What you should know about benzos before you take them
Within 10 minutes of disclosing his sleepless nights to his family doctor, Georges Marcoux had a little white pill in his hand.
His doctor in Shediac, N.B., prescribed him a sleeping pill, Oxazepam, which gave him relief for a few weeks.
"I got the prescription, and that's it. Nobody was asking questions. I was not asking questions."
But 35 years later, Marcoux realized he had been taking the same pill to help him sleep every night.
After seeing a story in the paper about a study correlating long-term benzodiazepine use to risk of cognitive impairment, he knew it was time to quit.
These pills, part of a class of drugs called benzodiazepines, have been around since 1955. Their use and misuse are portrayed in songs, movies and most recently in the TV series White Lotus and The Pitt.
A 2024 study published in the journal Sleep Medicine, surveyed about 4000 Canadians, and 15 per cent of all respondents said they had used a sleep medication.
The study also found that one in four respondents 65 and older, and about one in 10 between 36 to 49, used a prescribed sleep medication in the preceding 12 months.
According to a study published in the Canadian Journal of Public Health in 2023, a range of studies peg the prevalence of benzodiazepine use between five and 10 per cent of the populations in Canada and the United States between 1996 and 2019.
But there are serious risks that come with taking benzodiazepines, and medical experts say the drug is being over-prescribed.
Dr. Paxton Bach, a specialist in addictions medicine at Vancouver's St. Paul's Hospital, told Dr. Brian Goldman, host of CBC podcast The Dose, that once a dependency to the drug is formed, it takes a lot of effort to quit.
What are benzodiazepines?
Benzodiazepines are prescription medications primarily used for short-term treatment of specific medical conditions such as acute anxiety, panic attacks or severe situational stress.
Doctors may prescribe them to stop or prevent seizures, provide temporary relief for sleep disorders, as a muscle relaxer or to help manage alcohol-withdrawal symptoms.
Taking benzodiazepines comes with risks, said Bach, who is also a clinical assistant professor at the University of British Columbia.
"It's crucial to understand that these medications are intended for very brief use — typically only a few days to a week — because they can quickly lead to physical dependence."
What are the risks of taking benzodiazepines?
Within days to weeks of regular use, patients can develop a habit, said Bach.
"Withdrawal symptoms range from increased anxiety and restlessness to potentially life-threatening complications, like seizures or coma."
He said side effects to taking the drug include sedation, decreased cognitive function, impaired reflexes, and increased fall risk.
"Long-term use can lead to tolerance, requiring higher doses to achieve the same effect, and can be more challenging to discontinue than even opioid medications."
When combined with other substances, such as opioids or alcohol, Bach said, benzodiazepines dramatically increase overdose risk.
WATCH | Warnings about the overprescription of Benzodiazepines:
Warnings about the overprescription of Benzodiazepines
1 year ago
Duration 2:48
Why are physicians worried about benzodiazepines?
Dr. Camille Gagnon, assistant director at the Canadian Medication Appropriateness and Deprescribing Network, said there's a serious problem with benzodiazepines being over prescribed.
While benzos can be useful to patients with the qualifying symptoms, Gagnon said physicians should "also recognize that these are not the best approach for patients, especially not long term."
Gagnon recommends other alternatives to insomnia treatment, such as psychological therapy, but said there are barriers to accessing those options, such as high-costs and lack of publicly-funded psychotherapists.
She said access to medication, whether it's from a pharmacist or unprescribed, is often the more accessible option.
Bach said he's noticed some of his patients had been prescribed benzodiazepines without proper communication of the risks. He said that is a key factor physicians should take into account to prevent dependency.
"I hope that patients who've been on one of these medications long term have been communicating with their prescriber about the risks and benefits," said Bach.
"There are certainly times when longer-term use of benzodiazepines may be needed, but in general, these are medications that are primarily intended for very short-term use," he said.
Twelve people who spoke to Radio-Canada's Enquête said they were prescribed the drugs by a doctor, but most said they were not warned about side effects, including life-altering withdrawal symptoms.
How do I quit taking benzodiazepines?
Quitting benzodiazepines suddenly can be extremely risky, said Bach.
It can cause serious withdrawal symptoms, which can range from mild symptoms like anxiety, insomnia, and restlessness, to severe complications including seizures, delirium, coma, or even death.
"If you think of benzodiazepines as sort of a blanket or a break on the brain activity, and that's withdrawn very suddenly, you can imagine things kind of kick into overdrive."
Bach said quitting can take from months to years, but he believes anyone can make a plan with their physician to stop using these medications.
"In my experience, anyone and everyone can taper off these medications eventually. It's just about making sure we take the time and provide that level of engagement to do so in a careful and thoughtful way, such that we minimize that risk and maximize the chance of success."
It's not easy to quit, said Gagnon, but it's certainly possible with help from a primary-care provider.
"The goal is to make it collaborative. It's totally modifiable. It's something that evolves with the person, and it can be done for sure."
Marcoux has been off of benzodiazepines for two years now, but he says it wasn't easy.
"I was a little bit scared and I had withdrawal symptoms … but I am much happier without it."
He made a plan with his family doctor to reduce the dosage of his benzodiazepine every three months.
"I questioned my choice to stop often when I was trying to cut it off, but I knew I had to try," said Marcoux.
He said he created a personal goal to try and wean off his medication within a year, and stuck to it.
"Now I'm turning 80 and I whistle in the morning and I feel better. It's something that I have never felt before."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
24 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
RFK Jr.'s firing of U.S. immunization committee worrisome, Canadian scientists say
TORONTO – Canadian doctors and scientists say Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s firing of an immunization advisory committee south of the border is worrisome. On Monday, the U.S. health and human services secretary — a longtime anti-vaccine advocate — said he will appoint new members to the scientific group that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about vaccination. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan, said Tuesday that the move will foster more false anti-vaccine beliefs, not only in the U.S. but also in Canada. 'It creates a culture in which anti-vaxx beliefs are more accepted and challenged a lot less. And also it creates an environment where there's an alternative to an evidence-based recommendation framework,' she said. Even though Kennedy's new appointments will make vaccine recommendations specific to the United States, any disinformation could also feed vaccine hesitancy among Canadians, Rasmussen said. 'We have a lot of the same anti-vaxx sentiment up here. Certainly this will at the very least empower (that),' she said. Rasmussen said current measles outbreaks in both countries show the consequences of disinformation that leads to parents not immunizing their children against preventable diseases. She said Canada could also experience some fallout if the new committee pulls back vaccination recommendations, because manufacturers may cut back on production and that could lead to shortages. 'There's a lot of potential for really, really damaging vaccine access throughout the U.S. and potentially around the world because the U.S. market has a big impact on what vaccine manufacturers are actually going to make and manufacture,' she said. 'There's so many ways that this can end up really badly for vaccination in general. And it really causes me a lot of concern.' Rasmussen said the firing of the advisory committee members is just the latest in a series of anti-public health actions Kennedy has taken. 'It's a death by a thousand cuts,' said Rasmussen, who is American and moved to Canada during the pandemic to work at the University of Saskatchewan's Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization. U.S. President Donald Trump's administration has already cut billions of dollars in research grants at the National Institutes of Health. In May, the administration cancelled a contract with mRNA vaccine manufacturer Moderna to develop a vaccine against potential pandemic influenza viruses, including H5N1 avian flu. 'It just seems that there is a top-down approach that views mRNA vaccines in particular — vaccination in general, but mRNA vaccines in particular — with distrust and is trying to dismantle that particular avenue of medical research,' said Dr. Jesse Papenburg, a pediatric infectious diseases specialist at Montreal Children's Hospital. Papenburg, who is a member of Canada's National Advisory Committee on Immunization but was not speaking on its behalf, said although the Moderna contract cancellation and the firing of the U.S. vaccine advisory committee members are two separate actions, they're both concerning as Canada tries to prepare for potential human-to-human transmission of H5N1. 'Both are potentially very dangerous when it comes to America's and the world's ability to respond to emerging infectious diseases for which vaccines could be a useful medical countermeasure,' he said. — With files from The Associated Press This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 11, 2025. Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.
21 hours ago
Dentists praise Canadian Dental Care program, but also express concern over influx of new patients
A northern Ontario dentist says the Canadian Dental Care Plan has generally been positive, but he worries it could cause issues meeting higher demand for dental care over the long term. In June, eligible Canadians between the ages of 18 and 64 can start receiving dental coverage under the plan. Dr. Thomas Detert, a dental surgeon based in Blind River, said the dental plan is bringing in patients who haven't been to a dentist's office in years. Some of them are like over 10 or 15 years because when they retired, they lost their benefits, he said. In some cases, Detert said those patients had good oral hygiene habits and didn't need significant dental care. But in other cases, they put off going to the dentist until they were in serious pain, and needed significant work. While the program has benefited those people, Detert said there's a risk demand for dental care could outstrip the ability of dentists and other oral health professionals to meet it. Much like our socialized medicine in Canada, without proper prevention and education, the demand [has] outstripped any amount of supply that can be thrown at it. And that's what I'm afraid of for socialized dentistry, he said. Around 3.6 million Canadians have been approved by the Canadian Dental Care Plan and around 1.9 million people received care through the plan, as of April. Dr. Jerry Smith, a dentist from Thunder Bay, Ont., and the past president of the Ontario Dental Association, said another 4.5 million Canadians could qualify for the plan with the cohort of people between the ages of 18 and 64. Smith agreed the plan has been positive for people who might not be able to afford dental care otherwise. But he worries a shortage of dental hygienists and assistants will make it challenging for dentists to properly serve an influx of new patients. In Ontario alone, there is a shortage of about 3,400 dental assistants and about 5,500 dental hygienists, he said, quoting figures from a 2022 analysis conducted by the Ontario Dental Association. The Canadian Dental Association estimates that with the increase in patients from the Canadian Dental Care Plan, Canada will need an additional 2,300 dental assistants and over 1,500 dental hygienists in 2025. The numbers from the Ontario Dental Association reference its estimates for the total shortage in the province. In a statement to CBC News Marg Harrington, the CEO of the Ontario Dental Hygienists' Association, said that while some dental practices might struggle attracting dental hygienists, the narrative of a provincewide shortage is inaccurate. The fact is there are more dental hygienists in Ontario than ever before, Harrington said. Registration data from the College of Dental Hygienists of Ontario show a steady increase over the past few years in the number of dental hygienists registered in Ontario. Harrington said that research published last month in the BMC Oral Health journal showed that Ontario had 97 registered dental hygienists per 100,000 population in 2023, which is substantially higher than other provinces. Jonathan Migneault (new window) · CBC News
Canada Standard
a day ago
- Canada Standard
Q&A: How Deep Energy Retrofits Can Unlock Health Care Savings in Alberta
Across Canada, provinces like British Columbia, Quebec, Nova Scotia, and Ontario are investing in energy retrofits to cut emissions, lower energy bills, and improve health. But Alberta stands apart-not for what it's doing, but for what it isn't. There, 42% of 598,000 homes built before 1980 need repairs and upgrades. But Alberta is the only province or territory that doesn't allow utilities to engage in demand-side management (DSM) programs-initiatives that help people use less energy by funding things like insulation, heat pumps, and efficient appliances. Amid increasing wildfire smoke, extreme heat, and rising energy prices, retrofit advocates are working to build institutional support for programs to make homes safer for Albertans. Though retrofits can be costly and complex, a new Pembina Institute report shows their full value emerges when health care savings are factored into the equation. For example, researchers in England found that poor housing conditions cost their country's health care system $3 billion each year. Simply fixing homes that were too cold would save the National Health Service $1.8 billion per year in avoided costs, the study found. In New Zealand, researchers uncovered remarkable health and energy savings from retrofits made during a multi-year insulation and clean heating program, writes Pembina. After tracking hospitalization rates, prescription costs, and mortality across retrofitted and non-retrofitted homes, they found that insulation had the most benefit, while the biggest health savings came from reduced mortality. The program had a net return of $1.03 billion in health and energy savings-for every dollar spent, four dollars were returned. The Energy Mix talked with report author Raidin Blue, an analyst with the Pembina Institute's buildings program, about Alberta's retrofit gap, its health and equity impacts, and what's needed to drive policy change. The Mix : Why is it important to highlight both health and energy savings when making the case for deep retrofits? View our latest digests Retrofits aren't just about energy-they have a broader value proposition that we aren't capturing. We believe deep retrofits can be key to making life more affordable for Canadians, which is a huge priority right now. The business case for deep retrofits needs to be expanded to include non-energy benefits: improved health and safety, enhanced resilience, and better insurance coverage. When all of that is factored in, deep retrofits make strong financial sense. The Mix : Who do you hope will act on this report-and what message do you want them to walk away with? Building owners. I want them to understand that health is tied to housing-we spend 90% of our lives indoors. Poor ventilation? Air quality issues can damage your lungs. Struggling to keep your home warm in winter? Chronic cold is linked to cardiovascular issues. Both owners and tenants can face serious health impacts from their buildings, and retrofits are a powerful solution. The Mix: You highlight vulnerable households-like low-income families and seniors-living in poor-quality housing, yet Alberta has no province-wide retrofit strategy. However, we are seeing targeted programs like the Metis Government's federally funded $9.24-million retrofit initiative. What would it take to build broader political or institutional support for retrofits in Alberta? And should the feds step up with funding? People in Alberta want to retrofit. The demand is there. It is great to see this initiative from the Metis Government. The City of Calgary also expanded its Home Upgrades Program, and 20-some communities are involved in Alberta Municipalities' Clean Energy Improvement Program (CEIP). Unfortunately, CEIP programs are often out of reach for vulnerable populations, since the funding is tied to property taxes-and many low-income families and seniors don't own their homes. In provinces and territories where there are utility-led Demand-Side Management (DSM) programs, retrofit initiatives are common, and many focus specifically on low-income housing. These programs offer stable, year-over-year funding that building owners can rely on. So a key first step would be for Alberta-a DSM outlier in Canada-to enable utilities to administer and invest in them. At the federal level, the Canada Greener Homes Affordability Program has allocated C$800 to $900 million across the country to support retrofits in low- to median-income homes. So far, Alberta is the only province not actively working to access those funds. In most other jurisdictions, they're managed through a combination of designated agencies and utilities. To advance deep retrofits in Alberta and across Canada, all levels of government need to work more closely with important players like Natural Resources Canada, Infrastructure Canada, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, insurance companies, and health authorities. We need to better understand the impacts of retrofits on everything from health to resilience to affordability-and then create stable supports and incentives. That's when building owners will begin to see real returns on deep retrofit investments-beyond just utility bill savings and emissions reductions. The Mix : You've drawn on international examples from Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. Are conditions in Alberta different enough that more local research is still needed? Where should that work start? It is great to see that Australia saved senior households $840 a winter-I think a health-focused retrofit study in Alberta would see significant health savings. We had hesitations with extrapolations because our examples vary from Alberta in both climate and by types of buildings-so we tried not to make direct comparisons. Alberta-specific pilots would showcase the health benefits of retrofits to building owners, local and provincial governments, and the retrofit industry as a whole. Fortunately, these benefits are likely to emerge even without extensive data collection or formal studies. A good starting point could be post-retrofit surveys, where program managers ask tenants about increased comfort or improvements in their overall health and well-being. From there, deeper research could explore reductions in sick days or asthma symptoms. This means working with health care providers to make stronger links between retrofits, health outcomes, and avoided health care costs. The Mix: Are there any promising examples in Canada-provincial or local-where health research is already influencing retrofit policy or program design? Canadians are really starting to make this connection between our built environment and health. For years people have discussed active transportation, walkable cities, and their health benefits. The University of Alberta has a Climate Change + Health Hub and the Housing for Health initiative because these are important issues to Albertans. Look to the 2021 heat dome, when 619 people died in British Columbia, 66 in Alberta. The B.C. government responded with a formal coroner's investigation and the province worked with utility BC Hydro to provide free air conditioners to vulnerable people. Similar programs were also launched in Oregon and Washington State. These are promising, but still just responses to acute events-they don't take a whole-building approach to deep retrofits. I want policy-makers and researchers to understand that-beyond heat waves-there are chronic health impacts associated with our housing. The Mix : What makes you optimistic that this framing will gain traction? Are decision-makers starting to think differently about the value of deep retrofits? Retrofits do make a difference and that gives me optimism. They are the one form of climate policy that does both climate mitigation and adaptation. They can make our homes healthier, safer, and more affordable. Part of our work over the next year will be to bring together all of these pieces for a complete deep retrofit business case. We just need coordinated efforts from all orders of government, utilities, insurance and investment sectors, and building owners, to keep Canadians healthy and safe. Source: The Energy Mix
