Posted by Squiggles on October 27, 2002, at 9:38:02
In reply to Re: please be civil » Alan, posted by Dr. Bob on October 27, 2002, at 9:27:52
How could I forget Dr. David Healy?
Here is something on the squabble on the
term "addiction" (i hope this will be my
last word on it), from his book:"The Creation of Psychopharmacology"
Harvard U. Press, 2002, pp. 169-170:"Using the ease with which an animal can be
induced to crave a drug as a yardstick, researchers
found the abuse liability of the benzodiazepines
was low to ninexistent. [122]. Consequently,
in the 1980s it made perfect sense for an addiction
specialist to state that physical dependence on
the benzodiazepines was possible but that they
caused neither addiction nor drug dependence.
This was a semantic step too far not just for
the public but for most of the medical profession.
In the laboratory the benzodiazepines might not
be seen to be drugs of addiction, but saying that
they were not drugs of addiction did not solve
what had become a pressing public problem."I have not read the whole chapter, so i hope i am
not misinterpreting Dr. Healy's words; he does
seem to emphasize the comparable addiction to
SSRIs. I think that one feature that is common
to both AD withdrawal problems as well as
benzos is the lack of CRAVING which we associate
with the opiates. but though there is lack of
craving for the drugs, there is certainly relief
upon reinstating them.Squiggles
poster:Squiggles
thread:124171
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021025/msgs/125412.html