Vastness
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2006
- Messages
- 2,319
I believe (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that evidence is mounting somewhat for benzodiazepines, especially when used long term, being a potential risk factor for Alzheimer's disease as a consequence of structural changes occurring within the brain, some of which may be permanent.
I'm also aware that alcohol is itself a neurotoxin (or, at least, can act as a neurotoxin in certain cases, especially after long term and frequent exposure).
However what I would be very interested to see, if it has been done (which I don't think it has been) is some kind of quantitative comparison between the relative harm done by these 2 drugs (or more accurately, one drug and one class of very similar drugs) compared to each other.
Obviously the comparison may be somewhat difficult to do because of the vastly different ways in which these substances are consumed, as well as the social climate in which we live. I think the different ways in which these things are reported, and the reaction to this reporting, is somewhat interesting in that alcohol is an accepted part of everyday life, for the most part, despite everyone knowing that it is bad for you, and whenever a study comes out that analyses the already known neurologically damaging effects of alcohol in some new way, no-one really bats an eyelid. Benzos on the other hand are medically prescribed psychiatric drugs, so there is an interesting duality between somewhat justified outrage at the idea that these widely prescribed substances might actually be causing patients harm, as well as a general lack of concern (except in the vaguest sense) from others at the idea, feeling either that the dangers are overblown or just that it's no surprise they could be dangerous in some way but this danger never factored into their decision to use them.
Anyway I would be interested if anyone with some understanding of both these substances and the mechanism by which they cause irreversible neurological deficits (if indeed they do) would like to hazard an educated guess (or, better yet, point me towards an actual study) at which of these substances are more harmful in the long term, given roughly equivalent dose quantities and dosing frequencies. I know dose quantities cannot be directly compared but perhaps there is some way to reach an approximate comparison by either some arbitrary measure of "level of intoxication", or, more scientifically, by comparing binding affinities?
My gut feeling is that alcohol is likely still the most harmful one, being a particularly dirty drug with negative effects on a huge range of biological systems. Although please note - for the purposes of this discussion I am only interested in direct effects on the brain - so please do not take potential liver damage, for example, or any non-neurological effects into account.
Thanks in advance for any responses!
As a secondary query, I wonder out of the benzodiazepines if there has been any analysis of which ones are the least damaging - I believe I read something recently that suggested that shorter acting ones such as alprazolam typically caused less significant lasting changes than longer acting ones such as diazepam and clonazepam, which really surprised me because I had always considered diazepam especially to be a very benign substance, whereas my limited experience with alpazolam seemed to cause more negative side effects. Obviously if this is true though it just goes to show the subjective anecdote of a single person is no indicator whatsoever for the true properties of any substance... anyway if anyone can point me towards any kind of study or information on this, I would be very grateful also.
I'm also aware that alcohol is itself a neurotoxin (or, at least, can act as a neurotoxin in certain cases, especially after long term and frequent exposure).
However what I would be very interested to see, if it has been done (which I don't think it has been) is some kind of quantitative comparison between the relative harm done by these 2 drugs (or more accurately, one drug and one class of very similar drugs) compared to each other.
Obviously the comparison may be somewhat difficult to do because of the vastly different ways in which these substances are consumed, as well as the social climate in which we live. I think the different ways in which these things are reported, and the reaction to this reporting, is somewhat interesting in that alcohol is an accepted part of everyday life, for the most part, despite everyone knowing that it is bad for you, and whenever a study comes out that analyses the already known neurologically damaging effects of alcohol in some new way, no-one really bats an eyelid. Benzos on the other hand are medically prescribed psychiatric drugs, so there is an interesting duality between somewhat justified outrage at the idea that these widely prescribed substances might actually be causing patients harm, as well as a general lack of concern (except in the vaguest sense) from others at the idea, feeling either that the dangers are overblown or just that it's no surprise they could be dangerous in some way but this danger never factored into their decision to use them.
Anyway I would be interested if anyone with some understanding of both these substances and the mechanism by which they cause irreversible neurological deficits (if indeed they do) would like to hazard an educated guess (or, better yet, point me towards an actual study) at which of these substances are more harmful in the long term, given roughly equivalent dose quantities and dosing frequencies. I know dose quantities cannot be directly compared but perhaps there is some way to reach an approximate comparison by either some arbitrary measure of "level of intoxication", or, more scientifically, by comparing binding affinities?
My gut feeling is that alcohol is likely still the most harmful one, being a particularly dirty drug with negative effects on a huge range of biological systems. Although please note - for the purposes of this discussion I am only interested in direct effects on the brain - so please do not take potential liver damage, for example, or any non-neurological effects into account.
Thanks in advance for any responses!
As a secondary query, I wonder out of the benzodiazepines if there has been any analysis of which ones are the least damaging - I believe I read something recently that suggested that shorter acting ones such as alprazolam typically caused less significant lasting changes than longer acting ones such as diazepam and clonazepam, which really surprised me because I had always considered diazepam especially to be a very benign substance, whereas my limited experience with alpazolam seemed to cause more negative side effects. Obviously if this is true though it just goes to show the subjective anecdote of a single person is no indicator whatsoever for the true properties of any substance... anyway if anyone can point me towards any kind of study or information on this, I would be very grateful also.
