Gawd, it’s doing my head in! Geoff’s Day 3 would, I think, be my Day 9 - i.e. if we each increased by 1 tablet a day, but he’s on 300mg, and I’m only on 100, those are the days on which our doses would be equivalent.
If Geoff has increased by 300 a day without dropping dead, or other serious adverse event, I’m sure I must be OK to increment by just 100. The only reason I can think of that I’m on such an unusually low dose was that I’m rather drug averse (not physically - in terms of willingness to take it, that is).
BUT, if I’m going to bite the bullet and take it at all, I may as well at least take a dose that works. What’s the point messing about with medication that’s too trivial to do anything? You get the worst of both worlds then - the nuisance of having to take them, and acceptance of any associated risks, without the chance of feeling better!
Yes, I did appreciate I’d need at least a week’s tapering from the higher doses (still not high compared to the max, which I think is 3600mg per day). Which is all the more reason I need to schedule a review with the doctor even before my experiment is complete, as I will need additional drugs, even if we decide I’m coming off.
This all sounded like such a brilliant idea, but now I’m thinking: “Why didn’t we just start again with a clean slate, and forget the neuro prescribed me just 1/3 of a proper dose?” I’m even wondering if he might have made a mistake, because he had clearly said “tablets”, and the pharmacy queried it, and said: “They only come in capsules at that dose.”
Now if he had really meant 300, they probably do come as tablets! Obviously, I’d rather be under-medicated than prescribed an overdose, but it all seems slightly odd.