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.

The REAL Reason For Prescribing METHADONE.

Confirmation of Conspiracy From Another Source:

The Prescribed Methadone User:

Confirmation of what? Confirmation that psycho-pharmacological ‘therapies’ based on habit management or “maintenance dosing” reduce neither addiction nor the crime which daily accompanies drug usage in order to finance it.

Confirmation also that current so-called anti-drug strategies are clearly orientated towards making more turnover and more profit for the drug companies instead of being aimed at curing drug addiction.

In August 1999, The BIG ISSUE in the North Trust issued a 48 page A4 report, written by an M.P. and entitled “DRUGS at the Sharp End”, detailing his investigation into the results of psycho-pharmacological treatment – most specifically methadone maintenance – and this was accompanied by the following single page Executive Summary:

THE BIG ISSUE IN THE NORTH

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM THE DRUGS RESEARCH REPORT.

KEY FINDINGS FROM THE REPORT:

With regard to drug users interviewed:

* A third of the drug users had been in contact with services for more than five years. 12% had been in service for over 10 years.

* A third felt they had been attending drug services for too long. These were split equally between those who felt services were making little effort to help them become drug free and those who felt they weren’t ready to stop using.

* Of those on prescribed methadone, 80% also used street drugs on a weekly basis, particularly heroin. 44% of those on prescribed methadone also used heroin on a daily basis.

* Although a quarter of users said they received counselling, twice as many said it was important.

* The services that users said they received were mainly medical interventions such as methadone prescriptions.

* 17% of those on prescribed methadone are injecting heroin at least occasionally and are not using needle exchanges.

* Only 11% were working, over half (61%) lived in rented accommodation, more than half (54%) had lost regular contact with their children.

* Breakdown in relationships, crime and an inability to gain employment were all prominent features of their lives and were directly related to their drug usage.

* Although half of users wanted more community based drug services, only a third said that G.Ps were the best place to receive drug services.

In addition, service providers felt that services were not adequately meeting the level of demand. In particular, they felt that stimulant users (e.g. crack, cocaine and amphetamines) were not well catered for.

________________________________________________________________

WHAT A TOTAL DENIAL, REJECTION AND CONDEMNATION OF VESTED INTEREST CLAIMS FOR THE SO-CALLED ‘VALUE’ AND EFFICACY OF PSYCHO-PHARMACEUTICAL TREATMENT !

- PARTICULARLY METHADONE -

Let’s take a closer look at those claims and the results which are revealed by the highly respected BIG ISSUE in the North's report.

Methadone was recommended to government by psychiatric and pharmaceutical advisers as definitely procuring abstinence for life via “a methadone reduction programme” - but 55% of those interviewed had been on methadone for from 1 to 5 years, and 45% had been on methadone for from over 5 to more than 10 years !

Methadone was recommended to government by psycho-pharms as stopping heroin usage, but it does so in only 20% of cases and 44% use heroin on a daily basis !

Methadone was recommended to government by psycho-pharms as so-called “harm reduction” - but 17% continue to inject heroin without benefit of needle exchange ! In addition the methadone itself causes a wide range of unhealthy and uncomfortable side-effects and in most cases shortens the user’s life.

Methadone was recommended to government ny psycho-pharms as permitting opiate users to live a “basically normal life” in full time employment – but 89% are not working and so are receiving Unemployment Benefit, Housing Benefit, Income Support, Family Allowances, extra National Health Benefits and other support, all paid for by the U.K. taxpayer.

Methadone was recommended to government by psycho-pharm advisers as helping to restore family relationships - but breakdown in relationships are a prominent feature of their lives, and 54% had lost regular contact with their children.

Methadone was recommended to government by psycho-pharms as reducing crime by stopping heroin usage - but with 44% on daily heroin and 80% on weekly heroin (plus other illicit drugs), the necessity for acquisitive crime to support procurement of such illegal supplies is virtually as high as ever, and many police feel that daily methadone supplies are regarded by users merely as a welcome free opiate supply which gives them more time to plan better crimes with less likelihood of their being caught !

Normally at this point one could expect to think: “Need we say more”, and could assume that government would look at these stark facts and do something about them. But they don’t hear and they don’t see, because for years vested interests have been covering decision-makers’ eyes and ears with fancy PR statements and lying lobbying.

But our government is not blind and neither is it deaf nor stupid nor evil. It is merely deliberately and totally misinformed by those which tradition says they should trust.

It is therefore these blindfolds, ear-plugs and deliberately misleading words which the Society for an Addiction Free Europe (SAFE) strives to remove.

When the above totally independent investigation and report is examined from a societal cost and economic damage viewpoint, we find there are some 180,000 daily prescribed U.K. methadone addicts, and observers estimate the various methadone doses to be costing the NHS some £4.00 to £9,00 a day for each addict depending on the dose size.

However, more accurately, the Government's own National Audit Office reports that the cost of the drug alone is only the thin end of government expenditure, and that because of the involvement of psychiatrists, other doctors, hospitals, A&E departments, dispensing centres, police, courts, their officers and officials, and the whole of the benefits system, the average cost to the exchequer of each and every prescribed methadone addict is well in excess of £47,000 per annum.

Unfortunately, as these costs are spread across the budgets of several different government Departments, they are not apparent, as they get hidden amongst similar expenditures on other citizens for other reasons.

This gives departmental Ministers and Officials good excuses to claim or pretend that addiction is “not our problem”, and to refer any concerned electors to the Department of Health.

As a consequence, the average annual spending of £47,000 on each of the 180,000 currently prescribed methadone users costs our taxpayers £8.46 BILLION pounds a year, every year for an average of 40 years.

The only challenge to these figures has been made by the revered Centre for Drug Misuse Research, whose own in-depth investigations calculated average government spending per methadone addict to be closer to £59,000 per annum. The Government's former National Treatment Agency (effectively relaunched as Public Health England) agreed with the National Audit Office's figures in order to minimise that agency's culpability.

All this massive annual spending arises as a result of just two factors:

1) the swallowing by successive governments of psycho-pharm fraternity false claims that heroin addiction is incurable, coupled with,

2) the equally false set of claims (reinforced and spread around by massive black propaganda) that the one major organisation on Earth, which actually can and does cure drug addiction, is comprised of people who are even more weird than psychiatrists !

With 50 years experience at over 100 centres (including prison units) in 49 countries, self-help addiction recovery training expands every year, by helping 55 to 69+% to succeed in recovering from their addiction.

By recovery they mean returning to the natural state of non-criminal lasting relaxed abstinence into which 99% of the population is born.

And whilst (based on government statistics) each prescribed methadone addict will on average cost the U.K. Taxpayer £1,880,000 over the next 40 years, it costs only £29,000 to £39,000 ONCE ONLY to cure an addicted methadone or heroin user – which is an average lifetime saving per cured addict of ONE MILLION EIGHT HUNDRED AND FORTY SIX THOUSAND POUNDS PER ADDICT ! Even in the first year, this is an average saving of £13,000, and then an average saving of £47,000 for each year thereafter for an average of 40 years.

And – importantly - the above figures are for “cured addicts”, not just for “treatment”. Because self-help addiction recovery training is offered to groups of four addicts enrolled together at the same time by a Local Authority on a “Payment by Results” basis. i.e. if not still abstinent at the end of 12 months from commencement of their training programme, up to £25,000 of each individual's training fee will be waived.

In other words, whilst (according to the National Audit Office) a prescribed methadone addict costs the U.K. taxpayer at least £11,750 every 3 months, a prescribed methadone addict who (during his or her 13 week residential self-help addiction recovery training programme) fails to reach lasting abstinence, only costs the taxpayer £9,000 plus any family or housing benefits he or she may normally be in receipt of.

And that £9,000 feeds them, provides toiletries and houses them.

Even a child can see the benefit of such Payment by Results self-help addiction recovery training programmes, but psychiatric Professor John Strang preferred to kill off Payment by Results in favour of daily profitable methadone dosing for some 180,000+ prescribed methadone addicts every day for the next 40 years!

THAT'S THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT LEGAL OPIOID SUBSTITUTION (so-called) “THERAPY” BASED ON DAILY METHADONE DOSING !