All in the Name of $$$ Oxycontin Makers Pushing for FDA to Ok Use for SIX YEAR OLDS

reply to post by primus2012


Right but an RN is a different classification than an ARNP or a PA. I'm just trying to figure the situation out, because she/he makes it sound as if they made the decision to administer a narcotic, when in reality it would have needed to have been prescribed by a doctor and then authorized by the pharmacy at the hospital. Then and only then the person could have given that baby a narcotic.

reply to post by denynothing


ARNP's can prescribe, and RN's can administer. In some care wards doctors will write orders for several prescriptions, and then the RN's make the determination on what is needed and when to administer. Each state is a little different, and also different types of clinics and care settings have different rules, so it is possible it happened exactly as they said.

Originally posted by Ladysophiaofsandoz
I am against Oxycontin and yes I am was pain every day, car accident in 95 I ended up with 17+ breaks and fractures in my back and pelvis. The doctors kept pushing them but I opted for Radio Frequency Ablation it's a permanent fix. I haven't taken anything for the pain since having the surgery in 2000. They shoot radio waves and cauterize the nerve it either grows back healthy or you get a numb spot. I HIGHLY suggest this for anyone with back pain.

Anyway my point is there must be alternative treatments. Most of the people I tell about my surgery aren't interested because they would rather get painkillers than fix the problem. Marijuana is a safe natural cure for pain with out the risk of addiction or damage to the kidneys, heart and liver but we can't even discuss it as an option here in the US and if a parent gave it to there child for pain I suspect the state would deem them unfit parents but giving them narcotics is o.k.?

I don't want anyone to be in pain but really I don't think this is the best/.only option. I don't think anyone who has seen the problem here in Florida would think this is a good idea.

edit on 3-7-2012 by Ladysophiaofsandoz because: (no reason given)

I don't know who told you about RF being a permanent fix, but it is not. RF is, as you said, the cauterization of the nerve to break the pathway the pain signal uses to travel to the brain. However, when the nerve grows back the pathway for the pain to travel to the brain is re-established and the pain returns. Trust me I know, I've had RF performed 5 times in the last 13 years. Te doctor doesn't sever the nerve because it's bad. They sever it because it relieves pain and allows you to avoid a more intrusive surgery. To me it's simply a temp fix and not addressing the real issue.
I hate to hear anyone is in pain and just don't want anyone to be surprised when their pain returns and they remember this post and think, "Hey wait! I read RF was a permanent fix! So why am I hurting again?!?!"

reply to post by getreadyalready


I sent you a PM as well.

BTW... I am not wrong.
You feel emotionally attached to your belief and I admire that, but emotions create irrational responses.

I am not saying your wrong; however, I do believe that you are the victim of tunnel vision caused by personal investment.
So... I suppose that I am saying that you are wrong, but in the nicest way possible.

reply to post by kyviecaldges


It was pretty nice.

But, I posted a lot of links and quotes from other places in the country that are also impacted by the epidemic, and I quoted CDC, WSJ, and USA Today. Although I am very close to the issue, I don't think it is an emotional attachment, I think it is fact-based, I just happen to have more information than most.

In my home state of Missouri, the problem is still Meth. It is a terrible problem there, and I have had many close, personal friends with lives ruined, but I'm not emotionally attached to that issue, and I'm not pretending that issue is nationwide.

The prescription drug problem is nationwide. I've talked to drug agents from Arkansas, to Nevada, to Maine, and believe me, the Florida problem has impacted the whole nation, and the crackdown in Florida has complicated the issue by dispersing the dealers all over the nation. A few states have extremely strict regulations, but there are plenty of states that don't have those regulations, and the profit margin makes it more than worthwhile to drive a bus cross country and bring the drugs back to states where they are difficult to get.

I'll bet you that you just hear more and more about this from other states and nationwide press over the next couple of years.

And don't forget, there are several formulations about to hit the market that are much stronger than Oxy.

Originally posted by kabfighter
People who have a legitimate need for opioid pain medicines often do not become addicted.

I have defended opiates in this thread quite vigorously, but even I take issue with this statement.

If you are taking them for a short period of time, a couple weeks or so, then yes the odds of getting actually addicted is quite low. More likely people that continue to use them after they are no longer in pain just liked how it made them feel and want to keep using them.

But anybody, regardless of pain level or anything else, who takes opiates for a long period of time WILL become physically, and likely mentally addicted. Physical addiction is not a possibility, it's a fact. Your body will get used to them, and when you stop, you'll get sick. It doesn't matter if it's for legit pain or not. There may be 12 people on the planet that are somehow genetically immune to physical opiate addiction, but for everybody else, take them for a long period of time, you'll be sicker than a dog when you stop.

Originally posted by ThisIsNotReality
but they are not profitable enough, it's easier to mix some chemicals in a factory and bottle them, than it is to grow organic plants and process them for medicinal use.

How do you think ancient man dealt with all kinds of symptoms?

You can grow an organic plant and process it for medical use, with the exact same side effects as pharmaceuticals. It's called Papaver Somniferum, the Opium Poppy. From which all manner of opiates are produced. Heroin, Oxycontin (made from Thebaine, an Alkaloid in Opium) Morphine, Codeine (which is basically just Morphine, as Codeine is a prodrug and metabolized by the liver into Morphine)

In fact taking pure opium is even WORSE from an addiction standpoint than pharmaceutical opiates. Orally consuming Opium results in you receiving all of the Alkaloids in Opium, not just a single one. This means when you go through withdrawals, you are going through it for many different drugs, not just one.

Also, orally consumed opium, as opposed to pharmaceuticals derived from Opium, has a half life that's much longer than every single pharmaceutical Opiate, aside from Methadone. This means two things. First of all, the effects (pain relief, high, etc) is longer, usually anywhere from 10 hours, to a whole day) which is a really good thing.

And second of all, the withdrawals that you get from opium are ALSO longer, meaning instead of a couple days of withdrawals you get from pharmaceuticals, you can possibly go through withdrawals from Opium for a week or longer, which is a really bad thing.

The whole idea that something being all natural as opposed to something synthesized somehow makes it better is just bunk. As I have just demonstrated, taking natural opium is going to be WORSE than taking pretty much any pharmaceutical opiates when it comes to addiction and withdrawals.

As far as ancient man dealing with pain, well a lot of the times they used opium. Thing's haven't really changed that much, it's been known for a long, long time that there's no match to Opium's pain killing power.

Alcohol was also used extensively in the past for it's painkiller qualities.

As far as other parts of your post, where you are obviously referring to Cannabis being used as a painkiller (because every single other natural plant with painkiller properties CAN and DOES kill, so there really can't be anything else you're talking about) I already covered this earlier in the thread. While it's definitely useful for some types of pain, for others it's useless and can actually make the pain worse.

As far as the legality is concerned, there are quite a few states that allow it for medical purposes. If you are living life in pain, and have NO other options, moving to a state that allows you to legally get relief from your ills shouldn't be a big deal. Your health and well being is the most important thing, so deal with it and go to a state that allows it. While it's still illegal on a federal level, the vast vast majority of medical users never have a problem with it. It's just not worth it to the feds to bust medical users without the support of the local authorities, unless they are getting carried away and growing a huge amount of it, selling it, or otherwise making themselves a target.

In addition to that, the medical field obviously realizes the usefulness of Cannabis, as they have several medications based on it, Marinol and Sativex. Although they don't work as well as the base material because they are isolated compounds, which don't always work as well as the long list of active chemicals in Cannabis. Such medications are perfectly legal for any doctor to prescribe, however.

Originally posted by kyviecaldges


Drug addiction is a myth.

I'm sorry, that's complete BS. While they play up the whole idea of addiction and apply it to things that it doesn't belong, certain drugs are most definitely physically addictive. Take large doses of opiates for a long time, and you are physically addicted. Stop taking them, you get sick. Really sick.

Go tell all the Heroin users the few days of hell they go through when kicking Heroin is just a myth.

I can't even believe someone would say such a thing. That's like saying overdose is a myth.

Originally posted by Nomed
Not blaming the drug companies is like not blaming the drug cartels. People are addicted to this stuff just like heroine. On the street they pay $30.00 for 1 pill. People are dying and huge profits are being made legally and then again illegally. The drug companies are profiting off of a dangerous drug. If you think thats ok there is problem in the way you think.

More apples to oranges comparisons here.

The Mexican cartels don't just manufacture a drug. They have armed paramilitary forces that shoot, behead, and torture people. I don't blame them for producing and distributing drugs, because I feel people should be able to ingest anything they want as long as they aren't hurting anybody.

I do blame the cartels for the violence they are involved in, but said violence only exists because of the legal status of their product. Pharmaceutical companies manufacture legal drugs, and sell them to suppliers. They don't sent out hit squads to competing companies and kill them.

Originally posted by kyviecaldges

Heroin, like methadone, does not produce the analgesic benefits of other common pain killers.

That's just not true. Methadone does indeed have analgesic properties, and is definitely prescribed for such reasons.

Originally posted by kabfighter

I used the term 'crack baby' in an improper context. However, the baby was born addicted to coc aine and was going through neonatal abstinence syndrome; the morphine was used to treat the withdrawal symptoms. There is no conspiracy here. I'm a registered nurse, not a tin-foil hat wearing nut.

Here's a source for you regarding the use of opiates to treat withdrawals in neonates.

"Some babies with severe symptoms need medicine to treat withdrawal symptoms. Medicines may include:

-Morphine

-Methadone

If the baby was born addicted to Cocaine, there is no reason they would give it Morphine. The article is discussing general issues and treatment, not specific. Meaning, they give a list of many possible drugs the mother could have been abusing, and list many possible treatments. They don't make the connection between the drug that was abused, and the treatment being given for it.

Morphine or Methadone would be given to a baby who's mother was abusing or using opiates, not Cocaine. Cocaine withdrawals are not painful as to require the use of Morphine. Morphine will have no effect on the addiction to coc aine (I'm not going to get into the argument of Cocaine's physical addiction possibilities)

If anything, they would possibly give the baby Benzodiazapines to help with the symptoms, morphine would be pointless and dangerous to give to a baby with Cocaine in its system.

Originally posted by Destinyone
But adding oxi to the category of regular meds prescribed to children for say, a sore throat, needs much more consideration. jmoho

Oxycontin is not going to be given to anyone, children or adults, for a simple sore throat. This is the kind of ignorance that gets me.

They don't give adults Oxycontin for simple sore throats, why would they give it to children? You people are all so outraged about an issue that doesn't even exist. You agree children in major pain should be given strong opiates. That's all that happens, and all that ever will happen. You're all upset over children being given oxy for benign issues like sore throats, scraped knees, and sprained ankles. Which means your upset over an issue that DOESN'T EXIST, because Oxy is not, and will not be prescribed for such things.

reply to post by getreadyalready


It's just not true that the majority of people dying are legit pain patients taking their medication as prescribed. Yes, it does happen sometimes, but it's the extreme minority. There are also mistakes made by doctors or pharmacists with other medication that causes death.

The vast, vast, majority of people dying of Oxycontin use are people who are:

1. Illegal users. Buying them off the street, or stealing them from family, friends,etc.

2. People who are "legally" prescribed, but are simply gaming the system to get their drugs, that they don't need. They take more than they are supposed to, they are seeking out the drugs, not just taking what they are told.

3. Stupid people who are prescribed legally and legit, but take a few too many, or get drunk while taking them, etc.

You talk about the famous people who died from these meds. They are wealthy, they are basically no different than the Heroin addict on the street. The only difference is that they have enough money to doctor shop and get their drugs "legally" They doctor shop and get way more than they are supposed to. They aren't innocently taking their medication prescribed by their doctor and dying. They are intentionally seeking out large doses of these drugs because they want them.

A normal patient who goes to the doctor for an issue, and gets prescribed opiates, and takes them as directed very very very very rarely die.

This is what bothers me. People are simply being lied to, or choosing to remain willfully ignorant about the issue. Almost every single person dying from prescription opiates is a drug addict who is NOT a legit patient, or who is a legit patient that is NOT taking them as prescribed. It's their fault, not the doctor's fault, not the pharmaceutical company's fault.

reply to post by James1982


The accidental deaths where people are taking the prescribed dosages are not the majority, but they are far from rare. My cousin was one of them. He did everything by the book, and he died the first night he took the narcotic and muscle-relaxer. He was already on the anti-depressant and sleep-aid.

You used a lot of "verys" there, but it is not that rare. It happens every day. Sure, there are plenty of people abusing them, or taking alcohol with them, and there are people taking other peoples drugs and dying. A prescribed dosage for a 5 year habitual user could be fatal to a first-time user, so they take the prescribed dosage, but it wasn't prescribed to them, and it is fatal. They deserve some of the blame in that case, but then again people trust labels, and people trust doctors, and people trust their friends.

The fact is, the drugs are powerful and addictive and dangerous and profitable, and that is a deadly combination.

This is kind of stupid really. The risk for addiction in 6 year olds is moot. Why? Because 6 year olds aren't interested in addictions and they don't seek them out like some adults do with opiates. The risk for addiction obviously increases the longer the drug is given, and in 6 year olds they won't be prescribed these types of medicines probably for anything more than 2-4 weeks in 99% of cases.

So "duh", the Oxycontin makers are doing this for money rather than out of the kindness of their hearts, but in this case that isn't bad.

What do they do currently if a 6 year old needs a strong pain medication? You break some bones and want pain meds ASAP but a 6 year old does the same and Tylenol should be given?

What does that possibly say about some of you?

reply to post by getreadyalready


Someone posted some stat about 7 people dying every day from opiate painkillers. How many of those 7 people do you really think were like your cousin (my sympathies for that, btw) and not just junkies that OD?

I'd be willing to bet cash money that of those 7 people it's almost never an innocent person like your cousin. If it was, you can bet there would be a ton more lawsuits by the family of the deceased against the doctors.

In your cousin's case, were all of the meds he was on prescribed by a single doctor? Because that just seems incredibly idiotic of the doctor to give him THREE depressants, Opiates, muscle relaxers, AND sleeping pills all at the same time? I'm not even a doctor and I could tell you that's a horrible idea.

The warning literature you get with the prescription clearly says to not take opiates with other depressants. If your cousin was worried about this downer cocktail he was taking, and asked the doctor about it, but was assured he'd be fine your family should really consider suing, because that right there is the definition of malpractice.

I've never denied oxy is a strong drug. It definitely is. My main points are as follows:

1. Pharmaceutical companies are not to blame
2. Doctors (in the vast majority of cases) are not to blame
3. People need to be responsible for themselves and research, it's their health being dealt with after all
4. Most all deaths from Opiate pharmaceuticals are from misuse, not standard use
5. It's wrong to crack down the way it's currently being done, because it's effecting legitimate pain patients
6. People should delve deeply into an issue before whipping up an extreme emotional opinion based on wrong facts, or no facts at all.
7.Opiate based pharmaceuticals are extremely important, and good resource for people in extreme pain, and they should have open and easy access to them.

Again I'm very sorry to hear about your cousin. I think that your family has an extremely strong case to sue the doctor, assuming the same doctor prescribed, or had knowledge, or condoned the use of all three medications at the same. If that's the case, your cousin is in the extreme minority here and there is no excuse for his doctor to take such chances with his life. Even though in that specific circumstance, there is still a part that is his responsibility.

All it takes is 5 minutes of reading the drug warnings that came with the meds, or looking online, and you would see in very plainly written English that it's a terrible idea to take Opiates, sleeping pills, and muscle relaxers all at the same time. Why someone wouldn't do such research in the first place, or take the drugs anyway knowing the dangers is beyond me. I still think (assuming as I said the same doctor gave him all those meds, and told him they were OK to take together) the doctor is the main person at fault here, but he would be in the minority of doctors who would do such a thing.

reply to post by James1982

I'd be willing to bet cash money that of those 7 people it's almost never an innocent person like your cousin. If it was, you can bet there would be a ton more lawsuits by the family of the deceased against the doctors.

There are a ton of lawsuits. I see multiple lawsuits every day of the week against doctors that allegedly prescribed inordinate amounts, or prescribed without a thorough medical exam or history, or prescribed to people with known addiction problems.

Just because you don't see them, doesn't mean they aren't there. About 95% of the lawsuits I see are settled during the "pre-suit" period, so they never become a public court record, they are only in databases for OIR and DOH. They are required to be on the Doctor's profile page. Have you ever looked at your doctor's profile page with the regulating authority in your state?

ETA:
For my cousin's case, it was two different doctors, but the second doctor did have knowledge of the other drugs. One doctor prescribed the Xanax and Ambien, and he had been taking them daily as prescribed, and then almost a year later he hurt his back and the ER doc prescribed the Oxy and Muscle-relaxer. The ER doc did have his history and his current meds, but since he had been on the other two for an extended period of time, apparently he didn't feel it was a problem.

Sure, there is room for a lawsuit, but that doesn't bring him back. And, the lawsuit may or may not be successful, because just about everyone has an undiagnosed apnea problem, or arrhythmia problem. There are always complicating factors, etc. I don't think his parents are going to sue, I couldn't even get them to file an official complaint with my office, or get an autopsy report. That is part of the problem, a lot of these things are never even reported to the authorities.

Originally posted by denynothing
reply to post by kabfighter

 

If you were an RN at the time and I may be mistaken but you can't administer drugs without doctors orders, so you just followed orders correct?

I was a student nurse at that time, but the scope of responsibility and liability for a student is exactly the same as a licensed nurse. The 'orders' that a physican, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner provide are not orders by the same definition used in the military or other hierarchical structures. They are more like orders given to cooks or merchants to fulfill. Nurses are obligated to verify the safety (dose, route of administration, contraindications, drug interactions, allergies, etc.) of every medication order, since we are held liable for the consequences of every drug we administer. For instance, if I were to receive an order for a particular medication to which the patient has a known allergy and still administer it unquestioningly, I would end up in front of a judge and the Board of Nursing.

If you look back at my prior posts I corrected myself. Looking back, I recall that this mother had been in a Suboxone (buprenorphine/naloxone) program but had fallen off the bandwagon, so she was indeed addicted to narcotics. I'll say again that I know relatively little about illicit drugs and their addictive properties, especially in neonates. Like I said, they're both not my bag. Packing a wound with gauze and hanging antibiotics? Bring it.

Originally posted by James1982

Originally posted by kabfighter
People who have a legitimate need for opioid pain medicines often do not become addicted.

I have defended opiates in this thread quite vigorously, but even I take issue with this statement.

If you are taking them for a short period of time, a couple weeks or so, then yes the odds of getting actually addicted is quite low. More likely people that continue to use them after they are no longer in pain just liked how it made them feel and want to keep using them.

I think this is what I was trying to get across. What I stated is what we are taught in school. Every patient is asked to rate their pain periodically on a scale of 1 to 10 (or another scale based on cognitive function and developmental level), and whatever number they provide is the level of pain for which we must treat. Some people abuse this policy, but for the most part patients are honest and do not ask for more medication than necessary. This is mostly to cover our rear ends, since in recent years nurses have been named more frequently in malpractice lawsuits despite our relatively shallow pockets.

On the topic of marijuana, my pharmacology professor (a registered pharmacist) told us flat out that he has no issue with it.

Originally posted by denynothing

Right but an RN is a different classification than an ARNP or a PA. I'm just trying to figure the situation out, because she/he makes it sound as if they made the decision to administer a narcotic, when in reality it would have needed to have been prescribed by a doctor and then authorized by the pharmacy at the hospital. Then and only then the person could have given that baby a narcotic.

In this instance there was a physician's order for a protocol to be carried out, specifically the 'neonatal abstinence score', for which the nurse assesses for withdrawal signs in several categories, assigns a numeric value to them, and then the dose of morphine is given based on the total score. There is a similar protocol for administering benzodiazepines to people withdrawing from alcohol called the Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment. Since physicians are relatively infrequently around in hospitals (with the exception of academic medical centers), they usually write orders to be administered 'as needed' at the discretion of the nurse, such as medications for pain, nausea, insomnia, etc. Hospitals often have 'standing orders' that can be given under certain circumstances, such as Narcan (naloxone) for any patient whose respiratory rate falls below eight respirations per minute following administration of a narcotic. Boy, does that make them unhappy, though.