Dear all,

Yet another topic about nerves but I would like some advice from people.

I have read in another forum about taking beta blocks etc before a performance/exam takes place.

I am seriously considering this as an option as I fall to pieces even though I am a good piano player!

However is this, techincally cheating? Should we all just play the best we can without the aid of prescribed drugs?

I am trying to justify it because I'm nearly at the point at calling my doctors for my exam in December!

Let me know your thoughts!

Sarah

Hi Sarah,

I was the originator of the beta blocker discussion. Taking beta blockers is not a matter of cheating. To be perfectly honest many top-flight musicians take them including a substantial proportion of professional orchestral players. If taking beta blockers enables a person to play to the best of their ability when they otherwise wouldn't do so, then assuming there are no medical contraindications, what is wrong with this?

You might find that having played successfully with the aid of these drugs, you feel more confident anyway and in due course will not need them anymore.

Good luck.

Of course not!

Many musicians have taken beta blockers and some people with high blood pressure have to take them all the time. But you should also try to solve the problem without drugs wherever possible.

I'm sure others will give loads of advice. The only thing I can think of is to know your pieces so well, you can play them blindfolded and drinking a glass of water at the same time.
Other tips I've heard are to imagine the audience are all naked, imagine that you're actually in a film pretending to be a famous musician (ie it's not really 'you'), eat a small but rich snack 10 minutes before.

Good luck!

Steve



Yes! About 8 years ago I was flying back to the UK with my children and for the last 30 minutes, we had such bad turbulence I was convinced we would crash. People were crying and praying. It turned out to be one of the windiest days on record and we couldn't even disembark for ages because the wind was still rocking the plane.

Despite having flown for years, it broke my nerve and the only way I could fly was to take 10mg valium and a stiff drink!
Slowly but surely, I reduced this over the years to 5mg, then just had a stiff drink!

Now I'm able to fly without anything.

...though how to survive a Ryanair flight without medication is another matter!

Steve

Thank you for your comments I am going to make an appointment to see the Doctors!


Sarah x

Nope - not cheating.

I take beta-blockers due to a tremor that I have no control over - my arms can jerk and I never eat soup in public because who knows where it will end up

I only take the beta-blockers when I have to go out in public because I don't want people to make a fuss when I'm trying to hold a pen/hand over money etc. so I have no idea if you develop a tolerance to them over time??? But if I'm nervous it gets worse so I was very worried about my music exams.

p.s. I have taken them for three string exams and have had steady hands and distinction each time!

Does anyone remember Neil Foulds, the snooker player, being accused of cheating for taking beta-blockers? (Just as a matter of interest.) I actually don't even agree that this constituted cheating in that context; he had to be able to do what he did without the beta-blockers. They stopped him from shaking, but they didn't make him able to do something that he otherwise wouldn't have been able to do. Things like steroids are a different matter, because they DO make somebody stronger, and therefore able to to 'perform' in a way that would not otherwise be possible. People suffer from nerves to varying degrees, but there has to come a point at which it is a physical problem that needs to be overcome by physical means. If a singer has a sore throat, would they not possibly take something to counteract that? Does this constitute 'cheating'? Is it cheating to eat two bananas or have a glass of wine? The wine is not a naturally occurring substance and neither are beta-blockers. At what point do we decide that using a non-basic substance means cheating? The only difference with beta-blockers is that they are medically prescribed in order that they are used sensibly. Some cultures would argue that alcohol shouldn't be readily available either!

I don't think it's cheating - otherwise I cheated in my performance diploma, several other performances, and in my first few organ-playing church services. But I think lowering my ridiculous adrenalin and avoiding that rush to the loo and using up all the toilet paper with five minutes to go was probably of benefit to everybody.

I have to say I have done concerts before and the only one I did well in was when I was given a prescribed drug to calm me down. The others were embarassing/humiliating to say the least!

Shakes and papitations do not help a performance. I wish I had nerves of steel though like some peeople!

I wish I could figure out how I managed to "zone out" at the pupil's concert I played in... I don't remember playing much at all but it went really well..

Maybe it was an amnesia drug you had - afterwards...

Nah, just went into auto-pilot I think, or was concentrating so much that my brain couldn't take anything in at that particular time!

They don't! Many of the greatest performers suffer from nerves as badly as any amateur. They play wonderfully DESPITE them.

I suspect I have a different view from many.



I think so.

I don't have nerves of steel - see my various threads on teacher nerves and performance terror. But to take pills is a step too far in my opinion. They have their place to treat medical conditions and to help with phobias such as flying, but music is a performance of who you are - warts and all.

What if some brands of these drugs work better than others? What if some one's win at a competition was because they could afford a really expensive version which gave them the edge? Yes it can't make them perform tricks they couldn't already do but surely the point of performance is demonstrating you can do it under those circumstances. We can all perform well when no one's listening.

I'm happy that all exams I've taken have been under my own steam. Whether it was a distinction/merit or a barely scrapped pass (such as my grade 5 singing where I passed by 1 mark and sang with my heart in my mouth), these have all been my own marks and the congratulations were not shared with a drug company.

I don't understand this post - surely it completely goes against what you've done to overcome nerves You've often said that you've had hypnotherapy for performance nerves and I don't understand why pills should be deemed as "altering who you are" but not hypnotherapy

And in the light of what you've written here, then why wouldn't congratulations for your performance be shared with your hypnotherapist (the cost of which was a lot more than a few beta-blockers so not easily affordable by everybody) Not that I personally think congratulations should be shared with anybody, except maybe one's teacher


Is it true that a lot of professional musicians have a drink before going on stage - even orchestral musicians who don't have a solo to perform? Most people have nerves to some degree, and the extent to which they have them probably determines their choice of remedy - whether it's a banana(!), Rescue Remedy, a stiff drink, beta-blockers or hynotherapy. Personally I don't see anything wrong with it as long as it suits the individual and it's legal, and even in competitions, there are no rules as far as I know to ban the use of any of these remedies (although the rules might be tighter in a competition like the Leeds International Piano Competition )

Working on who you are is a reasonable approach to nerves in all circumstances. Just as working on other skills such as the technical ones needed for your instrument. In sports hypnotherapy is used to help athletes visualise a successful outcome and make the best of their skills. Performance enhancing drugs are another matter altogether.

Other people can make their own choices. A quick head count this morning with the other music teachers reveals much the same attitude as my own. Perhaps we're all old school? There's bound to be a loud lobby of pill-takers prepared to defend their attitude.



Certainly. But I won't need to go back there every time. And my physiotherapist should get a mention on the hounours roll too. Hopefully I won't need any more of that either.

The idea of taking pills to get through things becoming normal is horrific. Pills are for doctors to prescribe to those who need them for a medical reason.

no, they are not cheating. i think however that you won't get proper advice about them in a music forum, since none of us, including the healthcare professionals, know you in person.

the assumption that they can and should be taken by everyone for nerves is as dangerous as saying they shouldn't be taken by anybody. i have my own opinion about them from own experience (not for performance nerves though) and working in theatres where every second person pops them like cough-drops (which is sickening), but a rather personal getting discussion about this in the past keeps me from airing it.

as you say yourself: discuss this with your gp, they will, if they take the time, hopefully discuss all the options (with and without pills). i would strongly advise to go to a bapam-clinic though, since these are docs who deal with performers on a daily basis.

it might also be worth looking into what the underlying issues are so you tackle both symptoms and cause in the long run.

good luck!

I don't have any particular axe to grind here because I don't suffer performance nerves too badly (under the performing conditions to date) and I don't take anything. So from the outside, I must admit I can't distinguish the difference between enhancing one's performance through hypnotherapy and enhancing one's performance by taking a banana, Rescue Remedy, an alcoholic drink or beta-blockers. Hypnotherapy isn't the same as working on other musicianship skills. Hypnotherapy is a specific treatment in which it's the hypnotherapist who uses his/her skill, rather than the musician using their skill. And if it only takes a couple of sessions, as you've indicated previously, then to me it doesn't sound much different to the "quick-fix" offered by beta-blockers. It's not the same as honing one's musicianship skills over many weeks, months, years... Nor is it the same as using one's own resources to gradually improve one's innate performance confidence which is obviously the most desirable outcome in the long term, whether that's by training oneself in positive thinking, or more frequent performances, reading inspirational stories from others etc.

And where would you draw the line? If beta-blockers are deemed to be cheating, what about a banana or Rescue Remedy? Are members of a professional orchestra cheating if they have a drink beforehand to calm their nerves?




I don't necessarily agree with this. If the medical industry develops tablets to "get through" certain circumstances, then I don't see anything wrong with that. Some people take travel sickness tablets to "get through" a journey; I was prescribed tablets of some sort to "get through" the first couple of nights after the shock of a sudden bereavement; I've just taken some tablets to "get over" a headache - all these are short terms uses of a particular drug to suit specific circumstances. For some people they make travelling possible instead of impossible; they enable people to cope with the arrangements after a bereavement and get through the trauma of a funeral without collapsing; they help the daily chores to be done instead of taking to one's bed. Just as a matter of interest, are you against headache tablets too - and if you are not against all pills, again where do you draw the line?


Edit:

My post was written before you added this bit to your previous post:


The pills I had in the intermediate aftermath of the shock of a sudden bereavement were prescribed at the scene by the doctor who attended and they weren't at my request - would they constitute a "medical reason", or do you only mean pills to counteract known medical conditions like heart disease etc? Beta-blockers for performance anxiety would have to be prescribed by a doctor, so why shouldn't they be classed as a "medical reason"?

I take it you're against over-the-counter pills for headaches, PMT, travel sickness etc?

I shake just as much when playing on my own

And I certainly do not share my success with the drugs company - I'm the one who did all the work and I take a small dose specifically for the exam. The drug is not a crutch for me because it's my choice whether I use it but if I didn't my violin would probably drop from my shoulder or my bow arm would whack the examiner so I take it to experience normality.

Why should someone like me with a medical problem have to accept low marks because of something I cannot control and masks my true abilities and potential? My distinctions are entirely my own efforts and ability and how my life would be if I didn't have my illness.

To be perfectly honest I'd rather not appear a gibbering wreck and get ###### marks when it's perfectly easy to control my symptoms!



Medically necessary or not I find that statement an insult. I think taking a beta-blocker to combat exam nerves is not tantamount to drug abuse or addiction and should not be treated as such so it's very far from "horrific". Nor is it a condemnation to taking it for the rest of your performing life. Nor are there exclusively available 'expensive alternatives' which would cause favour for one person over another. - can you name an instance? Once confidence is built then many go on not to use them in the future.

But how do you define a 'medical reason'?

How severe does your headache have to be before you take an aspirin? Where do you draw the line?

Is taking ibuprofen to ease a fever before an exam allowed? If so, what's wrong with something to help calm nerves?

Remember that the majority don't want to have to take anything and try hard to get to a point where they don't need it.

Steve

Perhaps you missed post 12?






Hardy! Can you get Beta Blockers in Tesco too? I thought they were rather serious stuff to be prescribed by a GP.

Beta-blockers are not performance enhancing. They are adrenalin-lowering. They don't improve finger dexterity, musicality*, stamina or muscle memory, and they don't enhance cognitive ability or brain output. They don't touch the central nervous system at all. They will never make you do what you can not do without them. They simply stop you from shaking and sweating profusely whilst doing it. It is wrong to compare them with 'performance enhancing drugs'. Is flying - or having any other sort of panic attack - a performance? A performance enhancing drug is one which pushes physical boundaries beyond what they would be if the drugs were not taken. Beta blockers can not do this.

Some might argue, in fact, that beta blockers disadvantage those who would, without them, deliver a highly emotional performance, as lowered levels of adrenalin can be a double-edged sword in this respect.

I didn't suggest they were. You took the quote from the end of a paragraph where I was writing about the use of hypnotherapy in sports being justified.

Is it the word 'pill' that doesn't sit comfortably? What about herbal remedies, like Bach's rescue remedy? Is this a 'pill', or not?

What is normal for one person is not normal for another. Flying, for example, is normal for me... As is public speaking. But others are different. Might it be construed as cheating to see a hypnotherapist before an important job interview in which you had to give a presentation of some kind, in order to be able to cope with the pressure? I don't need beta-blockers any more to perform, and you don't need hypnotherapy any more - why is one acceptable and the other not?


And what I said was that it was wrong to compare beta-blockers with performance enhancing drugs!

But this doesn't tie in at all with your earlier statements that "taking pills to get through things becoming normal is horrific" and "Pills are for doctors to prescribe to those who need them for a medical reason". If you think that pills should be for doctors to prescribe, how can you not be against OTC remedies?

But to come back to the issue of hypnotherapy, how do you respond to the point I made earlier that hypnotherapy is a skill on the hypnotherapist's part and therefore is no more to the credit of hypnotee than taking pills is?

And I'd still be interested to know where you draw the line between beta-blockers and other remedies, and what you think about professional orchestral musicians using alcohol as one of those remedies (see my earlier post).

I don't think I'd have wanted to be the first to disagree with your viewpoint either as the question made its way round the circle.

If somebody said to a circle of school gate mothers, "Parking on the zigzags is dreadful. Would any of you consider this if there was no other way to park, and you were really late?" - well, not too many will say, "Me!" But then the evidence there is visible...

It's an entirely different question, but it's just to illustrate what I mean. Not many people knew about it when I took beta-blockers in order to overcome my performance nerves, which were very extreme and very physical. They still don't, even though I no longer need them. And the reason they don't is because of attitudes like what I've read here that imply I'm some sort of weak individual for resorting to them to get past something that was otherwise debilitating at that time.

As far as I can tell, the person who's implying this is doing so on the basis of a completely unfounded hypothesis that hypotherapy is part of a musician's armoury of skills, rather than it being the skill of the hypnotherapist who conducts a couple of sessions and hey presto - almost as quick to fix as beta blockers, but more expensive therefore not as universally accessible as beta blockers

These dicussions always end in arguments, hence my post

I think what many people take a stance against is not the fact whether or not Beta Blockers should be prescribed or not (neither do I). They absolutely have their place. I don't think however people should recommend to just "give it a shot, because they helped me" - and you sadly hear this quite often (and I don't mean these Forums in the first place).

The problem is that in the performance world, many people don't take them seriously - as they don't take alcohol or any other drug seriously. They just heard "they help". They don't really reflect on them, they even take them without prescription (yes, they are sadly quite easy to get), or they approach their GP like:"Can you prescribe me Beta Blockers for performance anxiety" instead of "I suffer from performance nerves, what options do I have?" In a system where the patient sometimes only gets 10min with their doc at the max, just asking question No. 1 about a drug that is considered relatively safe amongst medics can make all the difference to asking question No. 2 (not that I say that all GPs dish them out like that though).

You will find a lot of people who find BBs helpful. You will also find a lot of people who had serious side effects. A Forum will never give a realistic view on which group you could belong to, neither is it representative because 2/3 say BBs are okay and only 1/3 say they aren't - the truth hides somewhere in the middle.

After many threads about this in the past (and I was only really involved in one, my opinion hasn't changed btw), I would say that questions about medication should better not be discussed in a music (or any!) forum. Too many opinions, too much hearsay, even medics don't know all because they don't know the person.

Hence my recommendation again - try this:

http://www.bapam.org.uk/index.php

I'd also seriously like to recommend this factsheet: http://www.bapam.org.uk/docs/7_I_cant_go_on.pdf

You will find a lot of options in this - BBs are amongst them, and this quote really puts it in a nutshell:


Talk to an experienced healthcare professional who deals with performers.

Surely we can disagree with another's views and have a discussion on this forum without it being thought an "argument"

At the end of the day, we'll probably all agree to differ

Which would be good me thinks

Thanks. A very informative and balanced post.

Indeed!
When posts are balanced responses are likewise, and the reverse is also the case. They balance in the end. I don't think we've had any cases in this thread of "Try them; they worked for me." If my response was strong, it was to strong implications on the subject of cheating, which was the original question. No one at all suggested that the use of beta blockers be considered lightly or without personal medical consultancy. The topic was cheating.

Dear all,

Since I started this topic I should end it really!

Thank you to all of you for your comments they have been extremley useful for me.

I am plagued with shakes and sweaty hands when in exams/concerts etc even though I am a very good piano player and quite frankly had enough of it !

This is why I feel prescribed drugs on Doctors advise on a short term basis i.e on the night of performance is completely justified.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I feel we will all go round in circles if we don't bring this to a close!

Thanks again.

http://www.ethanwiner.com/BetaBlox.html

Another suggested website to inform and keep the the discussion balanced.

[font=Arial][size=4]
from Billy Boy

Just a word if I may about taking beta blockers, I am on these take 3 every day for heart problems these tablets are not to be messed with,if people get use to them they are very difficult to stop this should be done only under your GPs instructions, and I would be very surprised if any doctor would prescribe beta blockers under these circumstances.