Posted by Lou Pilder on February 9, 2016, at 8:49:35
In reply to Re: Can AD's Cause Long-Term Damage that is Reversible » babbler20, posted by SLS on February 8, 2016, at 19:45:04
> > Thanks so much for the thoughtful response Scott. I've tapered down rom 50 mg of Luvox to 3.5 over 8 weeks and I'm going to stop taking it in a couple of days. I guess I'll have to wait it out and see. How bad do you think my withdrawal symptoms will be , considering I was on a really low dose and I tapered down over 8 weeks?
>
> I really don't know, but you did a good job of tapering. Perhaps the worst thing that can happen is that you experience some mild to moderate brain zaps that last for a day or two. I don't really think this will be a problem, though. Otherwise, you might get a headache, feelings of malaise or flu-like symptoms, or even a temporary increase in anxiety. If any of these things occur, I would not restart the Luvox. You can try taking some Benadryl (diphenhydramine) to treat the withdrawal symptoms.
>
> I wish I had a more definitive answer for you.
>
> Have you tried Paxil or Effexor? Was the Luvox chosen to treat OCD?
>
>
> - ScottFriends,
Scott wrote here,[...Perhaps the worst thing that could happen is that you experience some mild to moderate brain zaps that last for a day or two. I don't think this will be a problem though....].
Be not deceived. This statement by Scott is allowed to be seen here by Mr. Hsiung as being supportive. But what Scott has posted could constitute the fallacy of overgeneralization. This fallacy could cost you your life if it is allowed to stand because it could influence readers to think that withdrawing is easier than it really is and the withdrawaler could kill themselves as being in a state much worse than Scott says here, as he says, "Perhaps the worst thing that could happen is that you experience some mild to moderate brain zaps that last for a day or two."
This statement standing could seriously mislead you into taking a chance with death. For what could happen to anyone withdrawing from these drugs is the commission of suicide or mass-murder that is left out by Scott. This leaving out the whole truth is a fallacy not permitted by the FDA in their rules for advancing or promoting a drug. Here, Scott also promotes Benadryl as some type of thing to take to help with withdrawal. Readers could be misled that Benadryl is a cure for withdrawal symptoms which is promoting the drug in violation of FDA rules, but Mr. Hsiung could be exempt from the FDA rules here and I do not know why.
Be not deceived. Scott cites no reputable research to support his claim and readers could be misled to their deaths by accepting the fallacy of overgeneralization indicated by what Scott has posted here, as Scott posts a conclusion without drawing from a representative sample and citing such in research. Scott states that he doesn't really think this will really be a problem. How does he substantiate such a claim? This is what overgeneralization entails because it is allowed by Mr. Hsiung to stand as being supportive.
But what is the proper conclusion? The research shows that thousands of people are killed each month by these drugs and that people in withdrawal could kill themselves and/or others and and even commit mass-murder and kill their own parents. That could be "the worst thing" which Scott has left out. This brings up what s known as the fallacy of slothful induction that I will integrate here as I show you how this site could mislead you seriously enough to cause your death or the death of your child being drugged in collaboration with a psychiatrist.
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:1086030
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20160131/msgs/1086053.html