Posted by IsoM on December 9, 2001, at 14:08:22
In reply to Re: Ativan, more effect over time? » IsoM, posted by Alan on December 9, 2001, at 13:25:59
It's fortunate that you've found a well-informed doctor then. Rmember how doctors in the 60s used to dish out Vallium like it was candy? I wonder if this is the resulting backlash. You see listening to all these doctors (who are SUPPOSED to know what they're talking about- though I've haven't always believed that) talk about the addictive properties, I thought that perhaps I was rather unique in the way I handled it. I don't form habits easily, either good or bad - thought that I just didn't have the addictive personality. I wish more doctors would come around to understand benzodiazepines then.
I've been writing adamie through e-mail, & I've encouraged him about what you've said about the Ativan. His case seems so sad that even IF it were somewhat addictive, he really needs it badly at this time in his life. Apparently, before he ever took Accutane (a synthetic derivative of vitamin A for acne), he had no problems whatsoever. So much for the rare depressive problems on it & the easy reversal of symptoms.
> *****************************************
> Sleeplessness - BZD's no for long term. Don't know diagnosis - sleep problem could be depression related.
>
> Chronic anxiety - whatever form it takes - YES for long term treatment with BZD's without fear of adverse side effects. This is what is not in dispute. Ill informed doctors will just have to come around especially for those non-specialists on the receiving end of the media blitz by the ssri's for the treatment of generalised anxiety disorders - medications that usually have to be augmented with BZDs in the end either PRN or as maintianence anyway. And the side effects!
>
> Alan
poster:IsoM
thread:85872
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20011202/msgs/86384.html