![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 17 to 41 of 47. Go back in thread:
Posted by Squiggles on August 22, 2002, at 21:05:16
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 20:43:50
>------------------------------------
Hi Alan,I better be more careful in my response - i apologize
for being so short - i was distracted with some
other work and thought i could nevertheless be
clear.
> Huh? Scientology?I mention Scientology, because the group
has a notorious reputation for anti-psychiatric
stances, including the nature of benzos, with
a tendency to be overzealous and enthusiastic
in encouraging complete cessation of psychiatric
drugs, sometimes when this is unwise and dangerous.I must have missed something.
>That is what i meant.
> Your statement that xanax "became" "addicting" and you hit "tolerance" makes no sense - especially after having asked what dose you were up to along with a whole host of other questions that may be illustrative as to how all of the variables you mentioned played into your particular case (Valium, diagnosis, lithium, synthroid, xanax dosage, etc.)
Oy vey - it's a long story - perhaps i should hunt my letter to
the Health Minister of Canada where things are described in detail;
for the present moment, i will give you a brief rundown;- i was on Xanax from 0.25 to 1.0 and not ever higher
than 3.0 over a great many years - maybe 12; the panic
attacks increased as time went on, and i felt the need
to take the "as needed" dosages more and more often to
stop the panic attacks; but as soon as the panic attack
went away, very soon i would have to take another Xanax as
a more severe panic attack would come after a couple of hours;
as you many know the half-life of Xanax is not long and the
panic attacks were very much associated with this short
interval between taking them.As for the Valium, that is a story that began everything;
Valium came before lithium, before my marriage, before
my thesis defence; Valium was taken erratically and without
supersion really (then being a popular drug); when i was
studying for my Ph.D. and a year or so before when
i was taking the Valium erratically, for the first time
in my life i experienced anxiety and panic.... eventually
i had a crash (a week of not eating, constantly crying,
terrible anxiety, nervousness - just inexplicable breakdown)This may have been concurrent with stress of graduate
studies, but it was like nothing i had ever experienced
before - it led to mania and deep suicidal depression,
as well as something like personality breakdown.That was when I was given lithium. The $64 million
dollar question is - did the Valium cause withdrawal
mimicking manic depression. I don't know.
> Bzd's, or other drugs that build up tolerance and have withdrawl don't "become" addicting, they simply always have had the tolerance/withdrawl phenomenon as part of the body's reaction to them.
In that case the dose on X should have been raised, just
as it was with clonazepam.
Hitting a "tolerance" or tolerance point implies some sort of arbitrary limit.Perhaps i needed more and had become adjusted to that dose, and it
no longer worked, as in the case of alcohol for example.
>
> Xanax does not cause panic attacks per se, but if one doesn't keep a steady state blood level, withdrawl will begin to occur which if too fast, will increase anxiety and lead to panic.
I don't think that we are disagreeing substantially here.
Yes, that is probably what happened.
If your need for more xanax because of fluctuating anxiety levels was not being met, it could be misinterpreted as the xanax causing panic rather than properly, the lack of it.
I am afraid that your fluctuating theory does not hold water.
The cycles of the anxiety were so dead on with the dose
of X and its diminuition of half-life that you would really
have to stretch this scenario to blame fluctuating anxiety.
> I'm sorry, but I am clueless about your point regarding old books and especially the book mentioned. Does this have anything to do with relying on older texts for the understanding of how these medications work and should or shouldn't be prescribed? Just curious.I think that there is information that is ignored in
modern statistical studies, which may be more explanatory
from a pharmaceutical point of view. And i will be glad to
quote from them, if you will allow me some time.I hope my message clarifies some earlier vagueness.
cheers,
Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on August 23, 2002, at 11:28:04
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 20:43:50
Alan,
You asked about variables - i forgot
to mention the fact that the Synthroid
was lowered from 0.155 to 0.112, and before
that had even been at a higher level; it
definitely contributed to anxiety. My dr.
knows this as presently i am kept slightly
hypo for that reason.However, it was not the only contributing
factor to anxiety - Xanax addiction/dependence
was as well, as dr. guided cessation of that
stopped the panic attacks.I regret that i do not recall the temporal
sequence of these events- i think Synth. adjustment
came first, and Xanax w/d came later.Squiggles
Posted by CLS on August 24, 2002, at 2:29:38
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 20:43:50
This is very enlighteniong since tonight I went through pure h*ll. I have been on Xanax for several years and also different antidepressents, antipsychotics. I just started taking Geodon, which works great but the side effects of anxieties is bothersome. I didn't realize how addictied Xanax can be until I decided today to only take 1 pill and switch to Seroquel to help calm me down. The withdrawl symptoms was so great I almost callled 911. My husband asked me what meds I was taking and then quickly did research on the Internet, while I was moaning on the couch. Once he realized that I was going through withdrawl symptoms he quickly got my Xanax and had me take 1 1/2 pills. And after another 45 minutes of agony I finaly felt normal (so to speak). So I learned a leason tonight 1) Xanax is very addicting and 2) I need to work with my pdoc to slowly reduce it and take something less addicting for my nervousness.
Posted by hiba on August 24, 2002, at 3:51:16
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence, posted by CLS on August 24, 2002, at 2:29:38
Dear CLS,
You didn't mention the strength of xanax you were on and simply calling it addictive doesn't make any sense. If you are on a high dosage of an antihypertensive medication and stopping or cutting the dosage to half abruptly, you will feel horrible withdrawal symptoms. Does this mean that the drug is addictive?
It is always patient's awkwardness that makes them moan benzos are addictive. You will have to taper the medication and your doc and pharmacist will surely have warned you over stopping or cutting the xanax dosage abruptly. Doing it without consulting with your doc or pharmacist and complaining the drug is addictive is not making enough fun. If you are on a medication especially on a psychotropic for a long time, your brain will need some time to adjust to the lack of that substance. It is quite rational. Again I like to quote great Shakespeare. 'THE FAULT DEAR BRUTUS IS NOT IN OUR STARS; BUT IN OURSELVES"
Thank you and hoping you will see your doc and taper the dose of xanax. But if it is working well, why should you quit it?
HIBA
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 8:08:41
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 15:43:16
Alan, and anyone interested,
here is the Merck's description of addiction
and withdrawal of benzodiazepines:http://www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/section15/chapter195/195d.htm
Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 8:15:56
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 20:43:50
Here is a guide for detoxification from
addiction to benzos. I could add the
voluminous collection that exists at benzo.org
(much of it from Dr. Heather Ashton) but i
think you have probably gone there yourself.http://www.vh.org/Providers/Conferences/CPS/33.html
Squiggles
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 8:20:31
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 22, 2002, at 20:43:50
A description of the effects, withdrawals, and
dependence/addiction of benzos from a physician's
reference manual - about as MOR as you can get:http://www.aafp.org/afp/20000401/2121.html
Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 11:07:06
In reply to Re: Addiction- benzos ( American Family Physician) » alan, posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 8:20:31
These references are all well and good (with several points that are self-admittedly speculative and inconclusive) but these references do not address the theme of my original interjection about the difference between "addiction" and "medical dependence".
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 11:46:36
In reply to Re: Addiction- benzos ( American Family Physician) » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 11:07:06
Here is the reason for the distinction:
Straight from a very intelligent horses's mouth:
infact if you wish to read anything really good
on this topic i recommend Charles Medawar -http://www.socialaudit.org.uk/4200peha.htm
Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 16:27:53
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence, posted by Squiggles on August 22, 2002, at 16:07:36
I've read throughly the link that you have provided. I see much reference to "discontinuation syndrome" as used (or misused) by the pharmecutical co's appropos AD's and do not see but an oblique reference in passing to bzds - one that didn't directly address the distinction as far as I am aware of.
Perhaps you will quote from what section of this link that directly addresses the issue of addiction vs. medical dependence as it relates to bzds.
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 16:56:11
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 16:27:53
Right,
You remind me of some profs i had:
ok - here is something hopefully more pertinent:
"Benzodiazepines were classified as drugs of dependence, in the early to mid 1980s, essentially because of their tendency
to cause withdrawal reactions, even when taken at the usual recommended dosage, though especially after long-term use.
This point is underlined in the 1990 report of the American Psychiatric Association's Task Force report on Benzodiazepine
Dependency:"The presence of a predictable abstinence syndrome following abrupt discontinuance of benzodiazepines is
evidence of the development of physiological dependence" ..."Historically, long-term, high-dose, physiological dependence has been called addiction, a term that implies
recreational use. In recent years, however, it has become apparent that physiological adaptation develops and
discontinuance symptoms can appear after regular daily therapeutic dose administration ... in some cases after a
few days or weeks of administration. Since therapeutic prescribing is clearly not recreational abuse, the term
dependence is preferred to addiction, and the abstinence syndrome is called a discontinuance syndrome." (APA,
1990)Essentially the same point is made in the College's report, Benzodiazepines: risks, benefits or dependence (1997):
"Dependence on benzodiazepines is mainly manifest by withdrawal symptoms on cessation", and "Dependence is now
recognised as a significant risk in patients receiving treatment for longer than one month..."
taken fromhttp://www.socialaudit.org.uk/4400rcp.htm
I would like to know a little more about you since
you are drilling me so hard. :-)Squiggles
Posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 18:58:29
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » alan, posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 16:56:11
> Right,
>
> You remind me of some profs i had:
>
> ok - here is something hopefully more pertinent:
>
>
> "Benzodiazepines were classified as drugs of dependence, in the early to mid 1980s, essentially because of their tendency
> to cause withdrawal reactions, even when taken at the usual recommended dosage, though especially after long-term use.
> This point is underlined in the 1990 report of the American Psychiatric Association's Task Force report on Benzodiazepine
> Dependency:
>
> "The presence of a predictable abstinence syndrome following abrupt discontinuance of benzodiazepines is
> evidence of the development of physiological dependence" ...
>
> "Historically, long-term, high-dose, physiological dependence has been called addiction, a term that implies
> recreational use. In recent years, however, it has become apparent that physiological adaptation develops and
> discontinuance symptoms can appear after regular daily therapeutic dose administration ... in some cases after a
> few days or weeks of administration. Since therapeutic prescribing is clearly not recreational abuse, the term
> dependence is preferred to addiction, and the abstinence syndrome is called a discontinuance syndrome." (APA,
> 1990)
>
> Essentially the same point is made in the College's report, Benzodiazepines: risks, benefits or dependence (1997):
> "Dependence on benzodiazepines is mainly manifest by withdrawal symptoms on cessation", and "Dependence is now
> recognised as a significant risk in patients receiving treatment for longer than one month..."
>
>
> taken from
>
> http://www.socialaudit.org.uk/4400rcp.htm
>
> I would like to know a little more about you since
> you are drilling me so hard. :-)
>
> Squiggles
------------------------------------------------
Well, firstly I have taken bzds in short and long term therapy off and on for twenty years now - but only after research about the risks involved in doing so after having AD's (commercially motivated), pushed upon me for my anxiety disorder when they clearly were not in my case working for anxiety.In the many posts to you I have tried to convey my dismay at having not been offered bzds on an equal footing with the AD's and have told you why I think things progressed in this manner.
Well I, as well as many others I was reading about, were scared to death of taking an "addictive" drug, after hearing them related to heroin or cocaine and being totally unacceptable for prescription as told to me by my corporate-line psychopharmacologists.
Come to find out, the anti-benzo movement that I and others were falling for hook, line, and sinker, were exaggerating risk to the point that they were scaring away patientws from the very drug that would help them. No end to hassles and haranguing from AD corporate-line docs about the addictiveness of bzds kept me from the very med that changed my life around.
The real irony is that the co's promoting AD's that have a somewhat similar profile as to withdrawl effects, have, in order to gain cometitive advantage over the bzds, witheld information that AD's indeed have the need to be monitored for tolerance and withdrawl just like the bzd's.
There is no literature claiming "significant risks" to long or short bzd monotherapy as your link describes. In fact the latest and most comprehensive report on the saftey of bzd therapy appears in the amalgamated synopsis of
ALL studies about bzds summarised by the World Health Organisation in their recent report on "THE RATIONAL USE OF BENZODIAZAPINES".My point is that the use of the word "addiction", while in sterile definition is correct due strictly to the phenomenon of tolerance/withdrawl, in CONTEXT the more appropriate usage that is adopted for obvious reasons is medical dependence as outlined in this link:
http://panicdisorder.about.com/library/weekly/aa031997.htm
"Addiction" is reserved in the medical community to describe in a pragmatic usage, those drugs that are not appropriate for medical use. To use the word inappropriately for the general public, for which little or no distinction is made, is scaring them unnecessarily into thinking that they will be no different than drug addicts on heroin or cocaine and most assuredly will suffer the same consequences as the addict that is addicted to illicit drugs.
Of course this is rarely the case - contrary to what these anti-benzo websites irresponsibly convey.
If this were indeed the case, bzds would have been jerked off of the market worldwide long ago - that is, if the risks were eqivalent to the hype surrounding them.
alan
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 19:39:29
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » Squiggles, posted by alan on August 24, 2002, at 18:58:29
Alan,
I don't think you or anyone else should
be intimidated into not taking benzos -
i think that each benzo has its "rational"
use, and if given according to the prescriptions
and guidelines of experts in this area,
the chances of addiction are not ubiquitous;
i believe that the short life ones are more
prone to that; personally i have not have
the same experience with Rivotril (thought my
doctor did raise it once or twice due to
tolerance - but this is over many years.)Having said that, i believe that withdrawal
is a much more dangerous experience and fraught
with unexpected symptoms which may be confused
with another illness by a novice doctor.As for the status of the drugs themselves, i
believe that in Canada and Britain they have
been raised to a higher level of narcotic
substances due to the testimonials and reports
from the medical community.The pharmaceutical brochures also warn of
habituation.With the growing awareness on how these drugs
affect people after 25 yrs of consumption (they
are relatively new) i think you can rest assured
that your doctor will now be more informed than
he or she was say 7 years ago.Squiggles
Posted by CLS on August 24, 2002, at 23:47:26
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence CLS, posted by hiba on August 24, 2002, at 3:51:16
Dear HIBA --
Thanks for your response. I'm taking 4 tablets daily (.5mg) each of Xanax. I had increased it becasue I have just started taking Geodon. Geodon works fime except that after it wears off a bit I get really nervous, which adds to my already parinoid state. I guess I can get caught up in the media bliz about how bad they are and feel guilty for taking them. I am going to talk to my pdoc when he comes back from vacation (which is today). Hopefully he will answer my e-mail. I guess I was pretty stupid in substituting Seqruel with Xanax. I should stick with the regime and not miss a dose. But I have to admit I have not been fully functional mentally. But hopefully the Geodon will do the trick to that.
CLS
> Dear CLS,
>
> You didn't mention the strength of xanax you were on and simply calling it addictive doesn't make any sense. If you are on a high dosage of an antihypertensive medication and stopping or cutting the dosage to half abruptly, you will feel horrible withdrawal symptoms. Does this mean that the drug is addictive?
> It is always patient's awkwardness that makes them moan benzos are addictive. You will have to taper the medication and your doc and pharmacist will surely have warned you over stopping or cutting the xanax dosage abruptly. Doing it without consulting with your doc or pharmacist and complaining the drug is addictive is not making enough fun. If you are on a medication especially on a psychotropic for a long time, your brain will need some time to adjust to the lack of that substance. It is quite rational. Again I like to quote great Shakespeare. 'THE FAULT DEAR BRUTUS IS NOT IN OUR STARS; BUT IN OURSELVES"
> Thank you and hoping you will see your doc and taper the dose of xanax. But if it is working well, why should you quit it?
> HIBA
Posted by hiba on August 25, 2002, at 1:11:29
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » alan, posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 19:39:29
Dear Squiggles,
I don't want to mess up with you and Mr. Alan and your war of words. But let me point something which will definitely be helpful to both of you.I have seen many links and quotings in both of your postings. And it is obvious both of you are speaking with the backing of personal experiences. I do have experiences with benzos and have used them. I definitely back Mr. Alan, he seems more rational and writes with a lot of sense. It doesn't mean you are senseless. You too have your liberty to express your findings.
Now let me also quote something."Although benzodiazepines are widely prescribed and used, most of this use is intermittent, brief, and for purposes of smptom relief. Research survey data indicate that long-term use of benzodiazepines is limited to a relatively small population of patients who take the drugs for legitimate, medically supervised symptom reduction. These patients tend to be older, to have chronic physical as well as psychiatric illness, and to have psychological distress, and these patients report that the drug use is therapeutic. THERE IS NO DATA TO SUGGEST THAT LONG-TERM THERAPEUTIC USE OF BENZODIAZEPINES BY PATIENTS COMMONLY LEADS TO DOSE ESCALATION OR TO RECREATIONAL USE.(Benzodiazepine: dependence, toxicity, and abuse. A task force report of the American Psychiatric Association p.55)
"There are significant differences between dependence in therapeutic use and abuse for socio-recreational purposes. Therapeutic dependence only very rarely leads on to abuse with dose escalation."(John Marks/ The benzodiazepines Use, overuse, misuse, abuse? p.114)
"People who receive prescriptions for benzodiazepines to treat medical problems rarely take more of the medication than their doctors recommend and do not often take it for periods longer than those required to treat their problems. There are certainly cases of benzodiazepine abuse, but considering the number of people who have taken this medication, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE ABUSED IT IS QUITE SMALL." (The encyclopedia of psychoactive drugs. Vol. 16 p.99-100)
"Because of the long half-lives and conversion to active metabolites with long durations of action, withdrawal or abstinence symptoms after prolonged use may not appear for a week or more after abrupt discontinuation of the drug and are likely to be mild. In most instances after tapered withdrawal of usual doses of long-acting agents, no abstinence syndrome occurs. (Goodman and Gilman's The Pharmacological basis of therapeutics vol.1 p.427)Instead of exchanging words and links I suggest you should read these books which are much reliable. There are many more to refer, but I only quote a few. Nowhere I could find the term "ADDICTION". Does it mean all these great psychiatists and scientists are misleading us with a linguistic squabble?
Okay, leave all these behind. Use common sense. We depend on a lot of things in our life. Air, water, food, relationships.... This table will be much longer. But do you ever think you are addicted to oxygen, water? or your spouse? What makes the difference here is depending on a true necessity is not an addiction, but depending on a created necessity is definitely an addiction. For those overanxious, panic patients, benzos are not a created necessity, but a true necessity. And depending on these substances can never be regarded as an addiction.
Good luck Squiggles, I am waiting for a level headed reply.
HIBA
Posted by alan on August 25, 2002, at 2:01:25
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » alan, posted by Squiggles on August 24, 2002, at 19:39:29
> Alan,
>
> I don't think you or anyone else should
> be intimidated into not taking benzos -
> i think that each benzo has its "rational"
> use, and if given according to the prescriptions
> and guidelines of experts in this area,
> the chances of addiction are not ubiquitous;
> i believe that the short life ones are more
> prone to that; personally i have not have
> the same experience with Rivotril (thought my
> doctor did raise it once or twice due to
> tolerance - but this is over many years.)
>
> Having said that, i believe that withdrawal
> is a much more dangerous experience and fraught
> with unexpected symptoms which may be confused
> with another illness by a novice doctor.
>
> As for the status of the drugs themselves, i
> believe that in Canada and Britain they have
> been raised to a higher level of narcotic
> substances due to the testimonials and reports
> from the medical community.
>
> The pharmaceutical brochures also warn of
> habituation.
>
> With the growing awareness on how these drugs
> affect people after 25 yrs of consumption (they
> are relatively new) i think you can rest assured
> that your doctor will now be more informed than
> he or she was say 7 years ago.
>
> Squiggles
----------------------------------------------
Yes, and that is why they are being prescribed now more than ever. If any trend is to be seen with prescribing habits of specialists that know and understand these medications, it is that the initial backlash to overprescribing when they first were introduced over 40 years ago (sound familiar - as in ssri's?) is now being supplanted by knowledgeable use of these drugs - despite the stigma that cult groups such as the backward looking benzo.org continue to attempt to inflict on these perfectly and overall safe drugs and the vulnerable med-phobic chronic anxiety sufferers that are in need of them.I've already debunked the big bad benzo monster in my mind...and after years of being deprived the medication by a couple of ill-informed, or just plain old idealogue benzophobic docs...but many others new to this pathetic game carried on by anti-benzo zealotry, don't stand a chance of escaping the same zeal of these highly political and moralistic organisations.
It's alright though. Websites such as this (psycobabble) where people can make up their own minds will eventually educate those that would otherwise fall victim to these far-from-medical, indeed unethical organisations.
There are enough obstacles standing between doctor and patient including commercialism, simple misinformation, and medical ideology. It's too bad that benzophobic evangilists have to further muddy the waters with politically motivated websites that mistakenly believe that scaremongering to make the end justify the means are somehow "legitimate" obstacles.
Pathetic.
Alan
Posted by Squiggles on August 25, 2002, at 8:28:07
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence, posted by hiba on August 25, 2002, at 1:11:29
Hiba,
Well, I am very sorry that the American Psychiatric
Association lacks data on this issue - perhaps with
future case reports they will acquire it.
Actually, it was not my dr. who got the information
about he addictive nature of Xanax given on a daily
basis that was troublesome - it was the pharmacist
who warned her that they are addictive given under
such circumstances.It was at that point that i realized i was addicted
and that he took measures from the Chief of Psychiatry
to change the situation.Squiggles
Posted by hiba on August 25, 2002, at 23:59:52
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » hiba, posted by Squiggles on August 25, 2002, at 8:28:07
Dear Squiggles,
It is amazing, that you, your pdoc and pharmacist still possess the data which APA lacks.
I saw the term "addiction" attributed to benzos only on the net. And I have enough reason to believe it is a creation of patient awkwardness.Physicians have no other options than to believe their patients.So at least some of them are forced to assume the term "addictive"(that is why you can see in some websites physicians use this term to dub benzos.) Did you see the posting of CLS above? It is an ideal example of patient awkwardness. Consuming a psychotropic drug for years and insisting on abrupt withdrawal is not much reasonable.Most of those horror stories of benzo withdrawal I read on the net are definitely the results of inappropriate use and abrupt withdrawal.
There is no doubt benzos cause physiological and psychological dependence. But "sometimes to understand the evil, you will have to go evil in details." So if you go in details without a biased outlook you can make yourself sure that this dependence is much, much better than leading a hellish life. When there are no safer alternatives to calm agitation, what do you suggest to do? Should we go back to the primitive way of handcuffing the patient and fixing him or her in chains?
Once again, I emphasize benzos are much safer than alcohol, tobacco and Antidepressants(newer and older ones). Because benzos don't cause any long term damage as alcohol and tobacco do. They don't have nasty side effects like sexual dysfunction attributable to antidepressants.Take care Squiggles,
HIBA
Posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 0:16:56
In reply to Re: Oh ! Not again Squiggles, posted by hiba on August 25, 2002, at 23:59:52
Hi. Dinah here, filling in for Dr. Bob while he's out.
I wanted to remind you that while it's fine to have different opinions, the rules of this site require that debate be carried on with a certain amount of civility and respect for the other poster.
I'm going to post a link to the civility guidelines of the site, and ask that you please keep the discussion to ideas rather than personalities.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
I really appreciate your cooperation in taking extra care of the site while Dr. Bob is away.
Thanks,
Dinah
Posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 0:21:53
In reply to Re: To...Addiction vs. Medical dependence » hiba, posted by Squiggles on August 25, 2002, at 8:28:07
It makes my job filling in for Dr. Bob a lot easier. And I really do appreciate your measured response.
Thanks,
Dinah
Posted by hiba on August 26, 2002, at 1:16:09
In reply to Re: Please be careful... » hiba, posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 0:16:56
Dear Dinah,
I don't what made my message offensive. Could you please specify it? Is it the title? If so I apologize
HIBA
Posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 1:48:38
In reply to Re: Please be careful..., posted by hiba on August 26, 2002, at 1:16:09
Hello Hiba,
That wasn't an official Please Be Civil, just a gentle reminder. I'm just being extra careful I suppose. And since I'm not a regular on the meds board, I wasn't sure how long you had been here, or how familiar you were with the civility guidelines.
It was based on the title coupled with a couple of sentences from your prior post.
"I definitely back Mr. Alan, he seems more rational and writes with a lot of sense. It doesn't mean you are senseless. You too have your liberty to express your findings."
"Good luck Squiggles, I am waiting for a level headed reply."
And I guess those sentences would have been fine had they said "His position makes more sense to me" rather than "He seems more rational". A subtle difference, but one refers to the ideas expressed while the other refers to the poster.
Nothing uncivil, but perhaps a bit challenging especially in light of the title to your later post? So I suppose I was just afraid that the discussion was getting more personal.
Perhaps I'm reading into it a bit more than was intended, and if so I apologize for overreacting. I want to make clear that it was not an official Please Be Civil. I just hate giving official Please Be Civils and so was trying to keep this thread from getting contentious. :)
Again, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.
Dinah
P.S. Dr. Bob prefers that posts about administrative matters be discussed on Psycho-Babble Administration. There are links at the top of the page.
Posted by hiba on August 26, 2002, at 2:50:31
In reply to Re: Please be careful... » hiba, posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 1:48:38
Dear Dinah,
Thank you for the specification. I am sorry for using such phrases. I owe this board and especially Squiggles an apology. I didn't mean to hurt anybody. I know the value of this support group and messages this board contain. I shouldn't have used such words. Once again I sincerely apologize to Squiggles and all in this forum
HIBA
Posted by Dinah on August 26, 2002, at 4:42:23
In reply to Re: Sorry, Squiggles, Dinah and Others..., posted by hiba on August 26, 2002, at 2:50:31
I am sorry Hiba. I certainly didn't want to make you feel bad about it. I always quake in fear of a PBC myself, and I don't want to make anyone else feel bad.
Perhaps I was just trying too hard to ward off trouble, and ended up causing it. :(
Please don't take it too much to heart. As I said before, it wasn't a Please Be Civil, just an expression of concern on my part, and perhaps unwarranted. This isn't my regular job you know. :)
So, how about we agree. I won't beat myself up too much over it, if you don't either. And I am sorry if I misunderstood.
Deal?
(And we really shouldn't discuss it any further here or I'm going to be in trouble with Dr. Bob for not redirecting this to Admin. :) )
Posted by Squiggles on August 26, 2002, at 7:20:27
In reply to Re: Oh ! Not again Squiggles, posted by hiba on August 25, 2002, at 23:59:52
I did not see the word "addiction" myself,
over the counter, just heard it - perhaps
it was loosely used.Squiggles
Go forward in 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.