Posted by proudfoot on September 9, 2010, at 5:48:25
In reply to Re: What dose is the right dose of Nardil?, posted by angels78 on September 8, 2010, at 22:24:23
I didn't mean to imply that avoiding side effects was the reason for reducing dosage. My sense is that this recommendation has something to do with the level of MAO inhibition produced by the high dosage, and that a lower dosage of Nardil may be sufficient to maintain adequate MAO inhibition on an ongoing basis. Remembering that Nardil produces irreversible inhibition of MAO, it makes sense that over time a lower amount of drug would be needed for maintenance to "zap" off any new MAO sites that the body produces, whether in the gut or in the brain, as there should be fewer of these sites being produced that the Nardil needs to inactivate.
As such, extra Nardil not needed for maintenance MAO inhibition (i.e. to turn off new MAO sites) would only be producing extra side effects, thus my thinking that reducing the dose makes intuitive sense (to me). Can't get a good resource online so far to validate this thinking, but I'm going to continue to look for such. If not, may try to actually contact someone at Pfizer/P.D. to explain this recommendation about dosage reduction. In the meantime, I'm still curious about others' experiences with their pdocs having reduced their maintenance dosage of Nardil over time, and if so how low they were able to go to still maintain remission of depressive/anxious symptoms.
Doug
> Being on Nardil for a few months, I'm not sure if backing off to avoid side effects is the right way to go. If your just trying to avoid the side effects i dont know how its going to help.
poster:proudfoot
thread:961534
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20100908/msgs/961762.html