Predictably, this thread has taken a turn away from the original question.
I wonder why?
Karen makes a number of statements:
"I try to be open-minded about LDN, to the extent that I have told various people who have been diagnosed with PPMS and SPMS about it - nothing ventured and all that. However, of those people who have subsequently tried it, none have stayed on it because they all had bad side effects that were not improved by changing the dose and/or persevering. Hardly something that has boosted my confidence in it 
I accept that plenty of people try it and find varying degrees of benefit, but it is NOT rare for LDN to be of no benefit or even to make things worse. It is a drug and we all react differently to drugs. To believe that a single drug can work for umpteen different conditions with only rare null or bad effects is naive and even potentially dangerous. "
David603 ignores the first sentence:
"‘’However, of those people who have subsequently tried it, none have stayed on it because they all had bad side effects that were not improved by changing the dose and/or persevering’’
‘’I accept that plenty of people try it and find varying degrees of benefit, but it is NOT rare for LDN to be of no benefit or even to make things worse’’
Before commenting can you please give me your evidence source for these two comments."
It should be clear to anyone with a basic understanding of the English language, that Karen’s statement referred to the people to whom she had referred in the ignored sentence. To expect Karen to give out information given to her personally is, to say the least, unrealistic.
As for the second point:
If anyone bothers to read the whole of this thread, they will come across a link provided by Darren27 to a part of another forum:
http://www.thisisms.com/forum/low-dose-naltrexone-f10
and will be able to see that there are indeed a substantial number of people who are in accord with Karen’s statement.
Meanwhile: David603 also writes:
“One post suggested 100,000 people take LDN do you disagree with that number, if so what is a more accurate number and what percentage of those people have you spoken to.”
There is no such post in this thread!
If the post came from another thread or from another forum, then please provide the link.
Of course, if there really are that many people in the UK taking LDN, that would put a value on the LDN industry of £18 million plus. Not exactly small potatoes, is it.
If the figure refers to the world at large, or maybe just to North America, it would be helpful to the OP to provide that information.
So, to give an answer to SUNSPIRITS, first you have to make your own decision about whether you really want to try LDN.
If yes, then you have to decide how to get it:
Ask your GP if you can have a script, and order it from that well known chemist in Scotland.
Go the other route and get your script and order it.
Yes, it would be cheaper if you could get it on the NHS - but it would not be free (unless you have an exemption).
I can say that I considered LDN. I was put off by the lack of scientific evidence, and by the fact that every NHS professional that I asked spoke against it. Despite this, if my RRMS turned into SPMS, then I would consider it again.
Geoff