaired the Working Group which prepared the “Orange Guidelines” published in 1999 by the UK Departments of Health, and chaired the NTA / DH Working Group (2002 / 2003) which prepared guidelines for the recommended new specialist modality for future injectable heroin and methadone prescribing in the UK. [i.e. prescribed addictive drug usage.]

(End of the UKDPC Biography)

Strang is acknowledged by others as also a tireless worker in the pharmaceutical marketing field, and as a leading authority consulted by Government in respect of research, drug addiction policy & prescribing.

For 20 years, he has posed as, and also been wrongly assumed by many to be, THE U.K. authority on addiction, and recently continued (in the running of his failed Payment by Results “Pilots”) to strongly and exclusively promote the prescribing of useless, failed and addictive medical substances as “treatment” to “rehabilitate” addicts.

But, the carefully hidden truth is that HE ACTUALLY IS the U.K. authority on the CREATION (not the cure) OF LIFELONG ADDICTION of millions of U.K. N.H.S. patients and thousands of illicit recreational drug users.

Such pushing of addictive drugs to impossibly “treat” addictive drug use is why his methods, whilst selling psychiatric services and pharmaceutical products IN DAILY HIGH VOLUME, claim a less than 3% success rate in actually bringing addicts to abstinence – coincidentally the same rate as natural quitting with ageing !

Whilst around the world, some 98 self help recovery training centres (inc. prison units) in 49 countries have for 50 years brought 55 to 69+% of addicts to lasting relaxed abstinence, Strang’s Opioid Substitution Therapies DO NOT and CANNOT ever actually cure, because their intention is to “manage” continuing addiction on a basis which creates profitable daily sales of pharmaceutical drug products to MILLIONS of addicts - ALL PAID FOR BY U.K. TAXPAYERS !

IN SPITE OF THE ABOVE BIOGRAPHY OF IMPORTANT SOUNDING APPOINTMENTS, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT JOHN STRANG, HIS PSYCHIATRIC METHODS OR HIS MEDICATIONS HAVE EVER DIRECTLY CURED ANY ADDICTIVE SUBSTANCE USER OF CONTINUING ADDICTIVE USAGE.  AND THIS IS BECAUSE THAT IS NOT HIS GOAL.

As indicated repeatedly (by Jim Dobbin, MP, former Chairman of the All Party Group on Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction, and just as often by Barry Haslam, a long-term sufferer from John Strang's methods and medication, and never denied by Professor C. Heather Ashton, Britain's great practical campaigner against involuntary addiction) John Strang's main goal is NOT the curing of addiction to illegal or legal drugs, but is the promotion of prescription drugs of an addictive and hypnotic nature to the hugely profitable benefit of the pharmaceutical industry which Strang serves far more than he serves our Government or our peoples.

AND NOW, OF ALL THINGS, WE HEAR THAT 10, DOWNING STREET PROPOSED STRANG FOR A KNIGHTHOOD IN THE MOST RECENT BIRTHDAY HONOURS LIST ! ! !

If our recently retired Prime Minister, for whom I have always had the greatest respect, personally and freely chose to honour the psychiatric professor who, nearly single-handedly, created more U.K. drug addicts than Roger Howard, DrugScope, the UKDPC, the NTA, the ACMD and Mike Trace put together - then David Cameron is regrettably headed for a similar miserable post P.M. reputation to that now enjoyed by Tony Blair as reward for his mistakes.

The Strang award is listed as being, amongst other doubtful achievements: “FOR SERVICES TO ADDICTIONS”.

But that only makes sense if David Cameron wanted an increasingly addicted population, which I cannot believe.

So then it raises the question of: “What did Psychiatric Professor John Stanley Strang actually DO FOR David Cameron ?”, and here again, my faith in David leads me to believe that he was seriously misled by some psychiatric or pharmaceutical biased or paid adviser amongst his senior staff members.

And if that is the case, then it is essential that psychiatrically and pharmaceutically biased or bought officials or other advisers in a position to influence the Prime Minister be kept well away from 10, Downing Street, because Theresa May's own straightforward character deserves honest advice and information upon which to base her vital decisions.

S.A.F.E. is a not-for-profit community support group formed in 1975

___________________________________________________________________________________

Some of Number 10's Current Most Awkward Spending Choices:

CONTINUE POINTLESS METHADONE,

OR

 

COMMIT TO HINKLEY NOW ALSO

POINT-LESS NUCLEAR POWER

OR

SAVE £BILLIONS BY ADOPTING A SAFER

ALTERNATIVE FOR BOTH.

At first sight, two sets of unrelated expenditure, except that they are both unnecessarily massively funded by the U.K. Taxpayer.

If estimates are right, and it IS going to cost only as little as £18+BILLION to build a new nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset, how does consideration of this massive expenditure and long term commitment stack up against the even more massive and long term commitment of £8.46 BILLION the U.K. Government's National Audit Office reports we spend EACH & EVERY YEAR across various State Departments - on maintaining 180,000 U.K. N.H.S. prescription addicts on methadone and other Opioid Substitution so-called “Therapies”.

A so-called “treatment” system which “manages” but never cures a heroin user of addiction – a user who will live for an average of 40 years at an annual overall cost of over £47,000 per legal methadone addict – all at U.K. Taxpayer expense, and approaching nearly £2 MILLION POUNDS for each and every one of those 180,000 methadone prescribed lifetimes ! (i.e. £338.4 BILLION over the next 40 years !)

This costly and ineffective “addict management” process might just be endured if there was no alternative, but for 50 years in 49 countries, 55 to 69+% of addicts have been curing themselves with a self-help residential addiction recovery training programme at 98 Centres (inc. prison units) for a ONCE ONLY fee of £29,000 to £39,000. But this programme is constantly black-balled out of existence by psycho-pharmaceutical vested interests who want their daily supplying of profitable Opioid Substitution “Therapy” (such as methadone and buprenorphine) to continue for ever.

On the power generation side. with locally installed windmills and domestic solar panels, heat pumps and thermo-dynamic panels, etc., etc., all increasingly proving themselves as viable non-carbon and non-nuclear energy sources, the new British Cabinet are right to be taking the time for an up-to-date review of energy policies.

Not least because LOCAL DOMESTIC energy production has advanced in leaps and bounds since Hinkley “C” was first mooted 20 years ago, so that:

1) the providing of thousands of now proven smaller locally located energy producing installations in our homes would spread employment benefits ACROSS THE COUNTRY, all based on local U.K. investors and equipment production rather than on French, Chinese or other input, and,

2) instead of waiting one or two more decades for a new nuclear plant to start delivering its energy at guaranteed exorbitant prices, with terrifyingly massive Chernobyl type security and waste disposal problems - an expansion of heat pump and thermo-dynamic panel provision could start next year, and these systems don't even rely on the sun shining or the wind blowing in order to deliver 24/7 every week of the year, day and night, winter and summer alike !

N.B. Increased widespread employment opportunities are what we would also need for recently rescued former drug addicts seeking to enter a productive life in their local community to the benefit of themselves, their families and the whole British economy.

S.A.F.E. Is A Not-For-Profit Community Support Group Formed In 1975.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Self-Help Addiction Recovery Training

 

LEARNING TO CURE

 

YOURSELF OF

 

DRINK & DRUG

 

ADDICTION.

BASED ON 50 YEARS OF INTERNATIONAL SUCCESS.

As you may well have noticed, you can't live somebody else's life for them, and equally, nobody else can live your life for you.

So that, whether we like it or not, life is a do-it-for-yourself activity.

This means that becoming addicted to drink or drugs is also mainly a do-it-for-yourself activity AND ALSO that escaping from addiction is something you must do-for-yourself, provided you know how to go about it.

A self-help residential programme of addiction recovery training for lasting relaxed abstinence is vastly different from other addiction rehab systems because, instead of offering “treatment”, it “TRAINS” addicts in HOW TO CURE THEMSELVES.

And it is the many differences in a self-help training programme which make all the difference to the results which such programmes obtain first time through in from 55 to 69+% of cases.

The FIRST Difference: between a self-help training programme and other forms of rehabilitation is found in such programme's view of the individual addict who is regarded as an “addiction victim” and designated as a “STUDENT” rather than as a “patient”, a “client”, a “bum”, a “criminal”, a misuser, an abuser or a “service user”.

An “addicted patient” for psychiatrists and pharmaceutical producers is a client with an addictive demand who should be “treated” by doing something “TO” him or her in order to have that addict as a consumer of substitute addictive medication for as long as U.K., taxpayers via the NHS, will go on paying for prescribed supplies of drugs such as methadone and Subutex, etc.

The definition of a “criminal drug user” varies from country to country and from time to time, but the intention and effect of the “criminal” label is to punish what any particular jurisdiction currently regards as a crime – which in practice across the world can mean anything from being given a caution or being sentenced to a fine, imprisonment, a whip lashing or even execution !

And interestingly, the above “criminal” view of addiction is usually concerned only with smuggled, stolen, illegal and designer drugs, and so does not include the vast majority of addictive substances such as licensed ALCOHOL and prescribed MEDICAL drugs – each of which are vastly bigger problems than smuggled, stolen, illegal and designer drugs.

The defining of an addict as a “student” recognises four things:

a) That 70 to 75% of all drink and drug addicts who have been using for more than 3 weeks, 3 months, 3 years or 30 years desperately want to quit, and although they have thus tried and failed on numerous occasions (often daily) to do so, they nevertheless have no lack of willingness to stop. Their problem is simply and actually “finding out HOW to stop”.

b) That – (because life is obviously and inescapably a “do-it-for-yourself” activity) – addiction is NOT just about a chemical substance but is a condition permitted by the individual's lack of a real understanding of life, mainly brought about by misinformation & lies from vested commercial interests in the massive alcohol and medical supply businesses, as well as from criminal sources.

 

c) That an addict is no longer in total charge of his or her life and so wishes to again take control, and,

d) That, to again take control of his or her life, an addict needs training in self-help addiction recovery techniques, with which they can concurrently procure lasting relaxed abstinence for themselves, and thus thereafter be able to easily apply what they have learned - for life.

 

So the first vital difference is that a self-help programme does not “treat” drug addicts, nor does it transfer addicts from one addictive substance to another as in so called Opioid Substitution Therapy where addicts are moved from illegal heroin to legally prescribed but more addictive methadone or Subutex, thus basically ensuring they remain as prescription drug addicts for life.

Self-help instead TRAINS THEM to cure themselves !

GIVE A MAN A FISH, AND YOU FEED HIM FOR A DAY.

BUT, TEACH HIM HOW TO FISH, AND YOU FEED HIM FOR LIFE.

This is the difference between treatment in most rehabs and training in self-help addiction recovery.

Give a heroin addict methadone and you satisfy his habit for that one day. But teach him HOW to take control of and get rid of his habit, and you give him the gift of recovery of the natural state of relaxed abstinence into which he was born, and which he can then maintain.

Which brings us to self-help's very different recognition of “WHY” addiction occurs.

SECOND Difference: Psychiatrists, psychologists, politicians, social workers and police, etc., assign a large variety of reasons as to why an individual becomes an addict. They ignore completely the fact that the UK's largest group of addicts (over 2 million) are NHS patients prescribed into involuntary addiction by the medical profession, and instead blame “peer pressure”, wanting a “thrill” or a “high”, irresponsibility, lawlessness, recklessness, criminal inclination, misuse and numerous other “possible” causes.

But for centuries medicine, alcohol and drugs have been used to solve problems, and that is still the reason for their usage today. For certain heart problems we take aspirin, for a headache or toothache we take paracetamol or some other pain killer, for the problem of travel sickness we take another tablet, for the problem of shock or family loss we are prescribed Valium or another “benzo” drug, and to solve shyness or anxiety many take spirit alcohol or another chemical stimulant, etc.

And it is the misinformation and even downright lies which are used to make the guy (who has what he “considers” a problem) use an addictive drug in order to solve it.

In fact, Mary Wakefield the deputy editor of the “Spectator” once commented that the pharmaceutical industry has grown into possibly the largest industry in the world by manufacturing “A Pill for Every Ill”.

“Drugs solve problems” - or so we are told from an early age, not only by psycho-pharms, but also by Grandma, Dad & Mum, our local doctor and even the local pub barman.

It is therefore not at all surprising to find self-help students finding and recognising for themselves that they decided or agreed to take an addictive substance IN ORDER TO SOLVE WHAT THEY THEMSELVES (and usually them alone) CONSIDERED A PROBLEM OF SURVIVAL IN THEIR DAILY LIFE OR ENVIRONMENT.

In other words: DRUGS ARE A SOLUTION – NOT A PROBLEM.

But strangely enough, most “treatment” forms of addiction rehabilitation, EXCEPT self-help, basically consider drugs as “a problem” which doctors believe can only be solved with some form of medication.

A solution is simply an action adopted by individuals to handle some problematic situation in their life.

Those readers with the benefit of self-help training will know that a solution comes under the heading of “a self-determined change”. i.e. It is not something forced on the individual.

So the second difference is that self-help training recognises that the initial cause of addiction is not a search for thrills, or highs, or misuse, or abuse, but that the cause is the desire of an individual to solve what he or she considers a worrying personal problem by employing a solution which he or she is wrongly advised or led to believe involves using an addictive substance.

So they are a VICTIM of both the addictive drug and the misleading information given them in order to persuade them to try a few doses.

In other words, they make a disastrous decision to use an addictive substance based on a lie or on some misunderstanding, and become addicted because it is addictive drugs themselves which are what impose and enforce addiction on the user.

This is obvious, because NO-ONE CAN EVER BECOME ADDICTED TO A DRUG WHICH ONE NEVER EVER USES !

THIRD Difference: From the above we see that the goals of self-help training are:

1) knowledge of recovery techniques,

2) resurrection of personal responsibility, and

3) the regaining of relaxed control of one's life - leading to self-determination

    of one's life.

But for other addiction rehabilitation systems the goal is often to be able to struggle through each difficult day - one day at a time - without taking the drug to which they are addicted, just by courageously fighting their craving.

Whilst this can eventually bravely lead some to increasingly relaxed abstinence, because other rehab systems make no attempt to remove the individual's store of drug toxins and metabolites lodged in the fatty tissues of the body, there is always the possibility of re-stimulation from the breakdown of such deposits, their release into the blood stream, a consequent re-triggering of desire for the drug, and a return to addiction. Release of such addictive deposits is triggered by increases in body temperature usually caused by physical work, exercise and / or weather hot enough to lead to sweating.

Which brings us to an examination of the technicalities and nomenclature involved in recovery from addiction.

FOURTH Difference: When self-help training says: “detoxification”, we mean flushing from the addict's body ALL drug residues, metabolites, hormones and other toxic deposits built up by addiction and life in general.

When a psychiatrist, doctor or pharmacists says: “detoxification”, they misleadingly mean the stopping of the regular taking of any further doses of a particular addictive substance. (What self-help regards as: “withdrawal”.)

 

So, when an addict is given medication to stop him taking heroin, that is the psycho-pharm idea of a “heroin detox”. The addict is no longer adding to the store of toxic heroin metabolites in his body, but nevertheless he still retains whatever damagingly poisonous store of them he has already built-up.

However, IF in order to stop the heroin intake he is prescribed methadone or Subutex, etc., (which is normally the case), IN ADDITION TO his existing store of heroin metabolites, he then starts to build up a further store of methadone metabolites or Subutex metabolites, etc., any or all of which (including the original heroin) – by engaging in hard physical work, energetic sport or just warmer than normal summer weather conditions – can by sweating be released from the body's fatty tissues, re-enter the bloodstream and lead to a return to a former state of addictive desire.

“Recovered” and “rehabilitated” are other words which for self-help trainees have different meanings from those which other addiction rehabilitation systems assign them.

For us: “recovered” means returning to the natural state of lasting relaxed abstinence into which 99% of the population is born. To fully understand why this is different – try ringing a local rehab and asking what THEY mean by “recovered” ! Or ring your local MP and ask what he or she (mis)understands by “recovered”.

Self-help training goals (and achievements) are seen by many as sky-high when compared to the goals of most other rehabs.

FURTHER Differences:

Because of the fundamentally basic differences between the self-help “TRAINING” approach and psycho-pharm “TREATMENT” approaches the reasons why self-help is totally different becomes apparent in every aspect of an addict's journey through his or her programme.

Self-help training “withdrawal” procedures are DRUG-FREE. Many other withdrawals are not. In LASTING RELAXED ABSTINENCE terms self-help programme results run at a 55 to 69+% success rate, normally reached in 11 to 13 weeks.

 

Methadone achieves only 3% abstinence after decades of prescribed usage. Twelve Steps does better at 20 to 30% achieved in 9 to 36 months or longer.

And even the cost of delivering self-help training residential recovery is different from other residential rehabilitation operations, because of our willingness and ability to offer the choice of “Payment by Results” as an alternative to the usual full up-front fee for attendance on course rather than for an agreed result.

Depending on local property and wages costs, which can vary from one part of the UK to another, the current self-help programme fee for the newest Centre in the expensive south of London counties is £29,000 on a Payment by Results basis. But other residential rehabs cost from £12,000 to £39,000 or more, for treatment periods far shorter than self-helps 12 weeks and with full payment due irrespective of the result.

And of course results of 20 to 30% abstinence are nowhere near as valuable as the self-help training results of 55 to 69+% of lasting relaxed abstinence and recovery – first time through the programme.

There is also another important difference.

Psycho-pharm treatment prescribing considers ALL addicts as nearly impossible to cure, as a result of which they say they should ALL be put on Subutex or methadone Opioid Substitution Therapy (OST).

On the other hand, self-help training centres know from 50 years experience of training addicts to cure themselves, that 70 to 75% of addicts who have been using for months or years WANT TO QUIT, have tried at numerous times (often daily) to do so and yet, having again failed, STILL WANT TO STOP.

THEIR PROBLEM IS THEREFORE NOT WILLINGNESS,

IT IS LACK OF RECOVERY KNOW-HOW.

The other 25 to 30% are resistive cases who for the three well known main reasons have no desire or intention whatsoever to quit. These are the horses you can lead to water, but who will not drink. So, with no willingness, how can they ever be trained ?

The other 70 to 75% of addicts need, want AND DESERVE Self-Help Training Technology. And the rest of the society also needs them to have it, because addicts are the 5% of the UK population which impinge most heavily on the lives of the other 95%.

It is therefore encouraging to observe that internationally more citizens and a majority of policy-makers are now recognising the direction in which addiction inevitably takes our families and society, and have seen that the most important first step is to REDUCE THE DEMAND which can arise from within a family from vested interest and criminal advice leading to poor parenting.

Westminster, Brussels, Edinburgh, Belfast, Dublin, Cardiff and other parliaments are now increasingly aware that amongst the problems which drug and alcohol addicts cause are the following:

* Addicts and drunks cause most accidents at work.

* Addicts mug and rob old people.

* Addicts and drunks cause most road accidents.

* Addicts sell drugs to children (and others).

* Addict increase the numbers of prostitutes and toy boys

    in our towns and cities.

* Addicts disrupt our schools, the education of our children

    and the life of our communities.

* Addicts bankrupt businesses and destroy jobs.

* Addicts break into and burgle people's homes.

* Addicts spread HIV, AIDS and hepatitis.

* Addicts and drunks commit the most crimes,

and,

ADDICTS ARE UNDOUBTEDLY THE REAL CURRENT THREAT TO

OUR LIVES AND TO EVERYBODY'S FUTURE.

AND THIS INCLUDES ADDICTS ON ILLEGAL, LICENSED

AND PRESCRIBED DRUGS.

This is because their addiction controls them, and

THIS AFFECTS EVERYBODY – EVERYONE'S FAMILY, EVERYONE'S

INCOME, EVERY JOB, EVERYONE'S HEALTH AND EVERY ONE'S

HOME – INCLUDING YOURS.

The above is about addicts in general and the increasing damage which they do to all walks of society and to our whole economy.

They are also the reasons why (although we might believe it is not our fault or our problem) WE MUST ALL DO OUR UTMOST TO POSITIVELY HELP ADDICTS reduce their numbers and their dependency on those of us who do not use drugs.

Because we have the truth staring us in the face, we can be sure it is no use relying on government alone to solve the substance addiction problems which are daily causing anxiety, crime, violence, terrorism, damage, accidents, injuries, disease and even death.

Every one of us is needed to solve this problem because, in the final analysis, it is OUR problem, even if our family and children have so far managed to avoid actual drug usage and the direct results of addictive behaviour.

SO, IT IS SINCERELY HOPED YOU AND YOURS WILL NEVER HAVE

TO DIRECTLY FACE ADDICTION, AND HOPED ALSO THAT YOU WILL RECOGNISE THAT SUCH AN ESCAPE WILL MAINLY COME ABOUT BECAUSE YOU HELPED STAMP OUT ADDICTIVE DRUGS

BY HELPING VICTIMS OF ADDICTION TO RECOVER !

-------------------------------------------------------

For further information, you may wish to contact:

Elisabeth M. Reichert, Field Staff Member

for Narconon United Kingdom,

e-mail elisabeth.3@btinternet.com, or phone 0775 263 0319.

who can arrange for you to inspect (without obligation),

and talk to the staff and students at,

the NARCONON UNITED KINGDOM Training Centre,

at HEATHFIELD, East Sussex, TN21 0DJ.

The True Status of Any Addict

An Addict Is a Victim of Some Drug

Supplier's Greed,

A Victim of the Lies Which Every

Supplier Tells

  

In An Effort to Satisfy that Greed,

 and Thus a Victim of Their Chemically

 Addictive & Hypnotic Drug Supplies.

Surveys over the last 50 years show that there is still a majority of Judges, Magistrates, Ministers, Politicians, Officials, Press and other Media Editors as well as the General Public, who have been well and truly conned into believing that addicts are stupid, criminal and to blame for their condition, when the truth is that addicts are victims of addiction, inflicted on them deliberately and sometimes incidentally – for criminal as well as commercial profit reasons.

We are falsely told by psychiatrists that addicts have “addictive personalities”, are told by alcoholic drinks distributors & pharmaceutical companies that addicts “abuse” alcohol and addicts “misuse” drugs.

Quite ludicrous, evil and misleading when you recognise that it is totally impossible to become addicted to a drug you never ever take, because, with the exception of alcohol, sugar and tobacco, it is the taking of two or more doses of any addictive drug which CREATES addiction !

It is because of their totally incorrect and jaundiced view of addicts that government policies over the last 68 years have mainly been directed against the addicts rather than against the alcoholic drink distributors, the addictive pharmaceutical drug producers & prescribers and the local criminal suppliers of illegal products, all of whose businesses make addiction possible and even certain.

All of these suppliers deliberately use the addictive nature of their products to create a lengthening list of consumers who must irresistibly demand daily or multi-daily doses in order to avoid the devastating cold-turkey aches, pains, vomiting, diarrhoea, anxiety & feelings of impotence which their attempts to “quit using” inevitably inflict upon them.

Adding to the usual commercial goals of the producers, governments see consumers and suppliers of alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceutical products as vast and vital tax-revenue sources, which governments will do anything to avoid losing – even preferring to see up to 5% of our population hopelessly and expensively addicted (as some 3 million currently are) to the ridiculous point where handling and compensating for those addicts likely costs more than the amounts collected in taxes.

Proof that Parliament is committed to taxing & punishing consumers rather than the suppliers who instigate addiction, lies in the fact that they are about to impose a new tax on addictive sugar, to offset the rising incidence and costs of treating body weight and obesity under the N.H.S.

If Westminster wants to cut sugar consumption, it should legislate against its production and limit its usage in a whole range of products and outlets.

As it should also do with alcohol and pharmaceutical products, where the legal production, distribution and consumption volumes MASSIVELY exceed the distribution and usage of ALL criminal drug supplies. (i.e. addictive pharmaceutical drug supply is 6 times greater than addictive criminal drug supply.)

For example, the U.K. has 2.4 MILLION N.H.S. funded “patients” living in their own homes or in care-homes who are involuntarily addicted to legally but excessively prescribed pharmaceutical drugs, which they take three or four times a day, at an overall cost of at least some £1,095 per patient per year. A total of at least £2.63 BILLION per annum.

But if they are “patients”- WHAT IS THE MEDICAL CONDITION FOR WHICH THEY ARE STILL BEING TREATED ? When they started “treatment” three months, one year or ten years ago, their problem might have been worry, grief, anxiety, depression, stomach-ache, tooth-ache, head-ache or pain from a healing injury, etc., etc.

But in 99 out of a hundred cases those conditions will have cleared up in a few weeks, and what they are now suffering from is not an illness or disorder, but merely “cold turkey” addiction withdrawal symptoms, when they go too long without their continuously addicting daily or 3 times a day prescribed benzodiazepines or opioid based pain-killing drugs, etc.

In addition, 180,000 former heroin addicts now on daily N.H.S. supplied

O.S.T. methadone, are reported by the Government's own National Audit Office to each cost the Exchequer over £47,000 per annum. Currently a total ANNUAL COST of £84.6 BILLION every year for up to 40 years.

On the other hand, it costs a ONCE ONLY fee of £29,000 to £39,000 per addict to bring 69+% of all methadone prescription users to lasting relaxed abstinence (on a guaranteed Payment by Results financing basis) using a residential addiction recovery training service already proven and available for 50 years, and today delivered at nearly one hundred Centres (including prison units) in 49 countries.

But in the U.K. we don't use this half century proven self-help addiction recovery training programme because our legal, political and media establishment have swallowed hook, line and sinker the totally false idea, put out for 65 years by drug producers and their psychiatric marketing arm, that the psycho-pharms are the only experts, that addiction is essentially incurable and that those who claim they can deliver recovery from addiction are ridiculous charlatans, and should not even be listened to or talked with.

So ever since the formation of the National Health Service in 1948, there has never been a year when any form of drug addiction – legal or criminal – actually fell, because the N.H.S. has no idea how to cure drug addiction, and proves this by either commissioning Service Providers to try and “rehabilitate” addicts, OR feeds addictive pharmaceutical drugs to addicts in order to stop them using criminally supplied drugs, a legal addiction for which the NHS also has no cure !

“Restricting Supply”, “Reducing Demand”, “Building Recovery Locally” and “Supporting People to Live A Drug Free Life” are the main over-arching features of the 2010 Drug Strategy, which is still current today. 

To progress in THE RESTRICTION OF SUPPLY, it is essential, that we stop wasting our resources by committing them to fighting the so-called “War on Drugs” outside Great Britain.

The main reason that our local police do not have sufficient resources to handle our local drug-pushers is because we commit to expensively taking actions in Colombia, Afghanistan, Mexico and numerous other distant foreign locations, when the pipeline of supplies which stretches from those countries to our own pubs, school gates and clubs, etc., can be more easily, effectively and inexpensively CUT by taking zero tolerance action much closer to the users being supplied by that pipeline.

By initially in a sense mainly ignoring the foreign supply pipeline up to the local pusher and concentrating on home production suppliers, millions of £pounds plus millions of police, customs & excise hours can be saved and concentrated on the last link in the supply chain. i.e. THE LOCAL PUSHER / DEALER who has to reveal him or her self in order to do business with the addicted user (who is most sensibly, accurately and usefully regarded as the ADDICTION VICTIM who should be rescued rather than criminalised). 

The police target should be anyone producing or growing addictive supplies in the U.K. and anyone who is found in possession of more than one dose or more than a personal supply of one or more drugs.

Possession of a single dose of just one drug usually equals an addicted user who needs rescuing rather than criminalising.

Two or more doses, carried by the individual, or found in his or her car or at home, etc., most often equals “pusher” - the last link in the supply line – and he or she should be hit with every punishment available to the police, the prosecutors and the courts on a Zero Tolerance basis.

It doesn't matter if the supply line is one, ten, one hundred, one thousand or ten thousand miles long, the last link is to be found in every U.K. city, town or village, close to the user AND CLOSE TO A LOCAL BRITISH BOBBY.

Furthermore, that last link can be identified by the user (the pusher's client), and if that user knows the police are not after him or her, it is not going to be all that difficult to get the users' co-operation, especially, if instead of being criminalised, the user is offered anonymity and effective treatment for their addiction – which 70 to 75% want desperately to quit.

Even pushers can be offered an opportunity to be cured if it is clear that he or she is selling drugs solely to support their own habit.

But only if they are prepared to give up their own immediate supplier.

Working back down the supply line from the user towards the initial supplier works effectively only when the user is protected and rescued, and when government resources are diverted away from overseas spending and concentrated on local U.K. situations. 

To progress in REDUCING DEMAND we must stop making the mistake of interpreting demand reduction as the beefing up of “prevention and avoidance” which, although important is aimed at stopping the development of future demand and not at reducing current demand.

ONLY CURRENT ADDICTS DEMAND DRUG SUPPLIES !

Non-users quite obviously don't !

So the only way we can possibly Reduce Demand is by bringing addicts to lasting relaxed abstinence, and for 50 years this has provably been best achieved by withdrawing addicts and training them in self help addiction recovery techniques.

It is not achieved by prescribing expensive addictive substitute pharmaceutical drugs to addicts. It is nowhere near achieved often enough by either residential or local daily 12 Steps groups, although local groups must not be ignored when affordability is a major barrier.

Fifty years of success and expansion confirm that self-help addiction recovery training on a three month residential basis leads to lasting relaxed abstinence in 55 to 69+% of cases.

To cure the approximately half a million U.K. addicts currently on criminal drugs and / or on O.S.T., and using the other two over-arching features of the 2010 Drug Strategy, (SUPPORTING PEOPLE TO LIVE A DRUG FREE LIFE, and BUILDING RECOVERY LOCALLY) is going to take 30 years if, over the next 4 years, we establish 100 addiction recovery training centres (nearly one per major local authority), each with accommodation for 25 students, plus 15 staff and executives.

The present total spending by “all government departments” involved in one or more aspect of addiction spending, reported by the government's National Audit office, is £8.46 BILLION EACH AND EVERY YEAR.

With 100 centres each with 25 or more student beds, turning out some 10,000 recovered addicts per year, the total cost with every centre in full operation would be only some £340 MILLION per annum – which is a ONCE ONLY cost of 4% of the current ANNUAL government reported inter-departmental spending on O.S.T. methadone alone !

But, for up to 40 years, our addiction affected Departmental Ministers between them go on spending EVERY YEAR, many many times the amount they would have to pay ONCE ONLY in order to cure all current U.K. drug addicts !

Even on the above basis it would take 30 years to cure the existing national group of illegal addicts, and of course in that period there would doubtless be new addicts getting hooked every month.

Why don't Ministers know this and do something about it. Are they mad, can't do simple arithmetic or are they themselves taking drugs ?

NO. None of these. Their problem is that they go on listening to and believing the downright lies which government psychiatrists and pharmaceutical company marketing departments tell them, in order to hold on to the millions of profitable “multi-daily-dose” addicts the Government are unwittingly paying the psycho-pharms to keep addicted !

If you really want to know why the National Health Service is financially crippled, you have only to look at the regularly increasing amounts of money being spent on addictive medication which cures nothing, AND SO NEVER REDUCES THE NUMBER OF “PATIENTS”.

And this is NOT because involuntary addiction is incurable. It is because the pharmaceutical companies who recommend small-dose step down gradual withdrawal from addictive prescription drugs, JUST DO NOT MANUFACTURE THE RANGES OF SMALL DOSAGE UNITS needed to apply this viable withdrawal procedure.

Instead of saying that they refuse to cut the throats of their own marketing men and their own profitability by helping to cure addiction, they say "small doses are too difficult and too expensive to manufacture and hold in stock."  Especially, they will also say, “because they are not in demand”.

So what is required is legislation to ensure that for every addictive and hypnotic drug a manufacturer makes, he must also produce dose units which are 2.5%, 5%, 10%, 20% and 50% of the size the manufacturer recommends as a “normal” dose.

This will stop 70 year old patients who are trying to withdraw from their addiction, from needing to cut tablets into 2, 4, 8, 16 and even 32 pieces, and also trying to perform similarly impossible daily exercises with the contents of powder or liquid capsules.

With 2.4 Million NHS patients involuntarily addicted to prescription drugs, there is a need for an organised approach to “Addiction Withdrawal Advisory Services and Help (AWASH),” and an organisation of that name, at the same address as the “Society for an Addiction Free Europe (SAFE)”, is able to recommend a plan which can be funded entirely from the savings to be made by reducing the massive over-spending on unnecessary prescription drugs.

Most forms of drug addiction and a majority of drug addicts are curable on a three month self-help residential addiction recovery training programme, costing ONCE ONLY some 60 to 80% of what the U.K. Government EVERY YEAR spends on OST prescribed methadone “therapy”, as a result of which the providers of such programmes have for 50 years been attacked, reviled and abused by criminal and pharmaceutical drug producers in an effort to avoid having their customers taken away by letting someone cure them !

But around the world those self-help recovery training providers go on expanding every year – solely because they deliver what they promise.

To know more, phone +44 (0)1342 810151 or 811099 any weekday between 11.00am and 9.00pm, or e-mail keneck@btinternet.com.