Does anyone know if Sifrol (restless legs medication) has any recreational value by any chance?
It says it acts as an agonist for the D2, D3, and D4 dopamine receptors
Sifrol = Mirapex = Pramipexole. Also used for Parkinson's.
This was discussed recently
here; short answer not really, that's not how dopamine works; even if it DID have recreational value, by the time you'd be in the zone of getting high you'd have too many negative side effects, psychotic agitation included.
Antipsychotics destroy lives. People report being in good health when they come off them. So many side effects. No benefits.
It is unfortunate how prevalent this view is here. The basic philosophy of Bluelight is "better living through chemistry," as
@4meSM has already stated, neuroleptics (antipsychotics) certainly provide better living for some. Yes, they have a plethora of troubling side effects. The thing is, these are often preferable to the desperate, unhappy lives that many schizophrenics live.
However, I suspect that the reason so many people are against neuroleptics here is that they are indeed overprescribed. Atypicals (or 2nd generation antipsychotics*) in particular seem to be marketed for nearly every psychiatric condition you can think of. This is probably excessive, although it is true that a wide variety of patients can and do benefit from them particularly as adjuncts prescribed together with other drugs.
The problem in general, and I have discussed this at some length elsewhere, is that psychiatric diagnoses are not neat and discrete little boxes that people fit into and which have a one-to-one relationship with prescribing practices. This algorithmic approach works great for many physical ailments but falls short in psychiatry, where it is adopted only by pharmaceutical and insurance companies, and the laziest of psychiatrists. Psychiatric treatments need to be highly individualized. Neuroleptics are prescribed too broadly, which is why many people have bad experiences (either first- or second-hand) with them. That doesn't mean they should be ruled out entirely and certainly doesn't mean they have "no benefits." This is a foolish and naïve view which nonetheless is understandable in people who've experienced unnecessary prescribing but who've never experienced, or known a person with, serious psychotic illness.
* Some consider aripiprazole [Abilify] and its derivatives "3rd generation."
Dopamine is unquestionably linked to pleasure/reinforcement, particularly with sexual related activity, but I'm sure other activities also.
Does taking anti-psychotics actually impact that, a pleasure/passion killer basically?
I ask this exclusively as, after using meth I understand now acutely how much pleasure is associated with a dopamine rush.
Blocking it consistently I mean, that's gotta suck.
.....
Does it?
To the question at hand, yes, antipsychotics blunt affect and subjective emotional experiences, which I recently wrote about
here. The thing is that this is preferable to life as a schizophrenic, or society having to deal with a problematic schizophrenic.
I believe it was Szasz that said that neurotics had symptoms that trouble them and psychotics had symptoms that trouble others. While there is a truth to this in that many psychotics only wind up getting treatment either reluctantly or outright involuntarily because they get hospitalized due to troubling behaviors, this statement lacks compassion in a profound way: the inner turmoil of schizophrenia is a horrible way to live—the stratospherically (and tragically) high rates of suicide bear this out. Antipsychotics do help, and the lived experience of many bears this out. I've seen many, many people come in resistant to treatment and leave taking medication and understanding in a very real way that it is helpful, even continuing to take voluntarily that which was originally given to them forcibly.
