Kooks add ‘inability to chew’ to list of 90,000,000 benzo withdrawal symptoms

Chewing...please help
« on: June 02, 2017, 10:40:39 am »

[Buddie]

It is about 4 weeks after stopping clonazepam. During this period i have muscle weaknesses in arms and legs, off balance. But the major problem is; I have difficulty chewing food; for example eating a bread or biscuites and hard foods are difficult. It makes me scare. Does anyone has chewing problem during withdrawal? Please help.
I will appreciate your sharings.

Kooks complain reputation of being lunatics impossible to shake, decry lack of progress against Big Pharma

I am told cult members are trying to figure out how to be activists i.e. doctor-bashing nutcases and not appear insane doing so.

Good luck.

Cult realizes it’s only a handful of self-pitying kooks, clinging to harmful beliefs invented by a madwoman

The rest of the internet has glowing positive reports about benzos.
« on: April 19, 2017, 01:26:19 am »

[Buddie]

It seems that the rest of the internet loves benzos and does not share the negative experience that we do. They don’t believe in side effects. They don’t believe in withdrawal syndrome.

They either don’t withdrawal at all or have a minor 2 week withdrawal, and this is with heavy doses. Some have gone on and off of the meds over decades, dozens of times and never experienced kindling or any problem going off whatsoever.

I’m in several support groups for issues like insomnia and IBS. Whenever a question comes up about what meds they’re taking or what meds cold be helpful, benzos are always eagerly suggested. Whenever I warn about the dangers of benzos, 10 people come to the aid of the person who mentioned the benzo to argue against me.

I have been banned from groups. I have been told I am fear mongering, am negative, am lying, am selling something, or have an underlying disease, and that I’m wrong. It is so frustrating. What is going on here?

Are we really a like a 5% minority of super sensitive people with weak gaba function or diseases? (5% LOL not even close, try something like 0.000001% of all benzodiazepine users – editor)

Re: The rest of the internet has glowing positive reports about benzos.
« Reply #1 on: April 19, 2017, 02:05:10 am »

[Buddie]

My doctor says that what I went through with Klonopin was rare. However, coming on this board assures me that I am not the only one who has suffered horrific effects from benzos. I’m curious as well to know the percentage of people that go through what we have gone through with benzos.

Re: The rest of the internet has glowing positive reports about benzos.
« Reply #2 on: April 19, 2017, 05:58:28 pm »

[Buddie]

Its true. The majority of people have few problems getting off benzos. But you were banned, so that’s good because they were not good sites for you to be on. “I Don’t Want to Belong to Any Club That Will Accept Me as a Member.” Groucho Marx. lol.

BALA vs. Benzo Buddies knife fight

new bill that can harm us - action needed
« on: March 19, 2017, 04:10:10 pm »

[Buddie]

One new bill has passed the house that will make it even harder than it is now to sue a pharmaceutical company for an injury. Another is coming behind it. It is important we contact the Senators and stop this. Write to your senators (Everyone has two) via this link about HR 985 or CALL THEM! Then write to or call your House Rep about HR 1215 They hate phone calls because they actually have to respond with more than a form letter. No democrat has voted for this bill, so focus on republicans. https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact/

H.R. 985, the 2017 Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act, aims to put more obstacles in the way of plaintiffs/victims who seek justice. This justice-reform bill is a gift to the pharmaceutical industry, and other big corporations that hurt citizens (like big banks, big agriculture, big chemical, big oil etc.) from Congress men and women who receive millions of dollars in donations from those industries. (PASSED HOUSE)

HR 1215 “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017.” H.R. 1215 eliminates the rights of people harmed by medical professionals. It rigs the system, making it nearly impossible for injured victims to pursue lawsuits by imposing harsh time limits on lawsuits, denying the right to a trial by jury, limiting certain damages to $250,000 (even in states where such limits are unconstitutional), and protecting those who prescribe dangerous drugs and who hurt people with dangerous medical devices. (HAS NOT PASSED HOUSE YET – CONTACT YOUR HOUSE REP)

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #1 on: March 19, 2017, 10:19:02 pm »

[Buddie]

That’s fucked up.

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #2 on: March 20, 2017, 02:12:22 am »

[Buddie]

I read the bill.

I don’t see how it creates any hardship for folks that have been harmed by medicines of med providers.

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #3 on: March 20, 2017, 02:41:01 am »

[Buddie]

Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 02:12:22 am
I read the bill.

I don’t see how it creates any hardship for folks that have been harmed by medicines of med providers.

I’m not exactly what bill you read. My spouse, who is an attorney and policy expert, read it and declared it is dangerous tort reform designed to greatly harm victims of medical malpractice. It essentially restricts the ability for victims to be compensated or to hold hospitals, incompetent doctors, nursing homes and pharmaceutical companies responsible for harming patients. All this bill does is line the pockets of big business and deprive the most needy access to fair compensation.

Call those republican lawmakers to help stop this onerous legislation.

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #4 on: March 20, 2017, 03:08:00 am »

[Buddie]

Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 02:41:01 am
Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 02:12:22 am
I read the bill.

I don’t see how it creates any hardship for folks that have been harmed by medicines of med providers.

I’m not exactly what bill you read. My spouse, who is an attorney and policy expert, read it and declared it is dangerous tort reform designed to greatly harm victims of medical malpractice. It essentially restricts the ability for victims to be compensated or to hold hospitals, incompetent doctors, nursing homes and pharmaceutical companies responsible for harming patients. All this bill does is line the pockets of big business and deprive the most needy access to fair compensation.

Call those republican lawmakers to help stop this onerous legislation.

This is the bill I read (as referenced in the original post)

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1215/text

I see none of the “dangers” you mention, but I do see, for example, some of the following language:

“…nothing in this Act shall limit a claimant’s recovery of the full amount of the available economic damages,

“…the court shall supervise the arrangements for payment of damages to protect against conflicts of interest that may have the effect of reducing the amount of damages awarded that are actually paid to claimants. In particular, in any health care lawsuit in which the attorney for a party claims a financial stake in the outcome by virtue of a contingent fee, the court shall have the power to restrict the payment of a claimant’s damage recovery to such attorney, and to redirect such damages to the claimant based upon the interests of justice and principles of equity.

No provider of collateral source benefits shall recover any amount against the claimant or receive any lien or credit against the claimant’s recovery or be equitably or legally subrogated to the right of the claimant in a health care lawsuit involving injury or wrongful death.”

Sounds to me that it protects harmed individuals from predatory attorneys.

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #5 on: March 20, 2017, 03:48:17 am »

[Buddie]

[…],

You can quote whatever you’d like, doesn’t make it true. This is extreme tort reform.

We should all be concerned about this bill and I’ve cut and pasted and article from Law Professors and Federal Courts Blog. I’d like to add, the lawmaker who introduced this bill is none other than Representative Steve King of Iowa. If you don’t know who Steve King is, google his name and “white supremacy.”

Republicans Introduce Sweeping Federalization of Tort Law, Limiting Recovery to Victims
By Patricia W. Moore Share
The Republicans in Congress are intent on expropriating ordinary citizens’ right to sue wrongdoers and allowing corporations and other defendants to violate the law without consequence.

Not content to protect corporations from accountability by hobbling class actions and intimidating plaintiffs’ lawyers with mandatory Rule 11 sanctions, Republicans are going for the full monty: federalized so-called “tort reform” (or what I call “tort elimination”).

Without a hearing, H.R. 1215 (Download HR1215) goes to straight to markup in the House Judiciary Committee this Tuesday. The bill was sponsored by Rep. Steve King (R-IA 4th Dist.).

H.R. 1215 has the Orwellian name of “Protecting Access to Care Act of 2017” (because all Republican-sponsored bills about the civil justice system are named just the opposite of what they would actually do to ordinary citizens). The name of this bill should be “Protecting Doctors and Hospitals from Liability for Wrongdoing and Protecting Insurance Companies from Having to Pay Legitimate Claims.”

Although Republicans supposedly care about “states’ rights,” this bill would eliminate (by preempting) vast swaths of state tort law. Among the many draconian provisions of the bill:

It would impose a uniform 3-year statute of limitations on “health care lawsuits.”* States would be free to have a shorter one, but not a longer one.
It would impose a uniform $250,000 limit on noneconomic damages.
The bill would not limit economic damages, but it would allow states to limit economic damages, noneconomic damages, and the total amount of damages.
Naturally, “the jury shall not be informed about the maximum award for noneconomic damages.” Because then they might at last understand what “tort reform” means.
The bill would eliminate joint-and-several liability. This could deprive an innocent injured person of full compensation, while shielding a wrongdoing defendant from paying for an injury he helped to cause.
“Any party” would be allowed to introduce evidence of collateral source benefits.
An award of future damages over $50,000 would be required, at the request of “any party,” to be paid in periodic payments.
The bill would completely release health care providers (as defined) from any liability in a products liability action for prescribing a product approved by the FDA.
Finally, no Republican-sponsored civil justice bill would be complete without denigrating plaintiffs’ attorneys and making it even more uneconomical for plaintiffs’ attorneys to represent clients. This bill goes so far as to call the payment to attorneys of an agreed-upon fee a “conflict of interest.” The bill would give the court the power to restrict a contingent fee. And “in no event shall” the contingent fee exceed 40% of the first $50,000 recovered, 33-1/3% of the next $50,000, 25% of the next $500,000, and 15% of any amount in excess of $600,000.

So now the federal government would be dictating to the states what attorneys’ fees they could allow. Those limits would apply even in settlement, mediation, or arbitration.

Really, guys? This bill isn’t even getting a hearing? Maybe to talk about its practical elimination of citizens’ ability to sue or the fact that the bill is a gift to the insurance industry? Maybe to talk about the experience that many states, swept up in “tort reform” over the last several decades, have had with similar provisions (many of which have been held unconstitutional)? How about the fact that the bill slavishly follows the positions of the American Tort Reform Association and the shadowy American Legislative Exchange Council?

H.R. 1215 joins five other bills introduced in the past few weeks that tilt the table in favor of corporate defendants in litigation. Is there any item on the corporate defense wish list that we haven’t seen introduced in Congress yet?

It is possible, though, that this bill could have one positive effect. It may induce doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies who currently refuse to participate in federal programs to do so, based upon the limited liability the bill would ensure.

*Definition: “The term ‘health care lawsuit’ means any health care liability claim concerning the provision of goods or services for which coverage was provided in whole or in part via a Federal program, subsidy or tax benefit, or any health care liability action concerning the provision of goods or services for which coverage was provided in whole or in part via a Federal program, subsidy or tax benefit, brought in a State or Federal court or pursuant to an alternative dispute resolution system, against a health care provider regardless of the theory of liability on which the claim is based . . .” This would presumably include Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act.

February 26, 2017 in Current Affairs, In the News, State Courts | Permalink | Comments (2)

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #6 on: March 20, 2017, 03:55:53 am »

[Buddie]

Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 03:48:17 am
[…],

You can quote whatever you’d like, doesn’t make it true. This is extreme tort reform.

But what I’m quoting is the actual language contained HB 1215.

Re: new bill that can harm us - action needed
« Reply #7 on: March 20, 2017, 04:01:03 am »

[Buddie]

Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 03:55:53 am
Quote from: [Buddie] on March 20, 2017, 03:48:17 am
[…],

You can quote whatever you’d like, doesn’t make it true. This is extreme tort reform.

But what I’m quoting is the actual language contained HB 1215.

So what! I posted a legal analysis by someone who cares about justice. ?

Kook petition for independent inquiry into benzodiazepines fails miserably

“The horrific life-destroying implications of benzodiazepines have been known about for decades and yet the medical profession remain largely in denial of the damage. The doctors are in denial not us. They conspired with Big Pharma to turn us into accidental addicts. Blah blah blah. The Department of Health, the BMA, and Parliament have a duty to give justice to those whose lives have been ruined. Blah blah. There must be an inquiry for the sake of future generations and for those undergoing the horrific consequences of this iatrogenically induced pandemic. Iatrogenic? Big word that means the doctors did it and we hate them. Pandemic? An epidemic of infectious disease that has spread throughout the world? Get a grip.”

https://www.change.org/p/health-select-committee-an-independent-inquiry-into-benzodiazepines

Even though it is a UK petition, signatures are being solicited, at secret online sites, not only from UK, but also from U.S. and Canadian, citizens. At last count they had 604 signatures. Their goal is 1000. One of the doctor-bashing groups claims to have over 1500 members but can’t even rouse a significant percentage of its members to sign the petition (they don’t have 1500 active members). Benzo Buddies claims 28,000 members but over 90% of the listed membership never posts, or has posted once, and ran from the site screaming (it is rumored Benzo Buddies even keeps deceased members on the membership rolls). If Benzo Buddies had that many members it would be very easy to get 5,000 of them to sign a petition that bashes doctors — some movement. It is as fake as their claims Big Pharma targeted them.

  • UK population 64 million
  • U.S. population 319 million
  • Canadian population 36 million

That is to say, out of a combined total population of 419 million only 604 people signed this garbage. What percentage is that? Pathetic is not even the right word to describe this.

Medication helps people live productive lives.

Kooks discover outside their tiny cult no one’s ever heard of Heather Ashton

Ashton's popularity
« on: February 08, 2017, 05:27:17 pm »

[Buddie]

I’m getting impression whenever I mention Dr Ashton / Ashton’s manual to GP’s or Psychiatrist no one of them seem to reflect. I feel like I’m mentioning name of some unknown shaman?

What’s your experience there?

Re: Ashton's popularity
« Reply #1 on: February 08, 2017, 05:33:00 pm »

[Buddie]

A lot of doctors in the US have never heard of Dr. Ashton. Some disregard her work simply because they “think” they know better. My doctor was receptive and was willing to use her taper plan for my withdrawal.

[…] 

Re: Ashton's popularity
« Reply #2 on: February 08, 2017, 05:35:54 pm »

[Buddie]

I am in the UK … and my psychiatrist had never heard of her. He also denied that my sxs were due to benzo withdrawal. He said something about there being no clinical trials …    on benzo withdrawal.

Re: Ashton's popularity
« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2017, 05:46:14 pm »

[Buddie]

So I’m in Ireland… same here.

In addition, the best thing I heard today from one psychiatrist is that my addiction at this stage is merely psychological .

Generally they are all aware Benzos are bad and they will be reluctant to prescribe it, but when it comes to Benzo addiction in their eyes it looks less significant.

Those two things are not in proportion…
I wish they are right though

Kooks start petition demanding to stay crazy forever, has 15 signatures

If this is allowed.... please sign
« on: December 29, 2016, 03:49:26 pm »

[Buddie]

This is probably for US residents only…..
I know there is a lot of UK and other countries here….I wish you could sign but I don’t know if it would help

https://www.change.org/p/united-states-department-of-health-and-human-services-improved-provider-education-patient-support-and-detox-centers-for-benzodiazepine-withdraw