Posted by Elizabeth on May 15, 2001, at 10:13:43
In reply to Re: Methadone - ps » Elizabeth, posted by NikkiT2 on May 15, 2001, at 9:14:56
> Oh, and so if Effexor is as bad as Metadone, why is Methadone sold on the "black amrket", yet effexor isn't??
Actually I compared Effexor to cocaine, not methadone. (Personally, I never experienced Effexor w/d symptoms. But I did have the delightful experience of Nardil withdrawal. It's rather like simultaneously withdrawing from Xanax and amphetamine.)
Anyway, as I said above, I was pointing out an absurdity, not making a serious claim. I agree with you that Effexor doesn't make you high (except perhaps if you switch to hypomania on it < g >) and that methadone can. But I don't agree that the law should be used to make medical judgments. Ideally the law regarding the practise of medicine should be minimal (politicians, few of whom have any medical knowledge to speak of, should stay out of the doctor's office) and should be based on scientific and medical facts. But all too often, it's not.
> Cos Effexor doesn't give you a high... You say Methdone doesn't, but it does, else you wouldn't feel better for it.
Once again, *I never said methadone can't cause a high*. Perhaps you are confusing me with someone else. There was someone who posted that, and I actually *corrected* that person's misperception. People can get high on methadone, although people on MMT are taking exactly the right dose to match their tolerance, so they don't get high on what they're taking. Whole different kettle of fish, and the source of the myth that methadone doesn't produce a high.
> I just believe, that by taking a drug like methadone, Vicodin etc, you are simply "Putting" off the pain..
Okay, finally we're getting to your beliefs. That's a good start.
So, can you explain what you mean by that -- how is that different from "putting off the pain" by taking Prozac or Effexor or Nardil or imipramine?
I do think that buprenorphine should be tried before you reach for the heavier stuff (full agonists). *If* buprenorphine doesn't work, the next thing I would probably try would be Ultram (unless I was taking monoaminergic ADs with it), then either methadone, MS Contin, OxyContin (slow-release oxycodone), or Duragesic (the fentanyl patch -- this is the longest-lasting and has the most favourable side effect profile of these four). Long-lasting drugs or slow-release preparations are preferable because they don't cause the ups and downs throughout the day that you get from short-acting drugs.
I also really wish that buprenorphine was available in a metred-dose inhaler (a la Stadol NS), because it is absorbed through that route (although you have to lie down with your head tilted back for several minutes in order to get it to absorb!).
The fact is, I'm functioning better on buprenorphine than I have on *any* of the dozens of monoaminergic ADs and other types of drugs that focus on monoamines (stimulants, neuroleptics, etc.), as well as various mood stabilisers and so forth (I gave the complete list somewhere in response to SalArmy4me's claim that people who are trying opioids really haven't tried all the reasonable options).
I can't think of any reason to suppose that monoaminergic systems are the only ones that can break down. People who don't respond to monoaminergic ADs (including amphetamine, etc.) should have the opportunity to take something that actually works. To deny us that is nothing short of immoral. (My mother -- a professional bioethicist, as well as someone who has seen the positive effects that buprenorphine has had on me -- agrees. FWIW.)
-elizabeth
poster:Elizabeth
thread:17065
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010515/msgs/63073.html