Posted by FredPotter on December 12, 2002, at 22:41:57
In reply to Re: follow up to antianxiety meds..., posted by utopizen on December 11, 2002, at 20:12:05
> This is crazy. Serentil did the same thing back in the 60's-- it was an antipsychotic, like the med you took, claiming to have "special" properties particular to the anxiety psychotic people get. (It's called psychic tension).
>
> Well anyway, some nifty marketing person came up with the idea to make this sound like another barbituate or something, and ran an ad in a doctor's journal that said lines like "for the businessman who can't fit in to his new job," "for the housewife who can't make friends," "for the mother who can't adjust to moving."
>
> Look I understand it helped you but I realize consider it unethical to give someone who does not have a psychotic condition an antipsychotic unless they are actually treatment resistant. Just because YOUR DOCTOR is resistant to benzos doesn't make YOU treatment resistant, it makes YOUR DOCTOR resistant to prescribing what is safest to cover himself in case you feel like you were led into an "addictive" substance.
>
> It's really, really sad. I suppose I can't say it's terrible to take an antipsychotic if one is indeed treatment resistant, but unfortunately doctors manage to interpret this as if responding to benzo treatment doesn't matter.
>
> If you respond to benzo treatment, you are not treatment resistant. YOUR DOCTOR IS resistant to treating you.Well said there! Years ago a Dr prescribed me first Largactil, then Eulactil and then Stelazine. Only after I became quite ill with the restless exhaustion they caused was I tried on something else. I often wonder if they did any lasting harm
poster:FredPotter
thread:130363
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021210/msgs/131585.html