![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 6 to 30 of 37. Go back in thread:
Posted by 3 Beer Effect on August 13, 2002, at 11:49:21
In reply to BENZOS ARE SAFER THAN ANTIDEPRESSANTS, posted by Hiba on August 13, 2002, at 4:17:50
The problem with Benzos is that they don't elevate your mood. I think that if Benzos worked more like Alcohol or possibly Chloral Hydrate (& the related but discontinued meds Triclofos & Chloral Betaine) they would be better. What I mean that Alcohol is a great disinhibitor & is mood-elevating at low doses (2 or less drinks) while Benzos are poor disinhibitors by comparison & lack mood-elevating effects, but 'dull' the mind, personality, & mood (induce apathy & often low-grade depression). I forgot much of the psychopharmacology of alcohol, which is quite complex (it acts on/increases GABA-A, 5HT3 Serotonin, Dopamine, Opoids, Adenosine, and decreases NDMA/glutamate), but most importantly, it releases the brain from its normally excessive inhibitory control/anxiety which usually results in stimulation/excitation/mood elevation/confidence-increase/disinhibition at low doses (2 drinks or less). I've read that after drinking 2 standard US sized drinks (12 oz beer etc), experiment test subjects could actually solve complex puzzles faster & more accurately than when sober, but of course, with the 3rd drink alcohol starts to become a depressant/dumb drug that which each successive drink turns you into something closer to a caveman/woman seeking instant gratification of biological drives/needs- a human "animal" with little to no rational thought.
I don't know if Chloral Hydrate works this same way, but it does metabolize to trichloroethanol, so I would guess that it would work similar to alcohol, & might work better than benzos if you got the dose just right, but no one prescribes it anymore so I guess i'll never find out. Its a shame that they stopped making Triclofos & Chloral Betaine because they work the same (metabolize to trichloroethanol) but don't have the main side effect of Chloral Hydrate= Nausea, stomach upset, terrible taste.
I don't know if Chloral Hydrate is very addictive or not. I have read that it is, but since it is so similar to Alcohol, I don't see why it would be since Alcohol is addictive to only 10% of those who drink it, & they tried (unsuccessfully) to wean Marilyn Monroe off Barbituates (Nembutal) by substituting (the safer) Chloral Hydrate, so I would guess that it is safer than Barbituates but more dangerous than Alcohol & Benzodiazepines, especially in overdose. I think like alcohol, it may have toxic effects on the liver at high/chronic long-term doses.
But, seizures caused by Benzodiazepine withdrawl are the #2 top reason for emergency room seizures in non-epileptics (slightly behind the #1 Cocaine which has faded quite rapidly in popularity over the last 10 years). Wellbutrin is #3 for seizures. So, although Benzos are one of the safer drugs in overdose, they are dangerous to withdrawl from rapidly or cold-turkey, especially when the person has been taking high doses. And the Benzo/Alcohol combo is supposed to be unpredictably dangerous & sometimes deadly.
This is all stuff i've read in books though. Has anyone here actually taken Chloral Hydrate at daytime, non-hypnotic doses, & if so does it work better than Benzodiazepines for anxiety or social phobia? How does Meprobomate/Miltown/Equanil compare?
I myself take the benzodiazepine Klonopin 4 mg/day with 40 mg/day Dextrostat (the only 'name-brand' dexedrine available in 10 mg tablets). So the combo I take is sort of like 2 drinks of alcohol in that the d-amphetamine is excitatory/disinhibitory/confidence enhancing while the benzo Klonopin, well, doesn't do much of anything except make me less jittery/nervous in social situations & seems to reduce any urge to drink alcohol.
But although this d-amphetamine/benzodiazepine combo is the best I have found for me personally (after disastrous trials with SSRIs, Remeron, Effexor XR) it is not a life-long answer because the brain always tries to maintain homeostasis, & stimulants like amphetamines/cocaine/methylphenidate or depressants like benzodiazepines/alcohol disrupt this homeostasis & tolerance develops as the brain's 'natural adjustment' to the effects of these 'medicines' which it perceives as negative/injurious "outside" ingested toxins. Dextrostat works as a great anti-depressant for about 5 hours after each dose, but then it wears off & you are depressed/lethargic/anhedonic again. The only way to prevent that is to take "stimulant holidays" once in awhile, but on those days getting out of bed is next to impossible. So to help alleviate depression I now take 100 mg of Solaray brand L-5-hydroxytryptophan at night which seems to work moderately well to increase Serotonin (& is not dependent on a rate-limited enzyme like l-tryptophan) & improve sleep, but without the side effects of SSRIs. Hopefully, they'll come out a non-toxic improved version of Wellbutrin SR some day that doesn't cause seizures or have possible hepatotoxic properties & I can then take that instead of Dextrostat. There is one in the GlaxoSK pipeline called GW353162 (NE/DA reuputake inhibitor) but it is in FDA Phase I trials so I guess there's a slim chance we might see it 5 to 10 years from now!
As far as antidepressants go, they are always missing any significant action on Dopamine which may be a partial cause of the "poop out" phenomenon & probably reduces their effectiveness. The SNRIs Duloxetine & Milnacipram might turn out to be improvements upon the SSRIs but they have very little to no action on Dopamine. An anti-depressant that acted on Serotonin, NE, & DA would probably be a very powerful medicine & have a high cure/depression improvement rate- Sibutramine/Meridia which isn't marketed as an anti-depressant but is an anti-obesity agent is believed to inhibit reuputake of 5-HT, NE, & possibly DA although it isn't known exactly how it works).
A great combination Anti-depressant & Anti-Anxiety/Social Phobia medication would be one than inhibits the reuputake of Serotonin (interest/trust in other people, outgoingness) AND Dopamine (confidence, optimism), but NOT Norepinephrine which is implicated in the most popular theories of Social Phobia & Anxiety. Zoloft (sertraline) looks like it has this property, but in reality it only inhibits the reuputake of Dopamine at doses greater than its max of 200 mg/day- a dose at which the serotonin receptor is already 95% "saturated" & would result in some major serotonin side effects.
A general (non-subtype selective) Dopamine-only reuputake inhibitor might make both a good energizing anti-depressant & an ADHD medicine. (Amineptine & another French anti-depressant called something like "medifoxine"? have this property but Amineptine has been banned by politicians for fear of possible abuse potential because of its dopamine enhancing properties, even though it was used in France as an effective anti-depressant for years without problems).
Any comments, suggestions, corrections, experiences with any of these medicines?
Thanks,
3 Beers.
Posted by Squiggles on August 13, 2002, at 11:58:01
In reply to I think benzos ADs are poor meds need improvem, posted by 3 Beer Effect on August 13, 2002, at 11:49:21
Please excuse me, i have been to busy to
read all these related messages carefully;
it was caught my eye was Chloral Hydrate -
do they actually still use that? I thought
it went out with Victorial literature - i have
also read that it is quite poisonous and
easy to o.d. on - where do you get this stuff?Squiggles
Posted by oracle on August 13, 2002, at 14:45:50
In reply to I think benzos ADs are poor meds need improvem, posted by 3 Beer Effect on August 13, 2002, at 11:49:21
don't know if Chloral Hydrate is very addictive or not.
Yes, very. Many OD'ed or killed themselves with
Chloral Hydrate. This does not stop us from deciding it is the cure for mental illness,
withheld by a gov. plot.
Posted by Squiggles on August 13, 2002, at 14:54:01
In reply to Re: I think benzos ADs are poor meds need improvem, posted by oracle on August 13, 2002, at 14:45:50
Chloral hydrate - looked it up - it
is a depressant like alcohol and some
opiates; therefore totally inappropriate
for curing depression, but good as a soporiphic;- funny, i am just reading a book where it
is mentioned during Victorian England -Squiggles
Posted by Ritch on August 13, 2002, at 23:03:51
In reply to I think benzos ADs are poor meds need improvem, posted by 3 Beer Effect on August 13, 2002, at 11:49:21
It is interesting that you have brought up sibutramine. It was supposed to be an Effexor "competitor" when it was first launched in clinical trials for depression. But, it didn't pan out well for depression, but was noticed that it had interesting weight loss properties (at least short term anyhow), hence the obesity indication. I wonder if anybody out there has been prescribed sibutramine (Meridia) "off-label" for depression or ADHD and had good results??
Mitch
Posted by Hiba on August 13, 2002, at 23:51:17
In reply to Re: I think benzos ADs are poor meds need improvem » 3 Beer Effect, posted by Squiggles on August 13, 2002, at 11:58:01
Dear Squiggles,
Don't ever try chloral hydrate, even for an experiment. It is a proven toxic substance like alcohol. Alcohol and substances which contain ethanol can cause irreversible damages.
I am not really advocating for any kind of chemical substances. But what I was trying to prove, all the kind of drugs have potential side effects. But some are comparatively less toxic than others. What I tried to question in my message is the practice of physicians to popularize antidepressants as safer than benzodiazepines, which actually doesn't make any sense.
See the side effect profile of ADs in PDR. And compare them to any benzodiazepine. You can understand the difference.
Antidepressants also induce tolerance, dependence, and severe withdrawal symptoms after the discontinuation. I can prove it from my own life experiences. A well known allegation physicians make against benzos is they only mask the problems instead of correcting the chemical imbalance. How should we believe this? We know what SSRIs do. They inhibit the reuptake of serotonin temporarily. Once the drug clears out of our system, this effects also wears off. That is why we have to dose the drug again and again to get the same effect. I there any antidepressant that has proven as a cure for depression? This is a challenge. Depression resolves naturally within six or nine months. That is why we are told to take them(ADs) six to nine months. (To ensure the natural remission). But after three or more episodes of depression, it is more likely to persist over time and a natural remission is more unlikely. That is why I have been told to keep on medicines for an indefinite period of time. If antidepressants were curing depression, why should I be forced to take it for the rest of my life?
Now use your common sense. What is the difference between ADs and Benzos? The only difference is one is indicated for depression, while other is for anxiety. That's all.
HIBA
Posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 7:33:34
In reply to Re: Say Never to Alcohol and Chloral hydrate, posted by Hiba on August 13, 2002, at 23:51:17
A lot of what you say makes sense; though i
am not sure that your theory about ADs and
depression is actually put in practice; it
may very well be the case the depression remits,
but i know of no dr. who once giving an AD does
not continue to do so for "prophylactic" reasons.Even with lithium (a class of its own) i was
a little shocked to read the booklet I ordered
from the Madison Institute of Medicine which
advises that once lithium is given, it can be later
taken away as many patients simply do not have
recurring episodes - whaaaaa!About benzos, as i said I hardly feel Klonopin,
but the Xanax should have been raised or removed
when tolerance was reached - and the constant
anxiety and panic resulting from that really
killed a normal life; i question the intitial need
for at least X as the Synthroid was too high and
that in itself is like speed - once lowered it
eliminiated anxiety, short sleep and panic - but
it was mostly the Xanax.I believe you about ADs because so many people
complain of their w/d intensity - i think the basisc
difference between severity has to be put in
persepective with time taken.Squiggles
Posted by Iago Camboa on August 14, 2002, at 8:35:37
In reply to Re: Say Never to Alcohol and Chloral hydrate, posted by Hiba on August 13, 2002, at 23:51:17
There was a guy who had depression. Almost everybody on this board knows by experience depression can be like hell on earth. The person I'm speaking about had indeed a very 'nasty' depression and felt in hell... Now his girlfriend (or his mother-in-law, I can't remember) told him about drugs called antidepressants and adviced him to try 'Bardil' (if you prefer put here the name of any effective antidepressant: it will do just as well in this most true and important story).
After a few weeks our friend's depression subsided and he felt like a new person. But alas, he commited the error of thinking he had completely healed. He stopped his 'Bardil' one beautiful day, 'cold turkey' and without ceremonies. A few days after he became depressed again (as was to be expected, from his imprudence...) and felt in hell again. Only when he described what happened to him and how he felt in a post on this board he didn't speak of "depression" this time ( perhaps better would be "aggravated depression") , rather he attributed the symptoms he felt to "'Bardil''s withdrawal". And everybody began to believe in the brand new 'syndrome'...I did't want to be provocative but for me benzos are unharmful meds, don't create any addiction nor any tolerance and don't have any withdrawal effects. I mean, those effects felt (to the contrary) have other causes (just see the above story) and are only misattributed to the benzos because it is the fashion. Not long ago every 'neuro-psychiatrical' disease was attributed (wrongly!) to the 'evil spirits' as the very words 'attack' and 'seizure' attest... Now the culprits are 'the benzoman' and 'the xanaxman'. Do what? I'd rather laugh to my own self, shut up in public and wait for the next fashion...
If you respond to this post I will not be able to respond back because I'm just leaving next Aug 16 early in the morning and will not have access to any computer during ten days. Sorry.
The best for everybody,
Iago
Posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 8:41:21
In reply to about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by Iago Camboa on August 14, 2002, at 8:35:37
You are well meaning Lago, and you write
well, but you're dead wrong about benzos.
Take a look a the "Merck Physician's Reference
Manual" and "Goodman and Gillman's: Pharmacological
Basis of Therapeutics" and look up barbituates and
benzodiazepines, withdrawal - these are medical
books which describe the symptom.Squiggles
Posted by hiba on August 14, 2002, at 11:54:54
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis) » Iago Camboa, posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 8:41:21
Dear Squiggles,
You seem to be benzophobic, I don't blame you. Perhaps the awful withdrawal symptoms might have made you so. But look unto the matters in a different point of view. Don't rely totally on books or what physicians write. Use your commonsense to judge. That's all I want to tell you. I don't argue, those books or writing are entirely wrong. But since we are having our own common sense to judge and justify, using it for a while will not cause any harm.
I can suggest you at least a couple of books on benzodiazepines, perhaps the most reliable ones. I will post the names soon
HIBA
Posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 12:15:10
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by hiba on August 14, 2002, at 11:54:54
Hi,
If you look at the the Benzo group, you
will see that I wrote the FAQ with David Woolfe;
i have read many books on them;
I am not benzophobic - I take Klonopin with
no problem and while I am on there is no problem.However, I would say the Xanax probably destroyed
at least 10 years of my life with constant panic
and anxiety - that was a tolerance problem.Again, take a look at
and search for my lette to the Minister of Health
for my story under CANADA.thanks for the good wishes,
Squiggles
Posted by Iago Camboa on August 14, 2002, at 14:43:05
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis) » Iago Camboa, posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 8:41:21
Hi Squiggles,
You are so very kind and your words so sweet to me that I almost feel compunctious and remorseful for having (maybe!) gone too far in denying the existence of any kind of 'benzo withdrawal syndrome' attributable to a benzo itself as opposed to 'a symptom of anxiety' rendered manifest and obvious by the premature (or outright contra-indicated and 'contra naturam') cutting out of a certain benzo in the wrong moment!! Perhaps (I just don't know for sure) I was too radical and if it is so I apologize it here for the exaggeration.
Now if you are naughty and call me Lago (instead of Iago (with an 'i')), I'm going to sell you to the bugaboo or to his comrade the bogyman, who are going to deliver you to the cousin of this latter, the pitiless hobgoblin!...
Yours truly,
Iago> You are well meaning Lago, and you write
> well, but you're dead wrong about benzos.
> Take a look a the "Merck Physician's Reference
> Manual" and "Goodman and Gillman's: Pharmacological
> Basis of Therapeutics" and look up barbituates and
> benzodiazepines, withdrawal - these are medical
> books which describe the symptom.
>
> Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 14:47:24
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis) » Squiggles, posted by Iago Camboa on August 14, 2002, at 14:43:05
Soright, Iago {:-)
Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 15, 2002, at 1:42:50
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by Squiggles on August 14, 2002, at 14:47:24
One, if not the most notorious anti-benzo sites on the internet and so full of half-truths, psudeo-science, and innuendo that it's laughable.
No doubt there are a few that have bad reactions to these drugs as many have to other drugs.
But this type of misinformation about bzds perpetuate the remaining stigma of taking these meds and scare potential candidates for bzd therapy by exaggerating risk by engaging in hyperbole of the highest order.
To place these medications in the same class as heroin and cocaine is simply flat-out irresponsible. To call them "addictive" by tying them in with illicit drugs is not only innaccurate but scaring off people with anxiety disorders that know nothing of the difference between "addiction" and medical dependence.
This is nothing but engagement in universalising for everyone else what has happened to a few unfortunate individuals...who were most likely misdiagnosed, misprescribed, or mismanaged...or as mentioned earlier, simply had a bad reaction to a drug.
Truly unfortunate for those few...but infinitely more unfortunate for those that are discouraged or downright misled into stopping bzds that are working or keeping them from starting them in the first place.
One can not extrapolate from a few bad reactions or poor oversight by a physician on to the entire population. One can not conclude that the medication is exclusively responsible in the ways that this site claims.
Truly insulting to the intelligence of the general public who for the most part need relief from chronic, life stullifying, miserable existences while in the throes of disabling anxiety disorders.
Dr. Heather Ashton is the darling of anti-benzoites since she is an addictionologist and sees everything through that one dimensional prism. Her articles are not her own studies but speculation on a few *selected* others (therefore all of the "perhaps", "tend to's", and "likely's". No peer review, nor science...all speculation.
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 15, 2002, at 7:59:28
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by alan on August 15, 2002, at 1:42:50
Please read the Merck Physician's Manual,
and "The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics"
by Goodman and Gillman on benzodiazepines, barbituates,
and withdrawal description.I do not believe Dr. Heather Ashton had a hand
in writing these medical books.Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on August 15, 2002, at 9:08:40
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by Squiggles on August 15, 2002, at 7:59:28
p.s. i should like to add that i have
strong disagreement on some beliefs of
the Benzo group, and agree with some
others, based on my personal experience.
I don't want to take up too much time here
on the debate as it is long and now, after
so much discussion and battle, tedious.I don't think that one should abstain from
using benzos - but one thing is certain -
after long term use, getting off, is very
difficult, at least without the aid of another
drug or professional assistance. Indeed, the
books i mention, warn of seizure, and sometimes
fatal seizure.Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 15, 2002, at 11:08:52
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis) » Squiggles, posted by Squiggles on August 15, 2002, at 9:08:40
> p.s. i should like to add that i have
> strong disagreement on some beliefs of
> the Benzo group, and agree with some
> others, based on my personal experience.
> I don't want to take up too much time here
> on the debate as it is long and now, after
> so much discussion and battle, tedious.
>
> I don't think that one should abstain from
> using benzos - but one thing is certain -
> after long term use, getting off, is very
> difficult, at least without the aid of another
> drug or professional assistance. Indeed, the
> books i mention, warn of seizure, and sometimes
> fatal seizure.
>
> Squiggles
--------------------------------------------
One can not extrapolate for the entire population based on their own personal experience. This is the problem regardless of the clinician texts that are mentioned. The texts are accurate in describing the build up of tolerance and withdrawl and the possibility of seizures if one is to stop them abruptly. This is no reason to scare the general population into exaggerating these risks since if taken as the drug was designed, there is very little risk.No less a prestigious organisation as the World Health Organisation has concluded that short AND long term bzd therapy is some of the safest therapy in the realm of psychotropic medication. It, unlike many other drugs, has a 40+ year track record with a plethora of studies and clinical evaluation to back up both long and short term therapy.
Yes, it is a tedious and long discussion. That's because the devil's in the details. The misunderstandings about these drugs are perpetuated by sites such as these because as just one minor example, this anti-benzo cult group makes no distinction between "addiction" and medical dependence like the rest of the medical world does. This deliberate blurring of the lines is at the root of most of the tedium that is mostly unnecessary and no doubt harmful.
Doing battle with windmills seems to be a full time occupation for groups that refuse to make this simple and medically straightforward distinction. This is not to say bzds are for everyone, but they should and are gradually becoming a class of drug that is offered to the patient on equal footing with all other drug therapy, including the comercially driven ssri's, for properly diagnosed anxiety disorders.
Long term bzd monotherapy is essential for those with chronic disorders that are in need of drug therapy. Withdrawl is NOT generally a problem if done properly regardless of length of therapy and should not be used as a scare tactic to keep patients from being offered the very drug that will provide them relief of their symptoms.
These groups are highly political and moralistic about drgs in general and unfortunately, about bzd's exclusively. This is not the way to administer advice and information about medicine. There are enough competing interests that stand between the doctor/patient relationship. Let's not make the stigmatising of bzd's continue in this overt a manner.
Alan
Posted by Hiba on August 16, 2002, at 23:36:23
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis), posted by alan on August 15, 2002, at 11:08:52
Dear Alan,
I was supposed to respond to squiggles, but you did the job. Squiggles sticks with Merck Manual and Pharmaceutical basis of therapeutics. But my advise is take a look at the American psychiatric Association's task force report on benzodiazepines. It has been done after intensive research, and definitely the most reliable source of information. The seizure which squiggles mention is a RARE withdrawal syndrom. Rare means occuring to less than 1 in 1000. I am not speaking of myself. The task force report says it.
Most physicians (in general practice, not psychiatrists) agree antidepressants are safe, and benzos are addictive. But see the incidence of seizures in the holy book of Merck and other therapeutic guides. They say "Antidepressants also rarely induce seizures" That is 1-4 in every thousand patients.
I am an unlucky person of antidepressant experiment. My doc believed ADs are safer than Benzos and he arbitrarily tapered me from clonazepam which was helping me tremendously and put me on fluoxetine. And now my drug is my problem. I lost my sexual self and even my doc doesn't know the way out of it. He gave me periactin, buspirone, gingko biloba but nothing restored my sexual self. I wish I could go back to clonazepam and once again stabilized on it, which was the best medicine I ever took. But getting off fluoxetine also seems a big problem because I tried twice and failed.
DEAR DOCS AND BENZOPHOBICS, PLEASE DON'T MISGUIDE THOSE WHO ARE DOING WELL ON BENZOS. DON'T EVER..PLEASE
HIBA
Posted by Squiggles on August 17, 2002, at 8:51:14
In reply to Re: Read A.P. A Task Force Report on Benzos, posted by Hiba on August 16, 2002, at 23:36:23
Perhaps my symptom was rare as you say;
the testimonials of bad withdrawal however
is far more frequent. You sound like a doctor
and a well read one at that.I have reported my own experience and what
i have read of others' regarding w/d *especially*
long-term use of benzos - i leave it at that.And i am sorry that other drugs are giving you
difficulty - again from my experience going back
on the *same* drug and then withdrawing (for what
reason i don't know) is the best thing to do,
unless you know of a dr. with experience in
using other drugs to get you off. Ask your
medical centre about addictionologists.i hope you get better soon;
Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 17, 2002, at 20:02:05
In reply to Re: Read A.P. A Task Force Report on Benzos » Hiba, posted by Squiggles on August 17, 2002, at 8:51:14
> Perhaps my symptom was rare as you say;
> the testimonials of bad withdrawal however
> is far more frequent. You sound like a doctor
> and a well read one at that.
>
> I have reported my own experience and what
> i have read of others' regarding w/d *especially*
> long-term use of benzos - i leave it at that.
>
-----------------------------------------------
This is exactly what I was talking about when I mentioned that one can not extrapolate for the entire population based on their own experience.The benzo.org website does this as well...and in the most inflammitory way. There is zero conclusive evidence or credible medical research that ties long term benzodiazapine monotherapy with more difficult withdrawl than short term therapy.
As a matter of fact the World Health Organization's report on "The Rational Use of Benzodiazapines" which reviews ALL of the studies and medical evidence states TO THE CONTRARY. It concludes that long AND short term bzd therapy for those with chronic anxiety disorders are safe.
Of course this is no comfort if YOU are the one that statistics don't apply and are struck by lightning.
But let's not needlessly make already med-phobic anxiety sufferers even MORE anxious about these extremely effective medications by exaggerating risk by using hard drugs as comparitors when that type of innuendo is blatantly used by these anti-benzo cults to carry out their political and moralistic crusade.
Alan
Posted by Iago Camboa on August 27, 2002, at 6:19:14
In reply to Re: about withdrawal 'syndromes' (a parenthesis) » Squiggles, posted by Squiggles on August 15, 2002, at 9:08:40
Dear Squiggles (and Dear Babblers),
Please forgive me for this so tardy response, but I must say two words about the last paragraph (some 50 words) of this most remarkable and instructive post of yours. It is NOT TEDIOUS at all, it felt to me (and I'm sure to many others) like a bomb, namely your last words which I quote here again for everybody to see them well (before, alas, I will send them to the trash-can, so help me God and Good Common Sense...). Those words read:
"Indeed, the BOOKS I MENTION, warn of SEIZURE, and sometimes FATAL SEIZURE". [Capitalization added for emphasis]
But just before I comment on those 'delicious' words, allow me to kindly disagree with the following:
"one thing is certain - after long term use, getting off [benzos], is very difficult, at least without the aid of another drug or professional assistance"
It is not certain at all! I myself got off Valium 10mg/day after 5 years daily intake 'cold turkey' (overnight) without any difficulties and without the aid of any drugs or any professional assistance whatsoever (which I would deem ridiculous, inappropriate and laughable).
But please pay attention here: if one person suffers from grave anxiety and decides in earnest to suppress their benzo(s) and begins to let their anxiety untreated, they may have a very hard time indeed (though this I would call 'stupidity syndrome' rather than 'benzo withdrawal syndrome' -- the 'stupidity' here is their doctor's or else due to the 'anti-benzo propaganda' itself -- not their own, of course).
I myself was induced by the ubiquitous 'anti-benzo propaganda' in believing (and posting it here a few months ago) that some (mild) 'tremors in the inferior limbs' I felt after I got off Valium and began taking Xanax were due to 'Valium withdrawal'; no, they were not!; it only happens Xanax/alprazolam competes with the same liver enzymes as two ADs I was taking at the time in higher doses, which doses were almost doubled in my bloodstream (due to added elimination time) and provoked the tremors; as soon as I reduced the ADs doses to just 1/2 the tremors vanished for good. Valium 10mg/day withdrawal effects after 5 years daily intake (and 20mg/day during only the last month I used it) were nil times nil: no withdrawal I could notice: neither much nor little, nothing!Now about the 'seizures' and the 'sometimes' 'fatal seizures' attributed to benzos (I'm assuming those are indeed attributed to benzos because you are not speaking either of ghosts or of witches...). Look, there are perhaps over 300,000,000 people all over the world who take benzos every day; even if seizures did occur in the frequency of one in a thousand, that would mean 300,000 seizures a day and not less than 30,000 or 3,000 FATAL SEIZURES A DAY according to whether we admit 10% or 1% of seizures are fatal.
Do you really think the authors of the books you mention believe in these numbers? Does FDA know about this permanent and diabolic 'holocaust'? How can it be that 'benzophobics' (with the zeal all of us know they have) don't use these numbers to enhance their propaganda in a decisive way, I mean to obtain the outlawing of benzos once and for all to the worsening of all mankind's health and well-being (which seems to be their reason of existence)? Worse still, you yourself don't believe them either, otherwise you wouldn't have told us that 'I don't think that one should abstain from using benzos'... I'm glad to acknowledge here your intellectual honesty: a true benzophobic would never have uttered such a sentence!
I'd risk the guess those numbers can be divided by 1,000 and be still excessive... I mean, one fatal seizure in one hundred million benzo users (winning any American lottery at the first trial would be far easier...) would yet be incompatible with the fact that I never heard in the media of one single case of a death that can be attributed to a benzo with certainty and without any reasonable doubt to the contrary. And I've been living in Europe and not in (Taliban) Afghanistan nor in Somalia and read papers, magazines (including American ones) and watch oftentimes the telly (including American TV)...Here I spent a few minutes reading a detailed insert of a well-known and much used benzo (and thank God on the increase, at least in Europe) namely 'Xanax XR'. Even though they speak lengthily of all side effects and of all manner of withdrawal symptoms, they strangely never mention any fatal seizures at all either actually 'occurred' or simply 'reported' by others or 'referred' in the literature. Perhaps here your two reference books know better than the manufacturers of the 'controverted' medicine??
You would do to all Babblers here a great service if you kindly transcribed for us the actual numbers provided by the two books you recommend regarding the total amount of fatal seizures induced by benzos some 40 years since to date. Unless the said books have no statistics about so crucial a matter and their 'warnings' about 'fatal seizures' provoked by benzos are nothing more than 'hunches' (grotesque hunches, IMHO)?...It really hurts me to have been just myself who had to convey to you the foregoing perhaps somewhat unpleasant comments...
Yours truly,
Iago
> p.s. i should like to add that i have strong disagreement on some beliefs of the Benzo group, and agree with some others, based on my personal experience. I don't want to take up too much time here on the debate as it is long and now, after so much discussion and battle, tedious.
>
> I don't think that one should abstain from using benzos - but one thing is certain - after long term use, getting off, is very difficult, at least without the aid of another drug or professional assistance. Indeed, the books i mention, warn of seizure, and sometimes fatal seizure.
>
> Squiggles
>
Posted by Squiggles on August 28, 2002, at 8:19:49
In reply to BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated) » Squiggles, posted by Iago Camboa on August 27, 2002, at 6:19:14
i thought i had answered this - must have
pressed the wrong button;It is not the benzo specific seizures that
are possibly fatal, it is seizures in themselves,
no matter what the cause. And it is not *all*
seizures that are fatal but some, and under
some circumstances. Some seizures are trivial,
such as "transient ischemic attacks" or "brain
embolisms";Therefore, some seizures can be fatal, which is
what i said.Again, read the medical books - surely the authors
must have known something when they wrote them,
even though they may be 20 years old, unless
disorders of the CNS have changed.Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 28, 2002, at 13:13:28
In reply to Re: BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated) » Iago Camboa, posted by Squiggles on August 28, 2002, at 8:19:49
> Again, read the medical books - surely the authors
> must have known something when they wrote them,
> even though they may be 20 years old, unless
> disorders of the CNS have changed.
>
> Squiggles
-----------------------------------------------The whole point is that the disorders have not changed per se but that the understanding of them have taken a quantum leap in two decades - especially when talking about the understanding of the CNS in regards to how medications effect it.
Posted by Squiggles on August 28, 2002, at 13:20:20
In reply to Re: BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated), posted by alan on August 28, 2002, at 13:13:28
What can i say - maybe they have
advanced in the understanding of
how these drugs works; on the other
hand, at this rate, how are we to
know that they will advance even
further in another 50 yrs. and everything
that is now considered an improvement
proves to be false.In psychiatry, the safest thing seems to
be treating symptoms. There is really
very little science involved, only symptoms
correlated with observations of brain
activities - and even there that changes
according to different vogues - the latest
one now being MRI tests.Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 29, 2002, at 0:20:06
In reply to Re: BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated) » alan, posted by Squiggles on August 28, 2002, at 13:20:20
> What can i say - maybe they have
> advanced in the understanding of
> how these drugs works; on the other
> hand, at this rate, how are we to
> know that they will advance even
> further in another 50 yrs. and everything
> that is now considered an improvement
> proves to be false.
>
> In psychiatry, the safest thing seems to
> be treating symptoms. There is really
> very little science involved, only symptoms
> correlated with observations of brain
> activities - and even there that changes
> according to different vogues - the latest
> one now being MRI tests.
>
> Squiggles
--------------------------------------------All drugs, psychotropic or not, treat symptoms. The only drug that "cures" anything is an antibiotic.
The understanding of how the brain functions couldn't be more accurately examined than the MRI and other similar modern scans of the brain. There's been more information gathered from these technologies in the last decade than perhaps from the beginnings of psychiatry.
Who would describe gaining that type of information as anything other than a positive stepping stone in turning psychiatry into something other than a punching bag as it is treated by some?
The present commercially driven fad is treating anxiety disorders with something other than bzds (with bzd @ rates of 75 - 85% effectiveness), such as ssri's (disputibly less than 50% effective) and neuroleptics (with side effects as serious as irreversable TD) or anticonvulsants....all of which are usually augmented with bzd therapy in the end anyway if the patient wants complete relief from their symptoms.
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.