There are definitely cases where long term use of benzos is the only viable solution and your sounds like one of them. But this paper just rehashes the same thi

There are definitely cases where long term use of benzos is the only viable solution and your sounds like one of them. But this paper just rehashes the same things about benzodiazepines. Are they saying that only some people become dependent on benzos? Do they have an example of anyone who's been on them for four weeks that isn't dependent? I doubt you could find someone who has been on them for two weeks who isn't dependent. They completely gloss over the fact that doctors have no idea how to get people off and rehabs are even more clueless (you can't do anything in 30 days other than damage for a long-term benzo user). Doctors often use a patient's dependance to squeeze money out of him and not provide any actual care outside the prescription, a prescription they know with certainty will bring the patient back regardless of how awful the rest of the services are. Often, they will stop seeing patients without warning, literally leaving them in life-or-death situations that they need to resolve themselves, situations they might not be able to resolve without going to a black market or emergency room. I'm not saying the guidelines are bad, just that they are extremely incomplete, they unacceptably play down the risks involved, and most doctors have never heard of them. The situation will hardly change given how much profit comes from benzos to all parties involved (except the patient)