Posted by Jerrympls on November 5, 2002, at 21:13:41
In reply to Legal vs. Medical Classification » Jerrympls, posted by fachad on November 5, 2002, at 21:04:51
> The first major point my pdoc made to me about pstims being controlled substances is that the schedule classification (C-II, C-III, CIV, etc) is a purely LEGAL, not a MEDICAL classification.
>
> Those classifications were cooked up by law enforcement personal (the DEA), not medical professionals (the AMA).
>
> Even though the descriptions given in the Schedule list use medical sounding expressions, like "potential for dependence, withdrawal, etc.", my doc told me that the schedule number a drug was given was more related to it's diversion potential than it's addictive properties.
>
> He maintained that benzodiazepines, which are C-IV, are plainly much more addictive than stimulants, which are C-II. Just look at someone who has abruptly stopped BZDs vs someone who has abruptly stopped pstims. And no one advocates "drug holidays" for Paxil or Effexor, but that is common practice for stims. That pretty much blows the theory that amphetamines are addictive and SSRI's are not, and shows that a C-II can be less addictive than a C-IV.
>
>That makes a lot of sense actually - because I had a pdoc once who refused to prescribe benzos to anyone - no matter what - but he easily wrote me prescriptions each month for Adderall.
poster:Jerrympls
thread:126471
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20021101/msgs/126599.html