I'd like to pipe in to say a coupla quick things: -There are other threads specific to going off clonazepam (too sicky to go look for them now) -and also, one thing that hasn't been mentioned here is Cheney's thought which I find interesting and kind of resonant for me (as we are indeed all different.) His take is that this drug is not addictive if you need it (yes, you become dependent because there is a specific neurological need.) If and when you have addressed the underlying thing causing that need, tapering off should be simple and easy, a non-event. Going to such lengths as Freddd describes would for me be impossibly complex, but also sounds like an indication that the substance is still needed by the body, and so maybe not worth all that effort. Since the withdrawal symptoms people are describing seem to be very similar to the symptoms one is trying to treat with the drug in the first place, to my mind that furthers the case for the continued need for that medication. (Bear in mind I am someone who generally refuses any kind of pharmaceutical whatsoever.) It's just a thought, not trying to debunk anyone here. Just thought it was worthy of adding to the pot.