dalpat077
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2019
- Messages
- 3,092
As some may be aware: I've just written a veritable thesis, or two, on another thread with regards benzodiazepine and z-drug use and tapering. But given that it's not in NPD it may not have garnered the attention of the academics among us. Hence this thread.
To summarize: many will know I've now been on Alprazolam and Zopiclone for just over a year now, at night, for sleep. Prescription and legitimate pharma. Not for abuse or recreation. Alprazolam: 1 x 1mg nightly and sometimes, rarely, 2 x 1mg. Zopiclone: 1 x 7.5mg nightly (only twice have experimented with 2 x 7.5mg).
Odd as it may sound: of late I've been mucking about with tapering and relative withdrawal symptoms. Just because I can. Enquiring mind or sucker for punishment or bored to tears. Take your pick. Maybe all three!
Reason for now posting: given that the above are the ONLY two substances having being used in the last year I've noticed some nuances that I would never have noticed before. In other words and during a previous stint, some ten years ago, with these things: there were all sorts of other factors at play e.g. alcohol, late nights, erratic and unpredictable lifestyle, you get the picture. In some sense therefore: this has inadvertently turned out to be, what I would deem, my very own little clinical trial i.e. everything a constant including lifestyle, eating habits, personal situation, etc. And this has now led to my wondering about a few things and that I have not seen detailed in any literature or papers. And given that benzodiazepines and, to a lesser extent z-drugs, have been a subject of interest and source of fascination to me, purely from historical and pharmacological points of view, for many years (since said previous stint) I think I've done my fair share of research. Not to mention having experienced physical dependence and withdrawal and subsequent, successful, tapering.
Aside from what I posted on the other thread mentioned I'm now wondering about all of the below for the sake of my own interest.
Assuming long term use i.e. at least +1 year:
Is it possible that as tolerance builds: said tolerance is built and negates the side effects but not the indicated actions? In other words and taking Alprazolam as an example: Alprazolam is prescribed to treat anxiety and panic disorders. But one side effect is sedation. Over time and as tolerance builds: said side effect becomes less pronounced and may even disappear. But does that necessarily mean that tolerance is also built against its indicated action? Put another way: is it possible that while the side effects become less pronounced and may even disappear: it is still being effective for said anxiety and panic disorders?
Moving on to the next issue...
In this past year I've been in contact, on the forums publicly, with at least two people who have been using the same benzodiazepine or z-drug for decades and at the same dosage (not for recreational purposes, not being abused, used as prescribed). I also know of two people, in real life, who have been using the exact same z-drugs, also for decades, and at the same dosage, to combat insomnia. Worth noting that they are unable to sleep naturally without them.
The above begs two questions in my mind:
If one is constantly building tolerance to these pharmaceuticals: then why do they still work for their intended purpose after decades of use at the same consistent and constant dosage? My initial assumption would be that it's the placebo effect at play. The flaw in such assumption: there is no doubt in my mind that they would suffer withdrawal should they immediately cease their use. And which brings me to the below.
After decades of use of the same benzodiazepine at the same consistent and constant dosage: why do individuals not start showing signs of withdrawal symptoms after a period while on the same consistent and constant dosage? In other words: as tolerance builds then one would expect said person to begin to suffer withdrawal and therefore increase their dosage to alleviate. But from what I gather this isn't the case i.e. this only becomes the case if it's the side effects that are desirable and have been negated or have disappeared due to tolerance having being built up over time.
In the case of z-drugs and in particular Zopiclone and Zolpidem and which are indicated for insomnia: I can and do understand that it's possible that after an extended period of time they no longer have the same effect i.e. they become less effective over time for their indicated action. But this does not seem to be a rule of thumb or a given.
Note: all of the above not based on research nor statements of fact nor any qualified opinions. The above based purely on anecdotal evidence (my interpretation thereof anyway) and personal experience.
I'm not concerned with the details of the possible physiological harm due to long term usage i.e. said is well documented.
I guess the long and short of it: there's ample studies and literature that warn against the dangers of long term benzodiazepine and z-drug use. Usually when it comes to physical addiction potential and side effects. But we seem to fall a bit short when it comes to extolling the virtues of these pharmaceuticals. And from the little that I've seen: this has adverse effects e.g. people beating themselves because they've been using said pharmaceuticals for an extended period of time and feel that they "just should" get off of them and sometimes not for any valid reason i.e. not taking into account that the pros of use may by far exceed the cons even if only for a given period or under a given set of circumstances.
Also worth being clear about something: none of the above applicable to abuse or using for recreational purposes i.e. not to be construed as a go-ahead or an endorsement of a 100mg per day Alprazolam bender.
To summarize: many will know I've now been on Alprazolam and Zopiclone for just over a year now, at night, for sleep. Prescription and legitimate pharma. Not for abuse or recreation. Alprazolam: 1 x 1mg nightly and sometimes, rarely, 2 x 1mg. Zopiclone: 1 x 7.5mg nightly (only twice have experimented with 2 x 7.5mg).
Odd as it may sound: of late I've been mucking about with tapering and relative withdrawal symptoms. Just because I can. Enquiring mind or sucker for punishment or bored to tears. Take your pick. Maybe all three!
Reason for now posting: given that the above are the ONLY two substances having being used in the last year I've noticed some nuances that I would never have noticed before. In other words and during a previous stint, some ten years ago, with these things: there were all sorts of other factors at play e.g. alcohol, late nights, erratic and unpredictable lifestyle, you get the picture. In some sense therefore: this has inadvertently turned out to be, what I would deem, my very own little clinical trial i.e. everything a constant including lifestyle, eating habits, personal situation, etc. And this has now led to my wondering about a few things and that I have not seen detailed in any literature or papers. And given that benzodiazepines and, to a lesser extent z-drugs, have been a subject of interest and source of fascination to me, purely from historical and pharmacological points of view, for many years (since said previous stint) I think I've done my fair share of research. Not to mention having experienced physical dependence and withdrawal and subsequent, successful, tapering.
Aside from what I posted on the other thread mentioned I'm now wondering about all of the below for the sake of my own interest.
Assuming long term use i.e. at least +1 year:
Is it possible that as tolerance builds: said tolerance is built and negates the side effects but not the indicated actions? In other words and taking Alprazolam as an example: Alprazolam is prescribed to treat anxiety and panic disorders. But one side effect is sedation. Over time and as tolerance builds: said side effect becomes less pronounced and may even disappear. But does that necessarily mean that tolerance is also built against its indicated action? Put another way: is it possible that while the side effects become less pronounced and may even disappear: it is still being effective for said anxiety and panic disorders?
Moving on to the next issue...
In this past year I've been in contact, on the forums publicly, with at least two people who have been using the same benzodiazepine or z-drug for decades and at the same dosage (not for recreational purposes, not being abused, used as prescribed). I also know of two people, in real life, who have been using the exact same z-drugs, also for decades, and at the same dosage, to combat insomnia. Worth noting that they are unable to sleep naturally without them.
The above begs two questions in my mind:
If one is constantly building tolerance to these pharmaceuticals: then why do they still work for their intended purpose after decades of use at the same consistent and constant dosage? My initial assumption would be that it's the placebo effect at play. The flaw in such assumption: there is no doubt in my mind that they would suffer withdrawal should they immediately cease their use. And which brings me to the below.
After decades of use of the same benzodiazepine at the same consistent and constant dosage: why do individuals not start showing signs of withdrawal symptoms after a period while on the same consistent and constant dosage? In other words: as tolerance builds then one would expect said person to begin to suffer withdrawal and therefore increase their dosage to alleviate. But from what I gather this isn't the case i.e. this only becomes the case if it's the side effects that are desirable and have been negated or have disappeared due to tolerance having being built up over time.
In the case of z-drugs and in particular Zopiclone and Zolpidem and which are indicated for insomnia: I can and do understand that it's possible that after an extended period of time they no longer have the same effect i.e. they become less effective over time for their indicated action. But this does not seem to be a rule of thumb or a given.
Note: all of the above not based on research nor statements of fact nor any qualified opinions. The above based purely on anecdotal evidence (my interpretation thereof anyway) and personal experience.
I'm not concerned with the details of the possible physiological harm due to long term usage i.e. said is well documented.
I guess the long and short of it: there's ample studies and literature that warn against the dangers of long term benzodiazepine and z-drug use. Usually when it comes to physical addiction potential and side effects. But we seem to fall a bit short when it comes to extolling the virtues of these pharmaceuticals. And from the little that I've seen: this has adverse effects e.g. people beating themselves because they've been using said pharmaceuticals for an extended period of time and feel that they "just should" get off of them and sometimes not for any valid reason i.e. not taking into account that the pros of use may by far exceed the cons even if only for a given period or under a given set of circumstances.
Also worth being clear about something: none of the above applicable to abuse or using for recreational purposes i.e. not to be construed as a go-ahead or an endorsement of a 100mg per day Alprazolam bender.
