# Switching from Xanax to Klonopin



## La_Resistance (Feb 3, 2009)

I have been on Xanax for 8 months. Was prescribed 0.50mg when needed. I quickly started taking it once daily and took 1mg to 1.5mg for the most of the 8 months.

I'm gonna go see my doctor tomorrow and ask him to switch me to Klonopin at 2mg daily.

I have experienced with Klonopin on occasions, and on the days I took it the effects were positive, the following day I'd be back on Xanax.

My question is, if I switch from Xanax to Klonopin, are there chances for withdrawals? Or should I be fine?


----------



## path0gen (Jun 28, 2006)

Is there any reason you want to go from 1.5mg Xanax to 2mg Klonopin? They both observe nearly the same potency but Klonopin actually sports a half-life twice as long as Xanax. To achieve a similar effect, it's possible that your Klonopin dose would be the same or even lower than your Xanax. As for withdrawals, there's very little that differentiates one benzo from another. They're all engineered to do more or less the same thing. It's just a matter of finding out what works for you during the transition. You will probably be taking both medications in concurrance with one another for a week or so, decreasing the doses of the Xanax and increasing those of the Klonopin. I've switched from one benzo to another twice now and haven't experienced any noticable side effects.


----------



## La_Resistance (Feb 3, 2009)

I noticed withdrawals when I went one day without Xanax, but on occasions I took Klonopin I had no Xanax withdrawal and actually liked the effects of Klonopin. I was just wondering if long term I could get some Xanax withdrawal while on Klons, but I guess not.

The reason I want to go to 2mg is because at the dose I'm at right now with Xanax, I feel it's effects not being as effective as before, basicaly my tolerance has been building up. I think 2mg of Klons would be good for me and hopefully I can stick to that dose with positive results for a longer period of time.


----------



## gillettecavalcad3 (Jul 9, 2009)

Using Clonazepam PRN 2mg should be fine. If you are going to take it daily, then 3 weeks on 1 week off should prevent tolerance. Personally I've been on the same dose for years and never built up a tolerance.


----------



## La_Resistance (Feb 3, 2009)

I saw my doc today. At first he was like no way, I'm not switching you on another Benzo, he would not buy into my crap of Klons being safer than Xanax in terms of tolerance. He said it's the same type of Benzos with similar ingredients, daily use, you will build tolerance and require more. He talked about Benzos being a patch to my problem and not attacking it at the source like an SSRI could.

He said you seem to have serious anxiety problem which are due to chemical inbalance in the brain. He said he wants to put me on either Celexa or Exaffor while he tapers me off of Xanax.

What I told him was the based on what I know, SSRI's take longer to take effect, and it's never a sure thing it's gonna work. So I might just end up going from one SSRI to another. I explained Benzos work for me instantly. And that since I'm on Benzos my quality of life has really improved. I also mentioned I was worried about SSRI side effects.

He finally gave in, refused to give me 2mg per day as I requested. But agreed to give 1.5mg per day on Klonopin and stop my Xanax. Gave it to me for 4 months and said to come and see him back, and that point he will make a decision if he will transfer me to a private psychiatrist or not.

He mentioned that prescribing these benzos was not ''good medicine'' practice.

But I really like this doc, he's young and takes time to listen to what I have to say unlike other old douche docs who don't wanna hear your side of things. And seems to find my stuborness amusing. He mentioned he's had many patients with similar problems as mine, but never one as insistent as me.


----------



## Upekkha (Dec 10, 2009)

I am on 1.5 mg Kpin PRN as well. I heard my Pdoc mention this same argument that benzos do not attack the source of the problem like SSRI's the last time I saw him, though I didn't get a chance to ask what he meant. I do not understand who determined the source of social anxiety was underactive serotonin production versus an underactive GABA system. Heck a variety of substances affecting many different brain mechanisms have a positive effect on SA symptoms. If the source of social anxiety was a lack of serotonin, wouldn't Benzos be useless in treating SA? Is this just Pdoc code for I like dealing with prescribing SSRI's vs benzos, or is there substance to the argument itself that serotonin is the source of SA?


----------



## path0gen (Jun 28, 2006)

You don't typically see a benzo prescribed for anxiety without an SSRI as part of the treatment. Benzodiazepines are basically just tranquilizers. They subdue your anxieties, help control your physicial symptoms and basically just numb you down so you can deal with life without flipping out whenever you need to leave the house. But they don't actually treat the cause of your anxiety, they're just masking it. It's perfectly possible to be treating anxiety that has resulted from depression but still be depressed. Doctors, good ones anyway, are more likely to want to fix the problem and consequently advise that you try a number of other solutions or concurrently take medications that might help to alleviate the anxiety and eliminate the need for the benzos. 

Psychiatry is a very, very new practice in the world of medicine. So trying to find any one definitive solution for a problem is almost impossible. Most of the medications are new and unique people require unique treatments. Which is why it's typical to see a doctor working through a laundry list of medications to see what will best work for a patient. But simple deductive reasoning still applies; if you treat a patient with SA with an SSRI and they get 'better', lack of seretonin must have been the root cause of the problem. This certainly is not always the case but certain patterns have been observed over decades to help set benchmarks and procedures for most mental afflictions. It just so happens that SSRIs tend to help a good many people with anxiety issues. And so most doctors are more willing to prescribe these medications in lieu of tranquilizers that are still inconclusive in the long-term treatment of anxiety.


----------



## UltraShy (Nov 8, 2003)

You can swap from one benzo to another or mix them at will. It doesn't matter as they are substantially similar.

And, yes, I've personally done so, thus I'm talking about real life, not just theory.


----------



## UltraShy (Nov 8, 2003)

gillettecavalcad3 said:


> Using Clonazepam PRN 2mg should be fine. *If you are going to take it daily, then 3 weeks on 1 week off should prevent tolerance.* Personally I've been on the same dose for years and never built up a tolerance.


Does your anxiety schedule a week off too?:stu

I get the point of doing this to avoid tolerance, but if you're taking them for anxiety daily that suggests you have anxiety daily. So under that schedule you have 21 days without anxiety then 7 days of anxiety...


----------



## crayzyMed (Nov 2, 2006)

UltraShy said:


> Does your anxiety schedule a week off too?:stu
> 
> I get the point of doing this to avoid tolerance, but if you're taking them for anxiety daily that suggests you have anxiety daily. So under that schedule you have 21 days without anxiety then 7 days of anxiety...


Id personally be willing to face my anxiety for a week if that would prevent tolerance. It depends on the type of anxiety tough, if your having panic attacks on work and you need to work it probably wont work out, but if you just cant be yourself and feel very uncomfortable in social situations like me, this is the best solution.


----------



## La_Resistance (Feb 3, 2009)

The week you go without you would not just face normal anxiety, it would be 10 times worst because you would feel withdrawal symptoms at the same time. At least I know I would.


----------



## Ash09 (Apr 27, 2009)

path0gen said:


> You don't typically see a benzo prescribed for anxiety without an SSRI as part of the treatment. Benzodiazepines are basically just tranquilizers. They subdue your anxieties, help control your physicial symptoms and basically just numb you down so you can deal with life without flipping out whenever you need to leave the house. But they don't actually treat the cause of your anxiety, they're just masking it. It's perfectly possible to be treating anxiety that has resulted from depression but still be depressed. Doctors, good ones anyway, are more likely to want to fix the problem and consequently advise that you try a number of other solutions or concurrently take medications that might help to alleviate the anxiety and eliminate the need for the benzos.


SSRI's are just thymoanesthetics, they aren't solving the problem either so I don't really see any difference between using one class of drugs or the other. For a lot of people the benzodiazepines are much more tolerable than serotonergics.


----------



## UltraShy (Nov 8, 2003)

path0gen said:


> Benzodiazepines are basically just tranquilizers. They subdue your anxieties, help control your physicial symptoms and basically just numb you down so you can deal with life without flipping out whenever you need to leave the house. But *they don't actually treat the cause of your anxiety, they're just masking it*. It's perfectly possible to be treating anxiety that has resulted from depression but still be depressed. Doctors, good ones anyway, are more likely to want to fix the problem and consequently advise that you try a number of other solutions or concurrently take medications that might help to alleviate the anxiety and eliminate the need for the benzos.


That's a common and logically faulty argument. The vast majority of drugs in an entire pharmacy don't cure anything. The vast majority just mask a problem. Other than antibiotics that actually cure infections, there aren't many drugs that cure anything. SSRIs just mask a problem as well. SSRIs don't cure depression nor any anxiety disorder nor anything else. Just like benzos, all they can do is mask the problem.



> Psychiatry is a very, very new practice in the world of medicine.


Guess it depends on your definition of "new." Cars are "new" to the world of transportation too, seeing how they were in their infancy 100 years ago.



> most doctors are more willing to prescribe these medications in lieu of *tranquilizers that are still inconclusive in the long-term treatment of anxiety*.


Yes, doctors are much more willing to prescribe drugs that are not controlled. That's very true and it's in large part a political issue, rather than an issue of pharmacology and what actually works better to treat anxiety. We have a War On Drugs in which the serious needs of legitimate patients take a back seat to busting junkies.

Given that benzos hit the market in 1960 with the introduction of Librium, soon to be followed in 1963 by Valium they have considerable history. Benzos have also been one of the most widely used drug classes in the entire world over that half century.

It hard to say it's inconclusive after countless millions of real world users over 50 years. You can find people who've been on benzos pretty much non-stop for the last 50 years. You'll likely find them in places the elderly hang out, since one clearly can't be too young if they started on Librium or Valium when they were new drugs. One can definitely study the long-term effects of such drugs as they've been around long-term in real world use. No clinical trial can come close to replicating reality like actual reality can.


----------



## meyaj (Sep 5, 2009)

UltraShy said:


> That's a common and logically faulty argument. The vast majority of drugs in an entire pharmacy don't cure anything. The vast majority just mask a problem. Other than antibiotics that actually cure infections, there aren't many drugs that cure anything.


That's not an entirely accurate statement. Antifungals, antivirals, antihelminthics, are all curative as well. But that's just nitpicking - they're all infectious diseases. Oftentimes, chemotherapy and a bunch of other medications are curative too though. But it doesn't need to be curative to do more than simply mask the problem. A GREAT deal of drugs impede, halt, or even reverse the progression of certain diseases. Other drugs are able to boost or even take the place of physiological processes that help the body overcome the disease. In fact, your example of SSRIs is one of these. The truth is, there is loads of evidence that SSRIs are able to prevent PHYSIOLOGICAL damage to the hippocampus caused by depression, and even stimulate neurogenesis in the area, something that can be of benefit to the patient long after discontinuing the drugs.

Benzos, on the other hand, have strictly short-term benefits, and with things like PAWS, can result in longstanding deficits after discontinuation.


----------



## bezoomny (Feb 10, 2007)

path0gen said:


> You don't typically see a benzo prescribed for anxiety without an SSRI as part of the treatment. Benzodiazepines are basically just tranquilizers. They subdue your anxieties, help control your physicial symptoms and basically just numb you down so you can deal with life without flipping out whenever you need to leave the house. But they don't actually treat the cause of your anxiety, they're just masking it. It's perfectly possible to be treating anxiety that has resulted from depression but still be depressed. Doctors, good ones anyway, are more likely to want to fix the problem and consequently advise that you try a number of other solutions or concurrently take medications that might help to alleviate the anxiety and eliminate the need for the benzos.
> 
> Psychiatry is a very, very new practice in the world of medicine. So trying to find any one definitive solution for a problem is almost impossible. Most of the medications are new and unique people require unique treatments. Which is why it's typical to see a doctor working through a laundry list of medications to see what will best work for a patient. But simple deductive reasoning still applies; if you treat a patient with SA with an SSRI and they get 'better', lack of seretonin must have been the root cause of the problem. This certainly is not always the case but certain patterns have been observed over decades to help set benchmarks and procedures for most mental afflictions. It just so happens that SSRIs tend to help a good many people with anxiety issues. And so most doctors are more willing to prescribe these medications in lieu of tranquilizers that are still inconclusive in the long-term treatment of anxiety.


If you go to a psychiatrist that specializes in anxiety disorders, it's more common in my opinion. My psychiatrist only gave me benzos after I went off my SSRIs (finally got fed up with those side effects). I had a friend in high school who had OCD, and I'm pretty sure he was on benzos during high school.


----------



## path0gen (Jun 28, 2006)

> That's a common and logically faulty argument. The vast majority of drugs in an entire pharmacy don't cure anything. The vast majority just mask a problem. Other than antibiotics that actually cure infections, there aren't many drugs that cure anything. SSRIs just mask a problem as well. SSRIs don't cure depression nor any anxiety disorder nor anything else. Just like benzos, all they can do is mask the problem.


And Ash, this will apply to your response as well:

It's actually a widely accepted argument, especially in the medical industry. The difference typically starts in the diagnosis--being able to differentiate between an actual chemical imbalance, post-traumatic stress, simple aggitation, etc. In situation a) a chemical imbalance has been identified as the problem and medication is prescribed to correct said imbalance. While not a permanent solution, you're taking treatment a step further than situation b) where a patient has difficulties socializing and requests a sedative to help overcome his issues without exploring additional medical options; he just wants something to help him relax, not figure out why he can't relax in the first place. Benzos in particular are used for such a variety of disorders that the only geniunely medical application is for anti-seizure treatment. Elsewise, it's typically acknowledged as a temporary means to an end.

Another example: Patient can't sleep? .5mg Klonopin, take as needed. Patient seretonin levels are significantly lower than normal? SSRI. In the latter scenario, a specific problem is identified and treated. In the former, it ignores the cause of the problem on a superficial level, anticipating that the problem will resolve itself. You'll often see both types of medication used in conjunction because benzos so effectively counteract the side effects produced by SSRIs. And also because it is typically the hope that two medications designed to address the physical aspects of the problem combined with extensive therapy to help deal with the mental and spiritual aspects will ultimately result in a 'cure'. At least the closest thing we can come to achieving one anyway. I will concede that addressing the cause of the body's inability to properly manage seretonin levels would be the optimal, least complicated method of addressing the problem. But psychiatric medicine has yet to produce a pill capable of doing so.


----------



## ThirdEyeGrind (Feb 7, 2006)

In my opinion its a good idea to switch from Xanax to Clonazepam because Clonazepam lasts so much longer. I remember when I took Xanax I felt nothing. No anxiety relief at all. I Didn't even feel any relief when I took 5mg of Xanax all at one time before. But if I take 2mg of Clonazepam I feel instant relief in about 20 minutes that lasts around the whole day.


----------



## Ash09 (Apr 27, 2009)

path0gen said:


> And Ash, this will apply to your response as well:
> 
> It's actually a widely accepted argument, especially in the medical industry. The difference typically starts in the diagnosis--being able to differentiate between an actual chemical imbalance, post-traumatic stress, simple aggitation, etc. In situation a) a chemical imbalance has been identified as the problem and medication is prescribed to correct said imbalance. While not a permanent solution, you're taking treatment a step further than situation b) where a patient has difficulties socializing and requests a sedative to help overcome his issues without exploring additional medical options; he just wants something to help him relax, not figure out why he can't relax in the first place.


Low serotonin levels have not been proven to be the cause of social anxiety, that's the problem. The less than stellar efficacy of SSRI's would suggest that the serotonergic theory leaves much to be desired. A number of studies show GABAergic dysfunction and low D2-receptor binding potential, something that benzodiazepines and stimulants would help to alleviate. Mental disorders cannot currently be diagnosed by looking at a patients neurotransmitter levels, if you do an MRI scan and it shows low serotonin levels then an SSRI may well target the cause in that patient, but just because someone has social anxiety or depression does not mean they have low serotonin levels, or that a neurotransmitter deficiency is the root cause of the disease.


----------

