Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: thanks Re: Klonopin as a dumb drug » Franz

Posted by Rick on November 3, 2002, at 17:49:04

In reply to Re: thanks Re: Klonopin as a dumb drug »All » viridis, posted by Franz on November 2, 2002, at 17:55:56


> Can Klonopin be used on demand or is it better to use a small dose every day?

In general it's more effecive to use a small dose daily. If you still have occasional breakthrough anxiety, a small-dose of quick-acting Xanax would be useful. As you can see, I'm recommending exactly the protocol Viridis is using. Even if you develop dependency, coming off low-dose clonazepam with a slow taper is usually not much of a problem. (Note that I said "usually," not "never.")

I think it's preferable to NOT physically "feel" the drug, as you likely would with as-needed use, but instead to have the clonazepam in the "background," unobtrusively guarding against anxiety. And -- while there is no guarantee -- sleepiness and other side effects are likely to go away as your body adjusts to them. But the chemically-mediated anti-anxiety effects will remain. If you're like most maintenance dose clonazepam users, you will reach an ideal dose from a few months of experimentation (maybe even sooner), and will thereafter maintain about the same dose, or even find that you can decrease it somewhat. In summary, using clonazepam as-needed you will probably develop tolerance to the side effects but not to the theraputic effects.

> But the question is, how is that it was introduced in 1976 and we know about it so late?.

Clonazepam's original indication (and still its only official indication in many countries) was as an anti-epileptic, as Viridis pointed out. But it has been widely studied for anxiety disorders since the early eighties.

>Marketing strategies?

That's certainly not the case now, since clonazepam is off-patent. In fact, that's why there's so much more focus on SSRI's. With generic versions dominating the benzo marketplace, the original benzo developers (e.g., Roche for clonazepam), have no financial incentive to find new indications; promote the safety of the drugs and defend against benzophobia; or research new uses.

(There is indeed benzo research going on, but for a new variety that will hopefully be more precise in which GABA receptors are targeted -- the goal being to maintain the anti-anxiety effects while eliminating the side effects.)

Clonazepam, in particular, is effective in an extremely wide array of "unofficial" indications, including several anxiety disorders (e.g., GAD, OCD adjunct, gold-standard benzo for social anxiety); bipolar adjunct; tremor of various etilogies; pain, including TMJ; Restless Legs Syndrome; and more.

> Why not to take glycine then?

Believe me, that will not provide benefits even remotely similar to clonazepam. In fact, some preparations of glycine include Pangamic Acid, which carries risks including carcinogenity. (Not trying to scare anyone here...MOST glycine preparations are probably safe, except for TMG - Tri-Methyl-Glycine).

You should strongly consider a trial of daily small-dose clonazepam. As long as you haven't taken it more than a month, any possibility of withdrawal symptoms should be especially remote.

If, for some reason, you try it as-needed and either aren't finding sufficient relief, or don't like the side effects, keep in mind that your experience could be quite different with daily use.

Good Luck,
Rick


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:Rick thread:124171
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021101/msgs/126306.html