Suboxone: Detox vs. Maintenance (re: Dr. Scanlan’s ideas)

Posted on by

Author: boxer

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:33 pm

Jimmy wrote:

birdie wrote:
For tearjerker…. I have a buddy in fla that went to dr scanlan. why he rather see someone on meth then sub was put like this or close to it. Meth being a full agonist is safer he feels since the brains receptors are made to accept the meth. Sub being partial, the receptor are not able to adapt, like putting a square peg in a round hole so the brain constantly struggles to maintain homeostasis but is unable.

I totally agree with this. Short back story: I have been using dilaudid to try and get off suboxone. So far so good. I have tapered quite nicely and with no ill effects. Luck being on my side, I also had a tooth pulled the other day which came with a nice script for 30 vikes. Might come in handy when the dilaudid is gone.

My urge to get off suboxone was mainly because now in our state there is a prescription database, and I would prefer my pcp not to know about my sub scripts. My last sub script was last August, being one of those who was prescribed way more than needed so I built up a nice supply.

To throw a wrench in things, I got a letter a couple weeks ago telling me my pain clinic is closing. The only other suboxone choices in my town seem to be the meth clinics.

ANYWAY since starting my dilaudid taper I have been happier, able to work better and longer, and overall a better person to be around. I fully agree that suboxone as a "partial agonist" is completely foreign to our brains and far more damaging than a full agonist. If for whatever reason this taper does not work, I will use methadone. I know suboxone helps many many people stay off street drugs, and I am not arguing that there is not a place for it in treatment. But in my opinion, my brain seems to like things that closely mimic endogenous opioids much better than a foreign substance that just gets stuck in the receptors.

And I have no doubt in the future these days will be looked upon as we now look upon blood letting and other medieval medical practices. Some people are born with defective opioid systems, that’s all there is to it. To not let us legally have substances that closely mimic these opioids will be seen as evil and cruel in the future, I have no doubt about it.

Best to all
J

I agree with you that many of the drugs and practices will be looked upon as "crude" in the future.

That is progress IMO.

I feel certain that there will be new drugs that have fewer side effects and will be less harmful and will be more effective than many of the drugs/treatments currently being used.

Either new drugs, compounds of drugs, metabolites of known drugs and so on will always be seen as time progresses.

There are many drugs that have been around for a long time that the FDA has not approved for certain uses, even though many know that these drugs are much better than the drug(s) currently being used. A lot of this boils down to the fact that the huge pharmaceutical companies try to stop the approval of new drugs because it will hit them in the pocet book. Just to file for an approval of a new drug, the company must submit a $1,000,000.00 few for the drug to even get to the review process by the FDA.

For now, people have to accept the fact that what is available (approved) now to us for certain ailments is better than what we had only a very few years ago.