Rivervalleymgb Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 With all this arguing back and forth, wouldn't the best result be to let the docs practice medicine and take care of their patients to the best of their ability? AND, keep all non-science literate people out of crafting the regulations? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) Well, okay, but I'm not sick, just dealing with a dental issue. I'm technically cured from the cancer, and hopefully it stays that way. With 30 years of smoking and the fact that it hit me once already, it wouldn't surprise me if it hit me somewhere else at some point down the road - but right now, outside of the back issue, I'm doing okay. Maybe you misunderstood the dental problem? Extractions would have been potentially catastrophic, but God in His grace spared me from that - both teeth are in good enough shape to be crowned. Truce then, but I can't promise I won't be a dick in the future. Okay then, back at it Alcohol is legal, and for the most part very inexpensive, so there aren't any problems with availability, and you don't have to steal and sell things to "feed your habit". Which reminds me, in the video, the older woman, who was clearly in some pain, used the word "habituity"(which isn't even a real word I don't think), in place of the word "addiction". I just thought it was an interesting way of looking at it. Edited July 21, 2015 by Crankysoldermeister Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 With all this arguing back and forth, wouldn't the best result be to let the docs practice medicine and take care of their patients to the best of their ability? AND, keep all non-science literate people out of crafting the regulations? I am a Cardiac Nurse with 17 years experience and I have been doing travel nursing for the past 7 years, so I have a lot of experience at a lot of hospitals in different states. You might not feel that way, if you realized how many Doctors use Cocaine.... Roger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivervalleymgb Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 What does that have to do with drug schedules? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rivervalleymgb Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 Cocaine and amphetamines have always been used by doctors. I was in healthcare for a lot of years. It is no different than any other profession except for the ease of getting controlled substances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsear Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I've not read all the posts here so if this has been mentioned, I apologize for the redundancy. Genuine pain patients prescribed these meds who get addicted are not the worst part of this problem IMHO. That situation is bad but there is one much worse. There are docs wiling to prescribe these meds to anyone regardless of need. If that is not horrific enough - the system in place does not police these docs. Assume that you have an adult child abusing these meds. They know a docs who'll give them scripts and any pharmacy will fill them. You know they're addicted, or worse transacting, 2nd selling the drugs to others. Try turning the doctor into the state? You can't. YOU are not the patient and have no authority to impose on patient doctor confidentiality. If you take the meds from your child you could be arrested for possessing a controlled substance and for theft. In other words if the prescribing MD is corrupted the system is not set up to investigate let alone prosecute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted July 21, 2015 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2015 With all this arguing back and forth, wouldn't the best result be to let the docs practice medicine and take care of their patients to the best of their ability? AND, keep all non-science literate people out of crafting the regulations? Yes, I think that is true, let the doctors and medical professionals practice. However, there is a problem, real or perceived, that there is a significant number of people that are not really in pain requesting HCPs, and a significant number of doctors willing to write those prescriptions. The FDA is pretty much run and staffed by MDs, with plenty of advanced degrees in public health policy. As I said before, the move from schedule III to II was a 10 or 15 year process. This last go around there were public hearings, hearings, etc. I do not know what the AMA's position on the schedule change was. The doctors I have talked to about it, less than 10, are generally split, so the AMA may have taken no position on it. I really haven't formed an opinion one way or the other on the rule change, but I was quite surprised several years ago when I learned that OxyContin was a schedule III drug. Travis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted July 21, 2015 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2015 I've not read all the posts here so if this has been mentioned, I apologize for the redundancy. Genuine pain patients prescribed these meds who get addicted are not the worst part of this problem IMHO. That situation is bad but there is one much worse. There are docs wiling to prescribe these meds to anyone regardless of need. If that is not horrific enough - the system in place does not police these docs. Assume that you have an adult child abusing these meds. They know a docs who'll give them scripts and any pharmacy will fill them. You know they're addicted, or worse transacting, 2nd selling the drugs to others. Try turning the doctor into the state? You can't. YOU are not the patient and have no authority to impose on patient doctor confidentiality. If you take the meds from your child you could be arrested for possessing a controlled substance and for theft. In other words if the prescribing MD is corrupted the system is not set up to investigate let alone prosecute. I think you have accurately stated the problems that were used as part of the rationale for the Schedule change. In many states the schedule change allows the regulating drug authority to see in real time what a doctor is prescribing and also allows pharmacies to see if a patient is filling multiple prescriptions from multiple physicians. It will be interesting to see if the schedule change reduces the abuse, without restricting their availability to those who really need them. Travis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 1. changing to sched II means higher cost for everryone and more inconvenience for patients. more office visits, more driving around with paper prescriptions and so on. docs will financially benefit from this. patients will suffer. criminals won't be affected by any of this. regulators always assume they are foiling criminals, but never are!!! but, you can't tell lwayers and politicians that...they live to write more laws. we need more health care not more laws. 2. as a medical patient i resent deeply having my doc make me sign a narcotics contract and submit to drug testing. these are the responses of big institutions trying now to please goverment demands. my doctor syas...."this is now required,sorry." meanwhile alkies by the millions are destroying families everywhere and killing themselves with booze, and costing the economy billions$$$ - they are portraayed on tv as having fun in bars and picking up chicks!!! this is a upside down world. ask the children who they fear more...alkies or people on opiates? my ole pappy was a big alkie and I can tell you all it aint a pretty life for kids of alkies. Wheres all the politician and lawyer interest in stopping alkies???? nowhere, that's where. that's the truth. 3. criminal docs are easy to find. look for the guy with 3000 patients and all of them are on oxy!!! LOL - it ain't rocket sciene. but instead of actual law enforcement...take it out on the patients. LOL~!!! stupid is as stupid does. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted July 21, 2015 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2015 dwilawyer it sounds like you are okay with alcohol because lets see here, you in fact might be a dui lawyer? What a real stand up citizen, people break the law and drive drunk and possibly kill other people with their cars and you go to court and try and get them off the hook so they can go do it again. Obviously you have never had a medical condition which required morphine? IV form of morphine is quick in quick out, I didn't feel any of the drug in my system after like a few hours of my last shot. I was getting 10mg of morphine injected every 2 hours for 2 weeks. I have seen both opiate withdrawal and alcohol withdrawal and alcohol is by far the worst, ask anyone who has seen it or lived it. Alcohol withdrawals is a very serious matter. The people that abuse opiates, which are mainly heroin users and NOT pill users do it for the initial rush. BIg doses of opiates quickly administered intravenously is what they do and why they die. Complete misuse of the drug. I have had nurses in a rush not mix the morphine with enough saline and just shove the plunger quickly............whoa your whole neck and spine hurt and this rush screams through your body. This is the high dopers keep trying to relive and keep needing bigger and bigger doses, which leads to respiratory failure. People can make money off defending criminal activity and that is okay in our society but if someone wants to take some medicine for pain they are the bane of society. So I am guessing you checked out webmd link and saw that Hydrocodone is in fact the most prescribed drug in the United States, because this response seemed to come out of left field and glossed over the fact that it is the number 1 Rx. You mentioned that education was the key, I think it probably is, but I don't know what you mean precisely when it comes to opioid pain killers. Education works pretty well with legal substances such as cigarettes and alcohol. However, who does education work with prescription pain medication? Should we teach in schools that pain medication can be habit forming and you should never take another person's medication? Or that you can die from it if you take too much. Or are you saying education is key by trying to change the public's perception about people who are on long term pain meds? Your facts about who abuses HCPs are simply mistaken. Over 15,000 deaths a year overdosing on prescription HCP PILLS. More than Cocaine and Heroin combined. That is just a fact. I do not see any problem with people taking HCPs long term, under a doctor's care and supervision. I don't think that the public believes that it is inappropriate. I think with all substances people are going to have different viewpoints about every kind of drug, based on personal experience, hearing from close friends, whatever. Some reformed smokers will tell you that cigarettes should be banned from the face of the earth. Some recovering alcoholics say the same about alcohol. Some people believe that caffeine is a gateway drug. People are frequently misinformed about a lot of drugs. For example, what are the long term effects of long term daily use of HCPs? For many there is no alternative in order to have any quality of life. However, to say there is no consequences to being on HCPs based on personal experience isn't really responsible in my opinion. Someone might be the one in a million who suffers no side effects. People shoukd be made aware of what the possible problems are, the probable risks, wtc. They should be asking their doctor, and double checking him or her with other valid medical sources. How many people said "I have been smoking for 30 years and it hasn't caused me any problems whatsoever. I can quit anytime." The science and the studies were against them, the fact that nicotine is more addictive than heroin has been well established. So, the question is, should HCPs have been moved to a Schedule II drug? Is it too restrictive for those in real need? Will it work to solve the perceived problems? I haven't made u0 my mind yet, but I think it is important for people to know the facts underlying this, or any other, issue. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thesloth Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 In regard to knowledge I mean before you put something in your body no matter what it is learn it's effects short and long term. This is not up to the school system. Do you believe everything the government says? Do you think the governement always tells the truth to the public? If you answered yes to any of these you are in serious danger. The government minupulates the associated press and this brainwashes the general public. People die from cocaine? Maybe but very rarely, probably had some underlying heart condition. In REAL life I have seen a lot of people overdose and or die form heroin. I have never seen or known one person to overdose or die from cocaine or presicription pain medication. I take that back one guy I knew took oxycontin and drank a bunch of booze and he died in his sleep. It actually makes no sense, to aquire enough presicription pain medication to overdose would require a lot of money. Heroin is cheaper and stronger. Most heroin users will laugh at you if you tell them you have an addiction to pain pills, it's like kids toys to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deang Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) You can either be in pain that has you climbing the walls and eventually has your mind going places where it shouldn't go -- or you can get help, and learn to accept the reality of being on a type of medication that requires that you stay on it in order to improve your quality of life. It is what it is. I just don't see what the big deal is as long as you're responsible and deal truthfully with your doctor. Over the long term, "addiction" is likely, but that doesn't mean you're going to end up as a criminal in order to support your true dosing level. This is why I think dealing honestly with your doctor is so critical. Stay ahead of the tolerance issue, don't end up behind it. Edited July 21, 2015 by Crankysoldermeister 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 everyone has their own doctor. my docs, who have experience with opiates and pain treatment for actual patients, say, addiction is not that common, but physiologic dependence is fairly common. If you become dependent and are no longer needing opiates, you got surgery or whatever, you can begin Subutex therapy to be de-toxed from opiates. Doctors are very good at this and have worked it out very well. (how long b4 I will have to consult a pol/lawyer before ghetting care under obnamacare?) basically we have two views here.... 1. chronic pain patients with doctors managing there medical problems. seem to do ok. 2. people with no opiate experience, and no pain doctor, and no chronic pain, but who read a lot and want to tell medical community what they should or shouldnt do about opiates. in otherworlds, a typical case of politics and lawyers pretending to know best for others, but always ignoring the elephant....booze and cigaretttes. we live in an agressive alcohol fueled society designed by....pols and lawyers. a smart person - not like me - would say - hey fellas, start with booze and cigs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistedcrankcammer Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 everyone has their own doctor. my docs, who have experience with opiates and pain treatment for actual patients, say, addiction is not that common, but physiologic dependence is fairly common. If you become dependent and are no longer needing opiates, you got surgery or whatever, you can begin Subutex therapy to be de-toxed from opiates. Doctors are very good at this and have worked it out very well. (how long b4 I will have to consult a pol/lawyer before ghetting care under obnamacare?) basically we have two views here.... 1. chronic pain patients with doctors managing there medical problems. seem to do ok. 2. people with no opiate experience, and no pain doctor, and no chronic pain, but who read a lot and want to tell medical community what they should or shouldnt do about opiates. in otherworlds, a typical case of politics and lawyers pretending to know best for others, but always ignoring the elephant....booze and cigaretttes. we live in an agressive alcohol fueled society designed by....pols and lawyers. a smart person - not like me - would say - hey fellas, start with booze and cigs! Sorry, but the nurses have WAY more experience dealing with chronic pain patients than the Doctors do! The doctor sees you at a visit and writes the prescription, he is not dosing, checking on pain ratings and recharting relief symptoms an hour later. AND, I have never seen a patient be nearly as disrespectful to a doctor / bee such an ***** or take a swing nearly as often at a Doctor than as at a nurse! Roger 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Travis In Austin Posted July 21, 2015 Moderators Share Posted July 21, 2015 everyone has their own doctor. my docs, who have experience with opiates and pain treatment for actual patients, say, addiction is not that common, but physiologic dependence is fairly common. If you become dependent and are no longer needing opiates, you got surgery or whatever, you can begin Subutex therapy to be de-toxed from opiates. Doctors are very good at this and have worked it out very well. (how long b4 I will have to consult a pol/lawyer before ghetting care under obnamacare?) basically we have two views here.... 1. chronic pain patients with doctors managing there medical problems. seem to do ok. 2. people with no opiate experience, and no pain doctor, and no chronic pain, but who read a lot and want to tell medical community what they should or shouldnt do about opiates. in otherworlds, a typical case of politics and lawyers pretending to know best for others, but always ignoring the elephant....booze and cigaretttes. we live in an agressive alcohol fueled society designed by....pols and lawyers. a smart person - not like me - would say - hey fellas, start with booze and cigs! Was it lawyer driven? Was it doctor driven? Do you know? Do you care? The head of the FDA is a doctor, an MD. I doubt they had politicians testifying regarding at hearings about whether to change the classification. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Naseum Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 everyone has their own doctor. my docs, who have experience with opiates and pain treatment for actual patients, say, addiction is not that common, but physiologic dependence is fairly common. If you become dependent and are no longer needing opiates, you got surgery or whatever, you can begin Subutex therapy to be de-toxed from opiates. Doctors are very good at this and have worked it out very well. (how long b4 I will have to consult a pol/lawyer before ghetting care under obnamacare?) basically we have two views here.... 1. chronic pain patients with doctors managing there medical problems. seem to do ok. 2. people with no opiate experience, and no pain doctor, and no chronic pain, but who read a lot and want to tell medical community what they should or shouldnt do about opiates. in otherworlds, a typical case of politics and lawyers pretending to know best for others, but always ignoring the elephant....booze and cigaretttes. we live in an agressive alcohol fueled society designed by....pols and lawyers. a smart person - not like me - would say - hey fellas, start with booze and cigs! Was it lawyer driven? Was it doctor driven? Do you know? Do you care? The head of the FDA is a doctor, an MD. I doubt they had politicians testifying regarding at hearings about whether to change the classification. yeah, I care because I am affected. 1. the DEA is how drugs get on different schedules, right? pasted The Obama administration moved Thursday to restrict prescriptions of the most commonly used narcotic painkillers in the U.S. in an attempt to curb widespread abuse. The Drug Enforcement Administration said it would reclassify hydrocodone combination drugs such as Vicodin and put them in the category reserved for medical substances with the highest potential for harm. The "rescheduling" means people will be able to receive the drugs for only up to 90 days without obtaining a new prescription. The opioid pills are taken by millions of Americans, including after dental surgery, for back problems and broken bones. Currently the pills can be refilled up to five times and prescriptions can cover a 180-day period. The new classification will take effect in 45 days, the DEA said. "Today's action recognizes that these products are some of the most addictive and potentially dangerous prescription medications available," said DEA Administrator Michele Leonhart. ------------------------------------------ 2. who is michele leonhart? A doctor? Um, no. she is not a doctor. pasted--Leonhart graduated from Bemidji State University in 1978 with a degree in criminal justice, ------------------------------------ drugs is politics my friend. did you watch the colorado changover to legal pot? yes, therre are doctors in agencies, but rules are made by legislators, cops and lawyers. so do I care? yes I care. I care that my health is in the hands of actual doctors, not cops lawyers and legislators with their political and money agendas. i was on pain meds for several years with no problems of any kind BEFORE michele leonhart, a bureaucrap cop and politician changed the rules and schedules. the change? more inconvenience and insults and cost and much indignity. but why would lawyers and pols care about any that??? LOL!!! jus teasin ya~! your chasin a fly when you should spend your time chasin the big game - booze and cigs. christ, leave the sick people alone, they have enough problems already, don't they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube fanatic Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 I agree with the points made that those who shouldn't be making decisions for the rest of us have the power to do so. Unfortunately, in many cases, we were the ones who gave them the power. It is even more unfortunate that once their incompetence, or personal agenda, becomes known to us there is nothing we can do to reverse things. The following quote says it all: "Democracies were based on a false presumtion- the theory that all people were fit to rule. It granted intelligence where there was no intelligence. It presumed ability where there was not the slightest trace of any. It gave the idiot the same political standing as the wise man, the crackpot the same political opportunity as the man of well-grounded sense, the weakling the same voice as the strong man. It was government by emotion rather than by judgment." From Empire by Clifford Simak, 1951.Maynard 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Matthews Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 I agree with the points made that those who shouldn't be making decisions for the rest of us have the power to do so. Unfortunately, in many cases, we were the ones who gave them the power. It is even more unfortunate that once their incompetence, or personal agenda, becomes known to us there is nothing we can do to reverse things. The following quote says it all: "Democracies were based on a false presumtion- the theory that all people were fit to rule. It granted intelligence where there was no intelligence. It presumed ability where there was not the slightest trace of any. It gave the idiot the same political standing as the wise man, the crackpot the same political opportunity as the man of well-grounded sense, the weakling the same voice as the strong man. It was government by emotion rather than by judgment." From Empire by Clifford Simak, 1951. Maynard LOL. We could always go back to an aristocracy. Long live the king! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer Posted July 21, 2015 Share Posted July 21, 2015 We could, but benevolent dictatorship can at least keep the rest of the family out of it the next time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tube fanatic Posted July 21, 2015 Author Share Posted July 21, 2015 I'll hijack my own thread by asking the lawyers if they believe the federal gov. should have the power to usurp states' rights. Please, no political discussions on this, but rather a simple, short, comment. I ask because of a clause in HR 1599 which would prevent states from requiring labeling of genetically modified foods. I'm bringing this up strictly because of the strongly expressed opinions above about opioid availability and government involvement in a medical matter. If this question is "out of bounds" I ask the moderators to either delete it or move it to where it is allowed to be discussed.SEC. 203. Effective date; preemption.(a) Effective date.—Regardless of whether regulations have been promulgated under section 202 of this Act, the amendments made by section 201 shall take effect beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.(Prohibitions against mandatory labeling of food developed using genetic engineering.—No State or political subdivision of a State may directly or indirectly establish under any authority or continue in effect as to any covered product (as defined in section 291 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as added by section 201 of this Act) in interstate commerce, any requirement for the labeling of a covered product indicating the product as having been produced from, containing, or consisting of a genetically engineered plant, including any requirements for claims that a covered product is or contains an ingredient that was produced from, contains, or consists of a genetically engineered plant unless the State (or a political subdivision thereof) establishes either of the following programs for the regulation of such claims:(1) A program that relates to voluntary claims to which paragraph (1) of section 204(a) of this Act applies.(2) A program that—(A) is voluntary;(is accredited by the Secretary pursuant to section 291E of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 (as added by section 201 of this Act); and© establishes standards that are identical to the standards established under section 291B or 291C of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as applicable (as added by section 201 of this Act).SEC. 204. Applicability.(a) Existing claims.—A voluntary claim made with respect to whether a covered product (as defined in section 291 of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as added by section 201 of this Act) was produced with or without the use of genetic engineering or genetically engineered plants before the date of the enactment of this Act—(1) may be made for such a product during the 36-month period that begins on the date of the enactment of this Act; and(2) after the expiration of such 36-month period, may be made so long as the labels associated with such a claim meet the standards specified in section 291B or 291C of the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946, as applicable (as added by section 201 of this Act).Maynard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.