Can benzos cause cancer?

[[Da...]]

 

So builder, is this to say I should believe the experts are all ethical and above board and have my best interests at heart? If this is true I'll sleep real sound tonight.

 

 

 

Reasonable intellectual skepticism is healthy, paranoia is not.

 

When there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence on one side of an issue, and/or an almost complete absence of evidence to the contrary, it should not be difficult for a rational person to choose.

 

And sorry, "... the literature could have been hidden. We aren't privy to the whole story "  smacks of paranoia, NOT intellectual skepticism.

 

Where is that overwhelming preponderance, Builder? If there is one, there should be a meta-analysis or a systematic review that shows the clear lack of a link between cancer and benzos. You're free to produce that. Or you can just keep claiming there is no link without any actual evidence.

 

Also, that site you linked is great. If you look at the sections on depression and anxiety, check out the DALYs (disability adjusted life years). Basically ever since the mass medicalization of mental disorders by doctors, there has been zero progress in reducing disability. The 500% increase in antidepressant prescriptions doesn't seem to have done much good. Maybe those drugs are actually more harmful and less effective than advertised?  https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daly-rates-from-anxiety-disorders-by-age

 

Anyway, round of applause for doctors and pharma wasting billions of dollars in resources to sell drugs to tens of millions of people.

[[Fl...]]

I also stand by my contention that benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true they cause cancer, we would know by now.

 

Benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true that they can cause severe, debilitating, protracted withdrawal issues, would we know by now?

 

Obviously "we" (as in the people who have been harmed by these drugs) know that benzos can cause debilitating health issues that can last for years, but good luck finding any solid studies or "professionals" that will acknowledge this.

[[Te...]]

 

So builder, is this to say I should believe the experts are all ethical and above board and have my best interests at heart? If this is true I'll sleep real sound tonight.

 

 

 

Reasonable intellectual skepticism is healthy, paranoia is not.

 

When there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence on one side of an issue, and/or an almost complete absence of evidence to the contrary, it should not be difficult for a rational person to choose.

 

And sorry, "... the literature could have been hidden. We aren't privy to the whole story "  smacks of paranoia, NOT intellectual skepticism.

 

No, it's not paranoia, it's healthy skepticism. And we ought to be skeptical about an industry that makes massive amounts of money and hides the truth from people.

 

And thinking about weight, I've always been underweight. I am 5'5" and weigh 115 pounds. I don't worry at all about my weight, and that, I don't believe, has anything to do with bladder cancer.

 

 

[[Ma...]]

 

So builder, is this to say I should believe the experts are all ethical and above board and have my best interests at heart? If this is true I'll sleep real sound tonight.

 

 

 

Reasonable intellectual skepticism is healthy, paranoia is not.

 

When there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence on one side of an issue, and/or an almost complete absence of evidence to the contrary, it should not be difficult for a rational person to choose.

 

And sorry, "... the literature could have been hidden. We aren't privy to the whole story "  smacks of paranoia, NOT intellectual skepticism.

 

No, it's not paranoia, it's healthy skepticism. And we ought to be skeptical about an industry that makes massive amounts of money and hides the truth from people.

 

And thinking about weight, I've always been underweight. I am 5'5" and weigh 115 pounds. I don't worry at all about my weight, and that, I don't believe, has anything to do with bladder cancer.

 

I'm very sorry about your cancer and I can't even imagine what it must feel like going through that experience. What I know is that cancer is such a random thing, it can happen to anybody and in the vast majority of cases the causes of cancer are unknown. There are risk factors but even if you're exposed there is no way of telling whether you will get cancer or not. Sometimes bad genes contribute sometimes environmental insults such as radiation, asbestos, and toxic chemicals. In a very few cases viruses can directly cause cancer and they may contribute to cancer in other cases. Chronic inflammation is also a factor.

 

With a very few exceptions, most drugs that are on the market (probably over 1000) do not cause cancer. One group of drugs that comes to mind are the anti-TNF antibodies which are used for a variety of autoimmune diseases and can cause lymphomas. Another group are the anti-cancer medications, which can cause secondary cancers. With both anti-TNF antibodies and anti-cancer medications, patients are warned. 

[[Te...]]

Okay, thank you, Maugham.

 

I still think it was chronic inflammation that caused the cancer because I dealt with high adrenaline for a long time and am still anxious to this day. But thanks for your input.

 

It was just a slow-growing tumor. The doctor waited a whole year to give me a referral to a urologist, and luckily it didn't spread much within that year. I just thought it was benign because my doctor was so slow to do anything. And he told me it was a tumor on my kidneys. So I was very surprised to find out it was on the bladder. And I had it taken out, have an excellent urologist, and hopefully it won't reappear.

[[Lo...]]

I also stand by my contention that benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true they cause cancer, we would know by now. An opposite example would be alcohol or smoking (or asbestos, radiation, etc.). These agents were suspected to have carcinogenic effects based on accrual of anecdotal evidence over many years. Studies then clearly showed that that was the case. The studies were partly very detailed clinical studies, partly mechanistic studies. No such accrual of anecdotal evidence exists regarding benzos. No detailed clinical studies or mechanistic studies. Not even a hint other than a couple of people here stating that their cancer was caused by benzos. Ironically, some of them have been alcoholics or smokers for a long time, yet they still blame the benzos.

 

Finally, even alcohol and smoking do not cause cancer. They increase the risk. Carcinogenesis is multifactorial.

 

The ill-effects of alcohol and tobacco have been extensively studied for decades. They have been studied to a far greater extent than the ill-effects of benzos. Also, neither alcohol nor tobacco are considered essential medicines by the World Health Organization nor are they prescribed or recommended/endorsed by doctors. There have been countless of articles and documentaries about the dangers of alcohol and tobacco in the mainstream media. I have yet to see any sort of mainstream media coverage about benzos that would even come close to the ones of alcohol or cigarettes or even electronic cigarettes.

[[Ma...]]

The ill-effects of alcohol and tobacco have been extensively studied for decades. They have been studied to a far greater extent than the ill-effects of benzos. Also, neither alcohol nor tobacco are considered essential medicines by the World Health Organization nor are they prescribed or recommended/endorsed by doctors. There have been countless of articles and documentaries about the dangers of alcohol and tobacco in the mainstream media. I have yet to see any sort of mainstream media coverage about benzos that would even come close to the ones of alcohol or cigarettes or even electronic cigarettes.

 

Yes, because they don't kill so many people. Opioids do and there is plenty of media coverage. What is your point?

 

 

Edit: fixed quote box.

~Colin.

[[Lo...]]

 

The ill-effects of alcohol and tobacco have been extensively studied for decades. They have been studied to a far greater extent than the ill-effects of benzos. Also, neither alcohol nor tobacco are considered essential medicines by the World Health Organization nor are they prescribed or recommended/endorsed by doctors. There have been countless of articles and documentaries about the dangers of alcohol and tobacco in the mainstream media. I have yet to see any sort of mainstream media coverage about benzos that would even come close to the ones of alcohol or cigarettes or even electronic cigarettes.

 

Yes, because they don't kill so many people. Opioids do and there is plenty of media coverage. What is your point?

 

My point is that the research on ill-effects of benzos (including their carcinogenic potential) should be welcomed and not ignored and thrown under the bus. Those good studies we have that don't have tons of tons of conflicts of interest behind them is something that I believe anyone who has been harmed by these drugs should welcome.  The more research is put into studying the ill-effects of benzodiazepines, the more treatments can be found and funded and the more people can be helped. But in order for people to get help, there needs to be more public discussion and acknowledgment of the disabling/harmful effects of benzos, up to and including their potential to cause cancer.

[[Ma...]]

I agree that much more research should be done on benzos. My priorities would be research on how they cause dependence and how we can taper off faster and with fewer symptoms. Dependence is the major issue with benzos and not cancer.

[[bu...]]

  Dependence is the major issue with benzos...

 

And about that, there really is no disagreement! 

[[Be...]]

Don’t shoot the messenger, folks, and don’t read these if you’re not up to it. For those seeking research results:

 

ncbi 2015: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602739/

 

Mad in America 2016: https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/03/is-long-term-use-of-benzodiazepine-a-risk-for-cancer/

 

Dear Challis99,

 

Can you please remove this whole threat with the original post. I think it's getting overwhelmed with negative vibes?

 

Thank you.

[[Mo...]]

I also stand by my contention that benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true they cause cancer, we would know by now.

 

Benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true that they can cause severe, debilitating, protracted withdrawal issues, would we know by now?

 

Obviously "we" (as in the people who have been harmed by these drugs) know that benzos can cause debilitating health issues that can last for years, but good luck finding any solid studies or "professionals" that will acknowledge this.

 

:thumbsup:

[[lo...]]

I also stand by my contention that benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true they cause cancer, we would know by now.

 

Benzos have been around for 60 years and if it is true that they can cause severe, debilitating, protracted withdrawal issues, would we know by now?

 

Obviously "we" (as in the people who have been harmed by these drugs) know that benzos can cause debilitating health issues that can last for years, but good luck finding any solid studies or "professionals" that will acknowledge this.

 

:thumbsup:

 

This is so true, protracted withdrawal should be widely known about by now ... yet it isn't.  The same is true for SSRI antidepressants, 30 years on the market and we have to campaign for recognition of the severity of withdrawal.  How many decades does it take?

[[Te...]]

A very excellent point, Fiona!! Thank you for saying that.

[[be...]]

For decades just about every home had the product Roundup in their garage or tool shed. Only recently has it come to light that this poison causes cancer and multi millions have been given to its victims. I don’t think anyone will disagree that the maker, Monsanto, knew this but said nothing. Now the German company Bayer is saying the same thing.

 

While nobody is supposed to ingest Roundup, they kept silent because it’s a huge money maker. In fact I just saw some very foolish man buying several containers. The same hold true for drug makers. They will deny everything if their products sell well but cause harm. However, I think if benzos cause cancer like Roundup does, we would all know about it regardless. People get cancer. Period. Just because they take benzos doesn’t make it magically disappear.

[[Li...]]

I agree that much more research should be done on benzos. My priorities would be research on how they cause dependence and how we can taper off faster and with fewer symptoms. Dependence is the major issue with benzos and not cancer.

Yes!

[[be...]]

:thumbsup:

[[Ch...]]

Don’t shoot the messenger, folks, and don’t read these if you’re not up to it. For those seeking research results:

 

ncbi 2015: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602739/

 

Mad in America 2016: https://www.madinamerica.com/2016/03/is-long-term-use-of-benzodiazepine-a-risk-for-cancer/

 

Dear Challis99,

 

Can you please remove this whole threat with the original post. I think it's getting overwhelmed with negative vibes?

 

Thank you.

 

We only rarely remove threads. I’d suggest doing what I’ve done and not read or reply anymore. 

[[Bl...]]

I agree that much more research should be done on benzos. My priorities would be research on how they cause dependence and how we can taper off faster and with fewer symptoms. Dependence is the major issue with benzos and not cancer.

Yes!

 

I think everyone on BB agrees with this.

 

I understand things take place with baby steps. The thing is, when will the experts take the first baby step?

 

Then, once that first step is taken...the experts can proceed from it to even more steps....until we, the collateral damage in this mess, get some enlightening answers.

 

Oddly there are benefits to this madness....and that is what has helped me to keep my sanity throughout this ordeal. And, this subject under consideration on this thread, I do consider to be at the top of the list of those benefits.

 

So please, don't get me wrong...I really appreciate this forum and I certainly would never consider this serious discussion on this thread as what some may consider as idle dribble....or whatever else some on this thread have already referenced it as. Not sure why anyone would even waste their time with dribble.

[[La...]]

I just came across this abstract and thought others might be interested in the topic:

 

"Design, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel benzodiazepine derivatives as anticancer agents through inhibition of tubulin polymerization in vitro and in vivo".

 

(Yes, that says "anticancer".)

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31499359 

 

Abstract

 

A series of novel structurally-related tubulin polymerization inhibitors based on benzodiazepine were designed, synthesized, and evaluated for anticancer activity. Extensive structure modifications were performed to investigate the detailed structure and activity relationships (SARs). Most compounds exhibited potent antiproliferative activity against a panel of cancer cell lines. Among these compounds, the optimal compound, 9a, possessed the most superior activity, including cytotoxicity against five cancer cell lines (IC50 = 6-15 nM) and inhibition of tubulin polymerization (IC50 = 1.65 ± 0.11 μM). Mechanistic studies revealed that 9a could disrupt intracellular microtubule organization, arrest cell cycle at the G2/M phase and eventually induce cell apoptosis. Compound 9a exhibited good metabolic stability with a t1/2 of 161.2 min, which was much better than the reference compound CA-4. Moreover, the disodium salt of 9a, 9a-P, exhibited excellent in vivo antitumor activity in xenograft mice model with inhibitory rate of 89.3%, which was better than the reference compounds CA-4P (inhibitory rate: 52.8%) and Y-01P (inhibitory rate: 77.7%). Altogether, 9a could serve as a promising lead compound for the development of highly efficient anticancer agents.

[[Te...]]

Are these new benzos coming out, Lapis? I'm confused.

[[Do...]]

Lapis...I like your study.  I think we will give you the last word on this subject.  Nice job.  I so appreciate chewing the fat.  Thanks for all the time you put into the thread.  Finding studies to contradict studies can be tedious work.      Thanks again

[[La...]]

Are these new benzos coming out, Lapis? I'm confused.

 

Hi Terry,

I'm not actually sure! I'm hoping someone else can drop in and explain. Bear in mind that the study uses a "mice model", so it's not about human beings at this stage. But seeing "anticancer", "antitumor", and "antiproliferative activity against a panel of cancer cell lines" in a paragraph about benzodiazepine-based "structurally-related tubulin polymerization inhibitors" seems like a positive thing.   

 

And we could certainly use a bit of positivity at this point.

 

This abstract just came out, so I didn't do any special digging to find it. It was just among the most recent studies. Maybe it presented itself at this point for a reason.....

 

;)

[[mo...]]

I had seen this, Lapis.

[[Ho...]]

So doing my best google/wikipedia research....

 

Tubulin is a kind of protein made by cells. Tubulin polymerizes (i.e. pieces link up end to end) to form microtubules (a fancy word for tiny tubes) in cells to form part of the cell structure. Your cells need the microtubules to move the chemicals it needs to different parts of the cells.

 

The compounds the researchers made were based on the benzodiazepine molecular skeleton, but "extensively modified." Since all I can read is the abstract, I don't know how extensively modified the chemicals are. My guess is the article probably won't say how much either since the researcher will want to patent these chemicals, so they want to keep it a secret.

 

These compounds show activity in preventing microtubules from forming in cells. Without the microtubules, the cells wither and die.

 

Chemotherapy drugs do something similar, but they prevent DNA from being synthesized correctly. Since cancer cells are usually multiplying rapidly which requires a lot of DNA to be synthesized, a drug that keeps DNA from being synthesized correctly will kill the cells. The side effects come about from chemo drugs because regular cells are doing the same thing, just not as much.

 

That's my interpretation of the abstract. Except the paragraph on chemotherapy drugs. That wasn't in the abstract.

 

This thread has been fascinating.