Posted by Mondeo on April 17, 2002, at 3:58:11
In reply to Re: high-dose Lamictal: why not?, posted by SLS on April 16, 2002, at 21:53:17
Hi,SLSwell,I must be honest with you as I have to reconsider my previous statements ; the reason for trying and push up Lamictal dosage has been the fact that things(depr.)weren'r really O.K. and the idea has been that by "going up"with its dosage,I shall achieve the so called efficient dosage,even if it would be a higher one,BUT as life is stronger than our wish(mainly while considering such maladies as ours),
I have just now realized that though Lamictal is indeed an AD ,too(not only Mood Stabilizer),it isn't good enough for a monotherapy,even at higher dosages,high as up to almost 500mg and I(and my doc.)have decided not to climb further on ; on the contrary,start reducing its dosage(even targeting the so called "normal"and "common"known dosage of 100-150)and start again...administering Celexa(eventually not so highly dosed as the 40mg I have been on,before switching to Lamictal)
So,I can just advise you (as it seems that you face a similar way of suffering as mine :more depr.with some hypomany,eventually induced by the AD's)to insist on an AD(and certainly Celexa is a quite good one regarding side effects)and eventually augment with Lamictal(being one of the most inoffensive Mood St.,moreover that it is also a so called AD)If you(and me too)will manage with this combo,you(and me)can consider yourself as a lucky guy,since both meds are the newest ones on the market,sharing very good side effect-free properties.Presuming that you(and me)are indeed "pure"BP(2,3..4),or even recurrent UP(I shall provide you with abstracts regarding Mood Stb. for Unipolars,too)such a combo should be logical ; it probably won't be the case for BP1,as Lamictal as a milder antimanic(but a stronger AD)
I hope that this message too is a useful one and do't hesitate exchanging more data with me(or any other interested about this thread)
In case you find our cases similar enough to continue a more personal correspondence,you can provide me with your e-mail and I shall certainly write to you immediately
>
> Hi Mondeo.
>
>
> > BUT anyway knowing that some and certain BP3 or BP4 are a result of AD's long term administration,it worth reconsidering this aspect,too.
>
> What are the definitions of BP3 and BP4?
>
> One of my doctors said that I am the BP3. This is a diagnosis proposed to be added to the DSM-V manual. I am always depressed. I become manic only as a reaction to medication. I have never experienced spontaneous remissions or manias. I am taking Lamictal 300mg. It helps slightly with depression. However, it did not prevent Nardil from causing mania in me. (Actually, it was the abrupt discontinuation of Nardil that caused the mania).
>
> > Normally in this case such an administration would be targeting another aspect,the one of prophylactic,while in the case of BP2,it(Lamictal,for instance) works first as a treatment med,mainly targetting the depr.phase,allowing to avoid AD.s
>
> I don't know. I have not seen many people with depression respond well and continuously to Lamictal monotherapy. I could be wrong.
>
> For me, Lamictal does nothing unless I am taking a tricyclic. Conversely, a tricyclic does nothing for me unless I am taking Lamictal.
>
> > celexa is a good med.,but it has the risks,too as described above ; I haven't have better results(almost free of side effects than with it,but I consider making a very good switch to Lamictal and I dare to suggest you the same ; be aware of the fact that in general and in MY case,too you may have to reach(slowly,very slowly)dosages of 300mg and even up to 500-600,in case you won't have any side effects.
>
> I will consider Celexa if Nardil does not work.
>
> Thank you for taking the time to respond to my questions.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Scott
poster:Mondeo
thread:100086
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20020416/msgs/103319.html