![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 13 to 37 of 37. Go back in thread:
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.
Posted by Squiggles on August 29, 2002, at 2:56:52
In reply to Re: Psychiatry and prescribing fads » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 29, 2002, at 0:20:06
Alan,
I agree with you about the benzos being
superiour to treating with SSRIs and
neuroleptics - the side effects of the latter
are more serious, and perhaps less predictable.I don't know about MRIs - whether they help in
a model of the brain or just pin point a
hot spot.Squiggles
Posted by hiba on August 29, 2002, at 2:59:05
In reply to Re: Psychiatry and prescribing fads » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 29, 2002, at 0:20:06
Hello Everyone,
I have read many articles on the net emphasizing the point, benzodiazepines only mask the symptoms of anxiety while antidepressants cure them by correcting the chemical imbalance in brain. But when it is universally agreed that none of those medicines in psychiatric practice really cure or eradicate an illness, I don't understand why this kind of false claim still exists and survives.
For an argument, I would agree with docs it may be true(The hypothesis of masking and correcting). But am very keen to know what difference does it make in a patient? For an anxious patient, klonopin or a similar benzo gives instant relief from his hyperarousal and anxiety. But an antidepressant takes as long as two weeks or more for a slight relief(and initially there will be an intolerable increase in anxiety and agitation in the case of SSRIs and other new ADs.) But whether it corrects or masks, the effect patient get is the same. And even if antidepressants corrects the chemical imbalance, the effect is only drug induced and wears off once the drug is withdrawn.
Antidepressants especially newer ones are no more considered safe in case of dependence. They can also produce severe physiological and psychological dependence and marked withdrawal reactions in a patient. Physicians insist on gradual withdrawal and this procedure takes months. So is the case of benzodiazepines. Even, after years of benzo exposure, if the patient is going through a gradual withdrawal process, benzos don't make any severe withdrawal symptoms.
So I suggest it is time to rethink the strategy. Benzodiazepines alone can be very useful in treating anxiety and depression. Xanax is having unique antidepressant properties in doses higher than usual and klonopin can be an effective mood stabilizer. I think physicians should give these wonderful proven medications a priority.
HIBA
Posted by alan on August 29, 2002, at 11:08:45
In reply to Re: Benzo monotherapy for Anxiety and Depression, posted by hiba on August 29, 2002, at 2:59:05
At the very least, offer them to the patient on equal footing with the commercially driven AD's.
All some patients know is the mantra "bzds are addictive". Just the whiff of anything that implies the old-fashioned concept of addiction is enough to have any med-phobic anxiety sufferer going into orbit over the thought, never considering the medication again.
Meanwhile patients can be guniea pigs for the pharmecutical industry and their unknowing accomplices - the psychiatrist that's bought their
blather about bzd's being "addictive" - and go through life just accepting the fact that the one ssri that they've finally landed on is the best the profession can do for them.A real scam....which I was victim to for several years until I found a doc that had a broader perspective of the profession...
alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 29, 2002, at 11:27:49
In reply to Re: Benzo monotherapy for Anxiety and Depression » hiba, posted by alan on August 29, 2002, at 11:08:45
I think i've said all i have to say on
the benzo matter -- i am stabilized now
(thank God) and i succeeded in getting off
Xanax. I am being watched on lithium by
my doctor and that i appreciate very much.At the end of the day, when all the controversy
has exhausted further possibilities ex cathedra,
there is nothing like experience to give
an answer to such pharmaceutical questions.So, just as a final remark i would say, educate
yourselves as much as you can through the net,
through the pharmacist, by your doctor, and try
to get good realiable sites (i believe Dr. Bob
has a list), and then discuss with your doctor
what the best procedure is.I have made some mistakes, and i think my dr.
may have too - my great mistake is fear of
making medical appointments and leaving things
until they get worse and worse. I'll have to
work on that as it would help not only me, but
my doctor. I am also what you might call
non-compliant in that i experiment with my
drugs - or at least did :-)take care
Squiggles
Posted by Iago Camboa on August 30, 2002, at 6:57:31
In reply to Re: BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated) » Iago Camboa, posted by Squiggles on August 28, 2002, at 8:19:49
Dear Squiggles,
Again I have to apologize for my delay in responding: this time I had a very bad failure in my main hard disk in my most used computer and I had to work hard on it for two days (!) before I could fix it all and restore all my data from 'backups': an horror!...
> It is not the benzo specific seizures that are possibly fatal, it is seizures in themselves, no matter what the cause.
This I cannot accept: so you were speaking of benzos and had just made your 'devastating' assertion about 'sometimes' fatal seizures [induced by those] and then, confronted with the fact that those fatal seizures are for all practical effects inexistent, you were urged out of trouble switching to 'seizures in general'. One wonders what has 'the ass to do with the pants'?, as common people say in this country...
> And it is not *all* seizures that are fatal but some, and under some circumstances.
Have you read my post? (I know it was long and perhaps boring so this may be my fault), but I had assumed there that only 1% of seizures were fatal in my calculations...
One could as well argue that there are 'fatal allergic reactions to benzos' as these can occur with almost every drug and ignorant people would add these 'fatalities' to the already horrific 'passive' attributed to the benzodiazepines ('passive' constructed on nonsense after nonsense but who cares about the truth when the 'medical books' you mention add 'irresponsibly' to the confusion, telling error after error in their information to a selected public?). Did you know that a single sting of a bee can be 'fatal' (to perhaps one allergic person in one hundred million people or even less)? Should we proceed to make an extinction war on the beneficial insects on that laughable grounds? It is an identical laughable war that is being made under our very noses against the unharmful 'benzos' , a war against intelligence and common sense; and it is my duty to open the eyes against such a coarse and gross mystification in the name of reason and common sense even if I earn not a single cent with it...> Again, read the medical books - surely the authors must have known something when they wrote them,
That 'naive' confidence you have in docs and in authors of books (even if those are intended to be used by physicians), I beg your pardon, but makes me laugh. I don't know of profession where so many infantile and outright grotesque errors are made than in the psychiatrical profession. Perhaps the difficulty of the matter can be an excuse for so many common errors and misunderstandings of human mind, but IMHO that is due more to the little time (and attention!) pdocs give to their patients...
But to illustrate and strengthening my point about possible gross mistakes in apparent reliable books, I will make use of a classic example. Let me tell you that the heads of the authors of the books you mention are much less powerful (not to say infinitely less powerful) than that of one of the great heads of mankind, e.g. that of the Greek Aristotle: and we can read in his original works many errors in scientific matters, not of course because of incapacity but due to the fact we can dispose now of tremendous advances in almost every scientific area due to dozens of thousands of scientists all over the world who dedicated their lives to the enlargement of science. But a book, even if written by a Nobel Prize is worth 'what it is worth' and is subject to critique and can have errors as any human work... Unless the two books you mention are a unique instance of 'noli me tangere' among the common works of the rest of mankind...> even though they may be 20 years old, unless disorders of the CNS have changed.
20 years (in psychiatric matters) are more than enough to render your books obsolete, IMHO. It is not that CNS disorders have changed, but many new knowledge has been added, though of course still far from what we all would desire for the hapiness of human kind.
Yours, Iago
> 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 hiba on September 1, 2002, at 3:56:43
In reply to BENZO-INDUCED FATAL SEIZURES? (outdated) » Squiggles, posted by Iago Camboa on August 27, 2002, at 6:19:14
Dear Iago,
You might have seen my name and postings in this board and I hope you may not treat me as a benzophobic. I want to calrify somethings for the others in this bord.
"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 "The quotation is taken from your posting. Still being a tremendous benzo supporter, I don't think you did the right thing. Luckily, you could get off without problems, but this kind of abrupt withdrawal should never be employed or encouraged, whatever the offending drug may be. Abrupt withdrawal after years long exposure to benzos will cause long term protracted withdrawal symptoms in some patients.(ONLY IF THE WITHDRAWAL IS ABRUPT). I think you are going far and far on overenthusiasm, but we have a responsibility to safe guard the public. I have volunteered for a detoxification centre in India, and I remember some benzo cases. After stopping benzos (esp valium and xanax) abruptly patients started to experience withdrawal symptoms and it was very difficult to handle. And I remember even months later when those patients came for follow-up they were complaining of some mild to moderate abstinence syndroms. You can't argue those abstinence syndroms as a return of the original symptoms of illness, because most of those guys were not using benzos for medicinal reasons. They were only ingesting them to get a high. It was impossible for these group to get alcohol because of strict religious restrictions and I think that made them to try benzos as an alternative to alcohol.I must admit they were taking higher than normal doses (upto 80 mg valium and 4 to 6 mg of xanax per day).
Still there were enough instances of safe benzo withdrawal with the help of a simple tapering procedure, and no patients experienced withdrawal symptoms upon tapering. So if anybody want to get off their benzos, after long-term exposure, please go through a simple tapering procedure to ensure safe and harmless withdrawal. Please don't try or advocate for abrupt withdrawal. It will make simple matters worse. When there is a proven effective method to come off benzos(Only if anybody wants to) why should we propagate or share our, perhaps rare experiences?
Good luck Iago, I like your sense of humour. I expect a humourous reply.
HIBA
Posted by Iago Camboa on September 2, 2002, at 7:18:09
In reply to Re: One word Dear Iago, posted by hiba on September 1, 2002, at 3:56:43
Dear Hiba,
Of course I've seen many of your posts so you are by no means a 'stranger' to me. I appreciate both the moderation and the good-sense of your messages and your present intervention goes in the same sense.
As a matter of fact I wholy agree with your remarks that as a rule and for general public safety 'benzos' (after long term use in non-trivial doses) should be subject to a tapering procedure for the prevention of possible withdrawal symptoms in sensitive people, so I will NEITHER defend NOR recommend any 'cold-turkey' withdrawals whatsoever. If I actually did it with Valium some 9.5 months ago it was more due to the fact I was not aware (as I'm today) of those possible withdrawal symptoms than to any will 'to defy the devil' for no useful purpose. So, why not comply (all of us!) with that now common accepted practice of a gradual, measured and wholy safe withdrawal to the benefit of all benzo-using community?
And after all it is not anything either new or contrary to common accepted practice in life: if one is in the old habit of drinking 5 cups of coffee a day and for some reason needs to cut it off altogether is it not much more reasonable to do so gradually during a few weeks than make an abrupt and probably very uncomfortable weaning?
It is a pleasure to me to give 'right' where 'right' is due.Best of luck to you Hiba.
Iago
> Dear Iago,
>
> You might have seen my name and postings in this board and I hope you may not treat me as a benzophobic. I want to calrify somethings for the others in this bord.
>
>
> "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 "
>
> The quotation is taken from your posting. Still being a tremendous benzo supporter, I don't think you did the right thing. Luckily, you could get off without problems, but this kind of abrupt withdrawal should never be employed or encouraged, whatever the offending drug may be. Abrupt withdrawal after years long exposure to benzos will cause long term protracted withdrawal symptoms in some patients.(ONLY IF THE WITHDRAWAL IS ABRUPT). I think you are going far and far on overenthusiasm, but we have a responsibility to safe guard the public. I have volunteered for a detoxification centre in India, and I remember some benzo cases. After stopping benzos (esp valium and xanax) abruptly patients started to experience withdrawal symptoms and it was very difficult to handle. And I remember even months later when those patients came for follow-up they were complaining of some mild to moderate abstinence syndroms. You can't argue those abstinence syndroms as a return of the original symptoms of illness, because most of those guys were not using benzos for medicinal reasons. They were only ingesting them to get a high. It was impossible for these group to get alcohol because of strict religious restrictions and I think that made them to try benzos as an alternative to alcohol.I must admit they were taking higher than normal doses (upto 80 mg valium and 4 to 6 mg of xanax per day).
>
> Still there were enough instances of safe benzo withdrawal with the help of a simple tapering procedure, and no patients experienced withdrawal symptoms upon tapering. So if anybody want to get off their benzos, after long-term exposure, please go through a simple tapering procedure to ensure safe and harmless withdrawal. Please don't try or advocate for abrupt withdrawal. It will make simple matters worse. When there is a proven effective method to come off benzos(Only if anybody wants to) why should we propagate or share our, perhaps rare experiences?
> Good luck Iago, I like your sense of humour. I expect a humourous reply.
> HIBA
This is the end of the 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.