Benzos Wow, never gave Pyrazolam a chance.

[roi]

There's sedation at higher doses, just start with 0.5mg and see if that works for you.

 

[pally pete]

At 5 mg there is some sedation.

 

[morphonorconic]

The potency of one benzodiazepine is only comparable to the potency of any other benzodiazepine(s) if and only if potency is used as a measure of the quantity required to achieve a particular effect.

For example, one could compare the potency of temazepam to that of clonazepam by finding the proportion between the dosage of temazepam necessitated to result in a degree of somnolence that is equivalent to the degree of anxiolysis produced by some quantity of clonazepam. In other words, one could say 30 mg temazepam is equipotent to 2 mg clonazepam, if that specific dosage of the former is as hypnotic as the dosage of the latter is sedating—an equivalency involving the relation of two parameters.

Or one could say 180 mg temazepam is equipotent to 2 mg clonazepam if the former is as anxiolytic as the latter—an equivalency involving only one parameter.

I understand the point you're trying to make, and I'm not going to say I believe it is fascile, but that it is rather exaggerated. To systematically attempt to break down into single therapeutic effect-based parameters what no equivalency chart has managed to agree on in the most rudimentary terms, and formulate a working method for determining the appropriate dose of one drug based on the desired effects in which case (to make my point as this would be highly unlikely) [up to] six different parameters would have to be accounted for and worked out accordingly. This would be painstaking, and I don't know how one would initially establish the parameters, assigning a value to each variable. I suppose it would be based on experience with the familiar one. I have to point out that this essentially contradicting your claim that all benzos are within the context of application are the same. Many will (myself included) fundamentally agree. However, others are liable to become downright angry and defensive. Pharmacologically, all benzodiazepines are MORE OR LESS the same. Now, with that said, with regards to individual pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, they differ significantly. It is also important to keep in mind two very key factors [1] Published cited research data regarding the generally accepted 6: anxiolytic, sedative, hypnotic, skeletal muscle relaxant, amnestic, and anti-convulsant effects of even the most popularly prescribed drugs are scattered, scarce, and are often, for all intensive and useful purposes, inconclusive. And [2] these effects are highly subjective from person to person, even among one individual on different days. So to reiterate, in essense we are in agreement, but if say we agree 180mg of temazepam is equipotent to 2mg of clonazepam- strictly speaking in terms of their respective anxiolytic effects: 2mg of clonazepam will absolutely exhibit highly potent anxiolytic effects within the user, but just because temazepam isn't generally considered an anxiety relieving benzo, I for one can tell you it works just fine to relieve my anxiety if I need it to, and more noteworthy: If that same user were to take 180mg of temazepam, not only would any anxiety be anhilated, but so to would the user, as they'd likely sleep for at least 12-18hrs and wake up groggy as hell. And still free of anxiety, likely into the following day.

But one cannot make any meaningful comparison between the potency of two different benzodiazepines without accounting for differences in the efficacy of their set of effects.

One must necessarily qualify what pharmacological effect they're using to compare the drugs' potencies for the equivalency to be serviceable and of any real value. This is because, while all benzodiazepines have the same set of effects, different benzodiazepines may be more effective than others at producing one or more of those effects, be it anxiolysis or sedation or disinhibition or ataxia or skeletal muscle relaxation or CNS depression or anterograde amnesia or euphoria or antiepileptogenesis and so on.

Consider how useless it would be to assert, for example, that 0.25 mg triazolam is equivalent to 1 mg diazepam. Equivalent for what? To be sure, the effects of triazolam and diazepam are essentially identical. But the dosage comparison is patently invalid nonetheless, because the two drugs produce those identical effects with nonidentical efficacities; triazolam is less successful than diazepam as a sedative, but diazepam is less successful than triazolam as a hypnotic, even though both drugs act as sedatives and hypnotics in sufficient doses.

This is where the pharmacological properties do in fact distinguish certain benzos from others. The effects of diazepam and triazolam exactly the same? Not even. Diazepam is like your mom gently scratching your back and reading you to sleep whereas triazolam is like your mom giving you Dimetapp and NyQuil to knock your little ass out. Yes, they could be swapped out if the dose was adjusted but even then the effects are still distinctly different. I'd say the same is true in the differences between triazolobenzodiazepines and classic benzos all around. And Halcion? The strongest prescription triazole-hypnotic available next to diazepam, the worldwide gold standard benzo which functions as THE go-to in countless emergency and therapeutic circumstances. Yes, they all exert an effect GABA etc. But they are all different. Some very different from others, some with only subtle differences.

*And I'd like to note, especially with the advent of all the NEW ONE's out, potent metabolites of pharmas, and extremely potent halogenated triazoles, chemistry is going to play a bigger role in diversifying the range of effects people experience, as previously unactivated or more or less uninvolved receptor subunits begin to factor in, the spectrum will only broaden. And what it ultimately comes down to is subjectivity. What works, what doesn't. What you like, what you think sucks, and so forth.


Just please, be careful y'all for your own sake. You know benzos, you've tried alprazolam, lorazepam, diazepam, clonazepam and taken large doses of each, so you consider your tolerance to be high. I just want to convey to you as clearly and earnestly as possible that you're probably right- if you take 6-8 milligrams or more per day (~x10 valium) you do have a serious tolerance. But if you decide to give some of these new ones a shot, and more than any other-flubromazolam- is the one that comes to mind, you won't even believe how with your pre-existing tolerance such a small dose (0.25-1mg) could have you relaxing as you turn on a series at five after school/work, and then you wake up having played through six episodes of your show, it's dark, and you have no memory of even closing your eyes. And tolerance builds fast. Really fast. So if you're intent, Neither I nor anyone else is exaggerating when we tell you to go easy, and treat them with respect. A few of these are the most potent benzodiazepines the world has ever known.

 

[Bizness1776]

The potency of one benzodiazepine is only comparable to the potency of any other benzodiazepine(s) if and only if potency is used as a measure of the quantity required to achieve a particular effect.


For example, one could compare the potency of temazepam to that of clonazepam by finding the proportion between the dosage of temazepam necessitated to result in a degree of somnolence that is equivalent to the degree of anxiolysis produced by some quantity of clonazepam. In other words, one could say 30 mg temazepam is equipotent to 2 mg clonazepam, if that specific dosage of the former is as hypnotic as the dosage of the latter is sedating—an equivalency involving the relation of two parameters.


Or one could say 180 mg temazepam is equipotent to 2 mg clonazepam if the former is as anxiolytic as the latter—an equivalency involving only one parameter.


But one cannot make any meaningful comparison between the potency of two different benzodiazepines without accounting for differences in the efficacy of their set of effects.


One must necessarily qualify what pharmacological effect they're using to compare the drugs' potencies for the equivalency to be serviceable and of any real value. This is because, while all benzodiazepines have the same set of effects, different benzodiazepines may be more effective than others at producing one or more of those effects, be it anxiolysis or sedation or disinhibition or ataxia or skeletal muscle relaxation or CNS depression or anterograde amnesia or euphoria or antiepileptogenesis and so on.


Consider how useless it would be to assert, for example, that 0.25 mg triazolam is equivalent to 1 mg diazepam. Equivalent for what? To be sure, the effects of triazolam and diazepam are essentially identical. But the dosage comparison is patently invalid nonetheless, because the two drugs produce those identical effects with nonidentical efficacities; triazolam is less successful than diazepam as a sedative, but diazepam is less successful than triazolam as a hypnotic, even though both drugs act as sedatives and hypnotics in sufficient doses.


So then, the immediate consequence is that, while their ED50 and LD50 are not incomparable, it would be impractical and unworkable for one to employ the dosage equivalency of the two drugs for a linear extrapolation—the effect of, say, 15 mg diazepam are not equivalent to the effects of 3.75 mg triazolam, which is just what such a benzodiazepine equivalency would suggest. That amount of diazepam would be very euphoric and relaxing, in my experience. On the other hand, that amount of triazolam, for someone without a benzodiazepine tolerance, would leave them on the floor.


Therefore, the notion of benzodiazepine dosage equivalency is utterly useless because it is merely a comparison of chemically related compounds, without any consideration for their pharmacological profiles.


Thus, it doesn't work at all, unlike with an opioid analgesic equivalency which is a comparison based on an actual pharmacologic property—namely, analgesia—rather than being just a comparison of structurally analogous chemical substances.

To put it succinctly, you ain't making no fucking sense if we don't know what goddamned property is being used to calculate the potency and to draw the goddamned equivalency in the first place.

the only comment this far that is medically accurate in any specific degree. There are a few that cite medical sources, but this is the best way to put it each benzo and type of benzo or diazepine (yes there is a difference etizolam is an example) have 3 main effects they are judged by anxiolysis, hypnosis, and anti-convulsiveness, I can't remember the medical term for the last one. So Clobazam is used for seizures almost exclusively it's a very short acting very strong anti-convulsant medication it has very low hypnotic and anxiolytic effects though so comparing it in any mg is just not going to be valid due to the fact the effect profiles are so much different. Even some of the new RC's out are very close to certain legal benzos/thieno/diazepines in structure and their effect profiles are completely different and binding affinity to the subtypes of the receptors are completely different and this has a lot to do with how potency is calculated. The equipotency scale is based on a conglomeration of the three effects to give the drugs per mg main effect and then when it's compared to other drugs it takes their cumulative score to use as the data to compare against so kpins are much more hypnotic than xans but they are mostly considered equipotent in most medical settings and literature. But this is because its based on the three main effect scores being accumulated per mg of the drug then the two scores compared for the outcome in mg for the drug answer of the comparison. This make any sense. Sorry I tried to be as simple as possible but major kudos to the op of the first comment on this right here that I'm commenting on.!!


EDIT: I forgot the sedative effects too so there are four not 3 effects that make up that relative score along with binding affinity to receptors and which subunit of which receptor they have the affinity for are also used to make the equipotency charts. ok bye now.