![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]Shown: posts 1370 to 1394 of 8406. Go back in thread:
Posted by pharmrep on November 25, 2002, at 9:01:28
In reply to Re: %'s/see bottom » pharmrep, posted by JLM on November 25, 2002, at 5:18:12
>
> I think by 'full safety data' Dr. Dave means ALL the data on the incidence of SE's taken as a whole, and not just the data disseminated to the public in the PI's. This would include data from published and more importantly UNPUBLISHED studies. That way we can see if there is any 'publication bias' wink wink...
>
*** I have seen your posts before on unpublished studies...I know of no secret hidden studies...everything is on the table.
Posted by sjb on November 25, 2002, at 9:17:43
In reply to Fiery Rhetoric, posted by Mr.Scott on November 24, 2002, at 14:35:27
Amen, bro. I'm so sick of the psychiatric profession now. They have no idea what all these drugs are doing to us, it's just pull out the script for something "new" or up the dose. NO MAS!!!!
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 9:22:53
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric, posted by sjb on November 25, 2002, at 9:17:43
I feel that some gratitude is owed to
Dr. Bob for tolerating all this anti-psychiatry
talk - i believe he IS a psychiatrist, right?
He is very kind or blind, or possibly
attending a conference, not to delete some
of these posts.Squiggles
Posted by sjb on November 25, 2002, at 9:27:10
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » Squiggles, posted by Geezer on November 24, 2002, at 17:26:55
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 10:21:20
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » sjb, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 9:22:53
> I feel that some gratitude is owed to
> Dr. Bob for tolerating all this anti-psychiatry
> talk - i believe he IS a psychiatrist, right?
> He is very kind or blind, or possibly
> attending a conference, not to delete some
> of these posts.
>
> Squiggles
================================================
Yes he is kind. But anti-psychiatry? I would have to disagree. I do agree that just saying "psychiatry sucks" without relating any personal experience as to why it sucks isn't very useful.But part of our education about medicines that we put into or bodies, diagnosis, etc, include the political and economic aspects of psychiatry, *especially* when we have someone from the pharmecutical industry visiting this bboard.
Part of getting answers to one's questions is to debate and also to tell of the bad as well as the good experiences with the profession. Where else are we all going to get the information that we need to make informed choices?
As long as there are no ad hominens and personal put downs, I think there is nothing but good to come from debate and strong but respectful rhetoric concerning the claims being made by representatives of the industry.
I'm sure that the Dr. is well aware of this. After all, the idea of this cyber board is to relate information and experiences isn't it?
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 10:37:09
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 10:21:20
There's a representative from the pharmaceutical
companies here? And he is taking notes?
Who is he, let me at him..... grrrrrrrrrrrr!Squiggles
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 10:37:10
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric, posted by sjb on November 25, 2002, at 9:17:43
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/22/business/22DRUG.html?pagewanted=print&position=top
This seems especially pertinent vis-a-vis this discussion.
Alan
Posted by pharmrep on November 25, 2002, at 10:43:34
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 10:21:20
================================================
> Yes he is kind. But anti-psychiatry? I would have to disagree. I do agree that just saying "psychiatry sucks" without relating any personal experience as to why it sucks isn't very useful.
>
> But part of our education about medicines that we put into or bodies, diagnosis, etc, include the political and economic aspects of psychiatry, *especially* when we have someone from the pharmecutical industry visiting this bboard.
>
> Part of getting answers to one's questions is to debate and also to tell of the bad as well as the good experiences with the profession. Where else are we all going to get the information that we need to make informed choices?
>
> As long as there are no ad hominens and personal put downs, I think there is nothing but good to come from debate and strong but respectful rhetoric concerning the claims being made by representatives of the industry.
>
> I'm sure that the Dr. is well aware of this. After all, the idea of this cyber board is to relate information and experiences isn't it?
>*** I feel we have a balanced representation here...there are doctors, existing patients, potential new ones, a drug rep, and others...as long as people know that many sides are represented here and sort them all with a grain of salt...it is good info. nice post alan
Posted by Geezer on November 25, 2002, at 10:51:27
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » Geezer, posted by Squiggles on November 24, 2002, at 21:28:03
> How often in your opinion? And how can
> i bring that up without offending or
> jeopardizing an otherwise good relationship
> with my doctor?
>
> tx for paying attention to me;
>
> SquigglesHi Squiggles,
I am reaching far back in my very unreliable memory for this one. I took Lithium for 5 years in the early 80s (I was not DXed Bipolar at that time, it was just the popular treatment of the day), it seems to me blood tests for Lithium levels were every 6 to 8 weeks. The critical times were during the summer months when dehydration was a possibility. I would post this question to the board.....surely there are many people taking Lithium that could suggest a proper testing interval. I recall that I did run .8 to 1.2 levels. I am at a loss for suggestions to make this "kindly" to your GP (I know it is important to maintain a positive relationship). I keep a very respectful relationship with my Internal Medicine doc., .......it's only in psychiatry that I am totally alone after 30 years of trying.
I wish you the very best,
Geezer
Posted by ayuda on November 25, 2002, at 11:50:33
In reply to Re: Fiery Rhetoric » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 10:21:20
> > I feel that some gratitude is owed to
> > Dr. Bob for tolerating all this anti-psychiatry
> > talk - i believe he IS a psychiatrist, right?
> > He is very kind or blind, or possibly
> > attending a conference, not to delete some
> > of these posts.
> >
> > Squiggles
> ================================================
> Yes he is kind. But anti-psychiatry? I would have to disagree. I do agree that just saying "psychiatry sucks" without relating any personal experience as to why it sucks isn't very useful.
>
> But part of our education about medicines that we put into or bodies, diagnosis, etc, include the political and economic aspects of psychiatry, *especially* when we have someone from the pharmecutical industry visiting this bboard.
>
> Part of getting answers to one's questions is to debate and also to tell of the bad as well as the good experiences with the profession. Where else are we all going to get the information that we need to make informed choices?
>
> As long as there are no ad hominens and personal put downs, I think there is nothing but good to come from debate and strong but respectful rhetoric concerning the claims being made by representatives of the industry.
>
> I'm sure that the Dr. is well aware of this. After all, the idea of this cyber board is to relate information and experiences isn't it?
>NO science is an "exact" science -- and especially not psychiatry. I once read where a scientist said that if the human brain was simple enough for us to understand it, we would be too "simpleminded" to understand it!
Psychiatrists are not God! They are human, just like the rest of us - they received an education in a particular field that is a very difficult field to get a handle on. The advances in psychiatric diagnoses and medicine over the past 20 years are amazing! But they aren't finished yet, either.
Yes, many of us are guinea pigs, but look at Santiago's post to see what it was like in the 1980s, and you should thank your lucky stars that at least they have SSRIs that are *trying* to alleviate our problems. 30 years ago and before that, we would all be alcoholics or drug addicts, trying to self-medicate our depression.
We can't expect psychiatrists to be something they are not -- they are not all-knowledgeable about the human psyche, they are students of it. All doctors (and I don't just mean MDs or shrinks)remain students their entire lives -- that's the reality of learning in general.
Some people go into the medical fields because they are good at science and they want to make a lot of money. But MOST go into medicine because they feel they have something to contribute. Many do not -- they are less competent than they think they are. And yes, some of us suffer because of that. But you can't pin anything on an entire group of people just because of any sample -- that's discrimination.
I'm sure that Dr. Bob knows that we are all frustrated -- I bet he is too! I bet that he would love nothing more than to find the "miracle cure" for depression/anxiety/bipolar, etc. People who are waiting around for that miracle, though, have no clue as to how science works.
And I am guessing that NONE of us was forced to go for treatment for our problems. We sought out help. Yes, ill people should seek out help, but should also be aware that help might not always be perfect. And it involves trial and error. People who have cancer often have to try several different types of chemo-therapy until they find the one that will put them in remission. Until they find it, they get sicker and the cancer keeps spreading and they have s/e's that make ours look like a walk in the park -- but that's the state of cancer medication today.
I am an advocate of being fair -- which means being reasonable, giving credit where credit is due and giving *constructive* criticism. One of the roles we play on this site is to pass around ideas that help Dr. Bob and others in his profession to become better doctors and learn more about how these meds affect real people with real lives. Give them some credit for giving us this forum and caring what our input is.
As for pharm reps, they are also not all sleazebags. My roommate's dad is a Pfizer rep, and he is a pretty cool guy. This is a capitalist free-market economy in the US -- that's the reality of it. And their job is necessary. Not necessary in a communist country. Not necessary in a fascist country. But necessary here. Gotta take the good -- democracy -- with the bad -- capitalism at its worst.
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 12:06:58
In reply to Re: wow...amen to alan on this , posted by pharmrep on November 25, 2002, at 10:43:34
> ================================================
> > Yes he is kind. But anti-psychiatry? I would have to disagree. I do agree that just saying "psychiatry sucks" without relating any personal experience as to why it sucks isn't very useful.
> >
> > But part of our education about medicines that we put into or bodies, diagnosis, etc, include the political and economic aspects of psychiatry, *especially* when we have someone from the pharmecutical industry visiting this bboard.
> >
> > Part of getting answers to one's questions is to debate and also to tell of the bad as well as the good experiences with the profession. Where else are we all going to get the information that we need to make informed choices?
> >
> > As long as there are no ad hominens and personal put downs, I think there is nothing but good to come from debate and strong but respectful rhetoric concerning the claims being made by representatives of the industry.
> >
> > I'm sure that the Dr. is well aware of this. After all, the idea of this cyber board is to relate information and experiences isn't it?
> >
>
> *** I feel we have a balanced representation here...there are doctors, existing patients, potential new ones, a drug rep, and others...as long as people know that many sides are represented here and sort them all with a grain of salt...it is good info. nice post alan
=============================================
In the fashion of which you speak, I will similarly receive your agreement and affirmation with a grain of salt....; )
Alan
Posted by Rich B on November 25, 2002, at 14:06:58
In reply to Re: wow...amen to alan on this » pharmrep, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 12:06:58
I have been on Lexapro for 5 days (including today) for Anxiety. So far, it has done nothing for the anxiety. If anything, it has made it worse. I grind my teeth allot and when I am working on something, I do it very intensely and the anxiety is even worse than it was before. When I am not doing much, am often tired. The tiredness is on and off and I get very tired early in the evening. I have not had insomnia, but when I get up at night to go to the bathroom, I have a hard time getting back to sleep. I have dry mouth and this very light constant headache in the back of my head. This is caused by a tightness in my neck and the back of my head that I believe Lexepro is causing. Can anyone shed some light on my situation? I know I need to give it more time, and I plan on it, but so far, it doesn’t look to good. I am trying to work on my anxiety problem (GAD) through therapy and I was hoping this medication would help bring me down a little and relax. Its hard to work on when the physical systems act as this counterproductive force holding me back.
Thanks ahead of time.
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 14:18:07
In reply to 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects, posted by Rich B on November 25, 2002, at 14:06:58
I'm sorry, i forget your diagnosis;
I think that after 5 days anxiety is common
with some drugs (bet this is an SSRI), and
it won't improve. If you could look at a
class that is pacifying, e.g. my friend is
taking Serzone and it is very good for her
in that respect...Here is a neat "hippy" analysis of drugs,
categorizing them in a phenomenalistic way
that might help:Squiggles
Posted by neptune on November 25, 2002, at 14:23:41
In reply to anybody have withdrawal s/e with paxil or effexor?, posted by pharmrep on November 20, 2002, at 19:40:28
It is about to kill me. I just went from 150mg a day of Effexor to Lexapro. The first 14 days were a horror movie, about a C level movie. I went one effexor per day and one lexapro for 3 days, and then all to Lexzpro. I was very sick, did not throw up but could not stay out of the bathroom, immodium may help, I just did not try it because I was taking enough stuff. I have no energy, and my mood is very bleek. I have been in bed for the past 6 days with a brutal "cold". I didn't know my head could hurt so much. This is my first day out. So, I still don't know if I will be able to take the lexapro, or have to fall back to the effexor. I have severe stomach problems anyway, But Effexor seemed to work fine on the stomach, not much on Depression, and before that was tofranil, did not have any stomach problems for about 10 years, and before that I had problems with my stomach for 27 years.
I am just gritting my teeth.
Neptune
Let me know how you do. O.K.
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 14:25:27
In reply to 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects, posted by Rich B on November 25, 2002, at 14:06:58
> I have been on Lexapro for 5 days (including today) for Anxiety. So far, it has done nothing for the anxiety. If anything, it has made it worse. I grind my teeth allot and when I am working on something, I do it very intensely and the anxiety is even worse than it was before. When I am not doing much, am often tired. The tiredness is on and off and I get very tired early in the evening. I have not had insomnia, but when I get up at night to go to the bathroom, I have a hard time getting back to sleep. I have dry mouth and this very light constant headache in the back of my head. This is caused by a tightness in my neck and the back of my head that I believe Lexepro is causing. Can anyone shed some light on my situation? I know I need to give it more time, and I plan on it, but so far, it doesn’t look to good. I am trying to work on my anxiety problem (GAD) through therapy and I was hoping this medication would help bring me down a little and relax. Its hard to work on when the physical systems act as this counterproductive force holding me back.
> Thanks ahead of time.
>
=========================================
Many docs include a "start - up" benzo like ativan or xanax to counteract the start-up side effects of AD's....especially when you are doing this very important "head" work with a psychologist or other type of therapy.Has your doctor offered you bzd monotherapy on an equal footing with the AD - considering your DX?
If not, why? I always find the answers to this kind of question very interesting.
Alan
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 14:35:42
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Rich B, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 14:18:07
> I'm sorry, i forget your diagnosis;
> I think that after 5 days anxiety is common
> with some drugs (bet this is an SSRI), and
> it won't improve. If you could look at a
> class that is pacifying, e.g. my friend is
> taking Serzone and it is very good for her
> in that respect...
>
> Here is a neat "hippy" analysis of drugs,
> categorizing them in a phenomenalistic way
> that might help:
>
> http://www.biopsychiatry.com/
>
> Squiggles
==============================================
From the site:"The so-called minor tranquillisers, the benzodiazepines such as....
"....benzodiazepines in current use tend to induce dependence, dull consciousness and impair the intellect. So there's not much chance of radical life-enrichment here."
And ssri's don't simililarly induce dependence, ie. have a dependence/withdrawl phenomenon?
Bzds dull consciousness and impair intellect? What? As opposed to the disorder itself?
Well, so much for the reliability of that site - at least generally speaking re: bzds.
"Radical life enrichment" isn't what is being talked about I don't think.
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 14:45:16
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 14:35:42
Alan,
Would I be too intrusive if i asked
what company you represent, and if that
is too bold, if you wear a suit and tie?Squiggles
Posted by ayuda on November 25, 2002, at 15:17:42
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 14:35:42
Alan --
I agree with you that the information is outdated. I have been on Ativan for more than a year for my insomnia, and I am neither addicted to it (in fact, I avoid using it whenever even remotely possible), nor has it impaired my life or intellect. In fact, in getting a good night's sleep, I can think clearer during the day. And not to keep harping on it, but I'm a grad student in an analytical field, and I think someone (a professor, myself, another grad student) would have noticed if I wasn't mentally sharp -- and I have been razor sharp. Literally!
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 15:51:21
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Alan, posted by ayuda on November 25, 2002, at 15:17:42
Taking a benzo once in a while is like
having a drink with the boys every Friday
night. But taking every day, is like night
is like drinking every night -- eventually
you will have to take it every night. And
taking some benzos ( maybe not Ativan ) now
and then chronically, will have an addictive
effect.You guys should take a look at Ray Nimmo's site;
not everyone testimonial there is a rabid
rant.Squiggles
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 17:01:12
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » ayuda, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 15:51:21
> Taking a benzo once in a while is like
> having a drink with the boys every Friday
> night. But taking every day, is like night
> is like drinking every night -- eventually
> you will have to take it every night. And
> taking some benzos ( maybe not Ativan ) now
> and then chronically, will have an addictive
> effect.
>
> You guys should take a look at Ray Nimmo's site;
> not everyone testimonial there is a rabid
> rant.
>
> Squiggles
=============================================Once again we're back full circle to 2 issues.
1)The relying on extrapolation for the general population based on one's own personal experience qualifying one as being in possesion of the truth (benzo.org).
2)The differentiation between "addiction" and sustained medical dependence:
http://panicdisorder.about.com/library/weekly/aa031997.htm
I am not associated with any pharm. co. and I'm not a MHCP.
In fact if you have read between the lines of my many posts at PB (or taken them at face value for that matter), I have as skeptical an eye on the industry/profession as anyone I've seen post here...since I've learned through my own blood sweat and tears having been the victim of various commercially driven psychotropics by commercially driven doctors for my anxiety disorder.
Alan
Posted by ayuda on November 25, 2002, at 17:04:10
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » ayuda, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 15:51:21
I'm not saying that you are ranting, I'm just saying that that information is not always true. I was taking the Ativan every night for months. However, when I am not experiencing sleeping problems, I have no problem not taking it. All summer I was mostly fine, I rarely took it, even though it was on my nightstand. Even though I am having sleep problems now, I don't feel like taking it, so I don't. And now that my doctor has given me Trazodone, I don't need the Ativan I still have, and I'm not tempted to take it. In the meantime, all I'm saying is that I am not a zombie, not dulled by the med, and don't feel that my quality of life is lessened because of it. You can't generalize about any med, people experience different things. If I never take another Ativan that's no big deal. If I never take another anything that's no big deal to me. The kind of information that Alan repeated from that website may make someone scared to take a med they need and can tolerate, when the things they say aren't true for everyone. I'm not attacking anyone personally, all I'm saying is that everyone has to be careful with *all* info you get on the web, it's not unbiased. And I think that's what Alan meant, too, that we have to be careful.
> Taking a benzo once in a while is like
> having a drink with the boys every Friday
> night. But taking every day, is like night
> is like drinking every night -- eventually
> you will have to take it every night. And
> taking some benzos ( maybe not Ativan ) now
> and then chronically, will have an addictive
> effect.
>
> You guys should take a look at Ray Nimmo's site;
> not everyone testimonial there is a rabid
> rant.
>
> Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 17:23:34
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Squiggles, posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 17:01:12
Thanks for posting the URL - are you the pretty
girl working on this ABOUT issue, or with her?
Anyway, i find ABOUT very helpful on a practical
level - i don't use it that much on account of
my Linus set up which seems to block when i try
to go there.The Benzo group represents more than one person -
i think it is a substantial portion of the
population. And as we have discussed before,
the Canadian Pharmaceutical Association, as well
as the Canadian Minister of Health, have declared
benzos to be addicting and added a black box warning.
The Minister has raised its "dangerous drug risk"
level up a notch on account of these reports and
activism from the Benzo group and Adverse Effect
Reports.The question is not whether or not they are addicting
i think, as can the addiction be managed by doctors
so as to continue taking the drug without unbearable
effects.For my part, i have no objections to addiction at
all - but I DO have grave concerns about withdrawal;
and i believe it was a miracle that i survived the
Klonopin addiction.What can i say -- you are probably writing from
a journalists' perspective and may have a more
objective view. But i have read stories from
the Support Coalition International group and the
Benzo group and know people personally, who have
been destroyed by some of these drugs, perphas
inadvertently. And their tale is enough to move
the coldest statitistician.Scientific knowledge is an intellectual
power and weapon against disease, but
its effect on people should be recognized
with a human heart.Squiggles
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 17:39:31
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Squiggles, posted by ayuda on November 25, 2002, at 17:04:10
>"...that website may make someone scared to take >a med they need and can tolerate, when the >things they say aren't true for everyone..."
ayuda
================================================
Well to put it a bit more accurately one perhaps may say, "when the things that they say are NOT so for an extremely large majority of the population."There ought to be a boiler plate post that goes up every time one of these radical, exaggerate risk, take-things-out-of-context-and-perspective websites go up implicit with statements that they are in sole possesion of "the truth".
Alan
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 18:10:15
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Alan, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 17:23:34
> Thanks for posting the URL - are you the pretty
> girl working on this ABOUT issue, or with her?
> Anyway, i find ABOUT very helpful on a practical
> level - i don't use it that much on account of
> my Linus set up which seems to block when i try
> to go there.
>
> The Benzo group represents more than one person -
> i think it is a substantial portion of the
> population. And as we have discussed before,
> the Canadian Pharmaceutical Association, as well
> as the Canadian Minister of Health, have declared
> benzos to be addicting and added a black box warning.
> The Minister has raised its "dangerous drug risk"
> level up a notch on account of these reports and
> activism from the Benzo group and Adverse Effect
> Reports.
>
> The question is not whether or not they are addicting
> i think, as can the addiction be managed by doctors
> so as to continue taking the drug without unbearable
> effects.
>
> For my part, i have no objections to addiction at
> all - but I DO have grave concerns about withdrawal;
> and i believe it was a miracle that i survived the
> Klonopin addiction.
>
> What can i say -- you are probably writing from
> a journalists' perspective and may have a more
> objective view. But i have read stories from
> the Support Coalition International group and the
> Benzo group and know people personally, who have
> been destroyed by some of these drugs, perphas
> inadvertently. And their tale is enough to move
> the coldest statitistician.
>
> Scientific knowledge is an intellectual
> power and weapon against disease, but
> its effect on people should be recognized
> with a human heart.
>
> Squiggles
=============================================The reasons for most problems with the understanding about the prescription of bzds are related to misprescribing and, most importantly, mismanagement. This is clearly pointed out in the World Health Organisation's report on "The Rational Use of Benzodazapines". There is no report that I know of that bzds are harmful to anywhere but to the smallest minority of patients that my doctor and I are aware of. Do you know of such a credible report?
Also, a doctor that doesn't even make the distinction between "addiction" and sustained medical dependency does not understand the fundamentals of addiction and is putting a patient at risk by mistakenly putting them into "detox" centers when it is not necessary...especially in the cases of chronic anxiety where a medicine is working.
The Canadian authorities lack of distinction based on the seeming political clout of an overtly political organisation such as benzo.org (if what is said about the extent of their influence is true, but I doubt it) seems to be simply stating the obvious - but where on the pill bottle is there room for the distinction between addiction and sustained medical dependence going to go? That's the pervue of the prescribing doctor and consumer groups and advocates of consumer power and knowledge to keep the big pharm co's from using the word "addiction" as a pejorative to then turn around and promote their new ad's as non-addictive or non-habit forming or some other such nonsense.
I agree that one person having a bad reaction to a drug is one too many.
I also am of the opinion that exaggerating risk taking away freedom of choice for the patient is equally if not more harmful - denying them the very medication that has a good chance of helping them without them even knowing about it. This is especially true in the case of anxiety disorders as I described in a post earlier where the dependence/withdrawal aspect of medical dependence on either bzds or AD's is a wash - and doubly so considering that stastistics don't apply in individual cases.
Considering all of this, it makes the benzo.org group outlook seem even more out of perspective.
Alan
Posted by Alan on November 25, 2002, at 18:18:48
In reply to Re: 5 Days on Lexepro = Efficacy side effects » Alan, posted by Squiggles on November 25, 2002, at 17:23:34
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010618/msgs/67768.html
This link is quite informative about the importance of making the distinction between "addiction" and medical dependence.
Kudos to her.
Has anyone heard from elizabeth lately?
Alan
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
[email protected]
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.