This is not a Baclofen bashing thread, if such a thing exists. I am trying to give another point of view because people seem to be frustrated that they cannot get a prescription.
At present, if I were a a Dr I wouldn't prescribe Baclofen in the high doses mentioned here, the evidence isn't of high enough quality to support it and even then, would I?. Suppose it depends what level of expertise the doctor has...if you're a consultant in this area, you can basically do what you want and very few can question it but as a GP, I think it would be plain wrong to prescribe it above say (for example) 30 mg/day (I seen a short, small double blind trial at this dosage). Its great that people do well on this, but anecdotal reports aren't worth much. Even expert opinion, as in the case of Dr OA are the bottom of the barrel.
It's all evidence-based medicine these days. This ensures that things like Seethepony posted doesn't happen, or happens as little as possible. There are more recent examples than that, but they are less dramatic. For example Clofibrate, a lipid lowering drug (high lipid is major risk factor for a variety of heart conditions) was studied in a lenthgy double blind trial and it was shown that it was associated with a slightly higher mortality than doing nothing at all and was discontinued. INtervention should be associated with lower morbidity and mortality than doing nothing at all. IS that the case with Baclofen? I don't think we really know.
Comment