A Controlled Study of Lysergide in the Treatment of Alcoholism. I. The Effects on Drinking Behavior

To investigate the effects of lysergide treatment on the drinking behavior of alcoholics, 30 alcoholics (2 women), aged between 26 and 50 years (average 40), all with a long history of excessive drinking and previous unsuccessful attempts at therapy, were randomly selected from the inpatient facility of the Toronto clinic of the Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Research Foundation of Ontario. They were divided into 3 groups: 10 received a single 800-µg dose of lysergide before an investigative and therapeutic interview, 10 received 60 mg of ephedrine sulfate before a similar interview and 10 received no drug. All patients were given psychiatric interviews, psychological tests and a drinking behavior questionnaire prior to the study and again in a follow-up 6 months later. All patients took part in the general treatment program of the clinic, which included group, physio- and occupational therapy and individual casework and psychiatric interviews. The average length of stay after the drug session was 1 week. Assignment to groups was made so that the patients, the therapists and the follow-up workers were unaware which drug was given; however, the therapist giving the drugs guessed correctly in 19 out of 20 cases. Thus, this was a modified single-blind study. All three groups showed an improvement at the 6-month follow-up, but with no significant intergroup differences. The gain in abstinence time in the lysergide, ephedrine and control groups, respectively, was 34%, 32% and 20%; the number of times patients had one or more drinks pretreatment was 14, 23 and 19, and post-treatment, 5, 11 and 7; the number of times patients got drunk pretreatment was 6, 3 and 11, and post-treatment, 3, 3 and 3. No significant intergroup differences were found in the following alcoholic symptoms: morning drinking, blackouts, drinking on job, or preoccupation with alcohol. It is concluded that lysergide, as used in the present study, failed as an effective adjunct to psychotherapy, in contrast to the claims made in previous studies. It is suggested that the discrepancy with the earlier reports can be explained by the controlled nature of the present study and possibly by such factors as the personnel and facilities employed or details of procedure.