Slashdot Mirror


FDA Considers Banning Acetaminophen-Based Pain Killers

Greg George writes "The FDA has determined that Tylenol enhancing pain killers are dangerous enough to potentially be pulled from the market. Drugs including Vicodin, Hydrocodone, Lortab, Maxidone, Norco, Zydone, Tylenol with codeine, Percocet, Endocet, and Darvocet may be permanently banned from the US market, even if the patient has a prescription from a doctor. The problem is the key ingredient — acetaminophen — can easily damage or destroy a patient's liver if more than 2000 mg are used per day. In many cases that means if you take a pain killer and then take two extra strength Tylenol, you may have gone over the maximum dosage per day."

13 of 631 comments (clear)

  1. Why? by muridae · · Score: 4, Insightful
    In many cases that means if you take a pain killer and then take two extra strength Tylenol, you may have gone over the maximum dosage per day.

    Would it not make more sense to educate the people taking the pills, instead of banning an effective pain reliever? Anyone taking a vicodin and then two Tylenol is either in serious pain that the hydrocodone is not treating, or is unaware of what is in vicodin. A little talk by the pharmacist or doctor can fix both. Lowering the dose of APAP in prescription pills makes sense too, I mean 650mg in Darvocets? Take that 4 times a day and you are already over the daily dose. All of that just to prevent some junkies from getting high?

    Not that I will argue too much, since I can't take Aspirin or ibuprofen, it will be much easier to get a script for pure codeine.

  2. So wait... by moosehooey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The FDA made the drug companies put acetaminophen into the narcotic painkillers to keep people from recreationally overdosing on them (same as they "denature" ethyl alcohol that you can buy at the hardware store by poisoning it with methyl alcohol), and then when druggies take large doses anyway and cause liver damage and death, the FDA is *surprised*?

  3. Alcohol by sexconker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So when will the FDA ban alcohol for destroying people's livers?

  4. Why BAN and not WARN? by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously here. Why not make sure that there are STRONG WARNINGS on these drugs and require that they also place the warnings on TV Ads (not just in the small print, but actually required spoken warning about exceeding the 2000mg limit, and mention that other drugs like prescription pain killers may also contain this substance and to check with your doctor). I mean, if people know that over-dosing on this WILL seriously damage and potentially kill your liver, they will pay a little more attention to how much they are taking...

    As it currently is, with the current ads and warnings, more people think that something like Tylenol with Codeine is pretty safe to take. I mean, its Tylenol, safe for your stomach (too bad just not necessarily safe for your liver).

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  5. Re:If You Drink Alcohol Avoid Acetaminophen by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Maybe your sister should have told you not to drink that much alcohol in first place. Makes a lot of more sense that way.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  6. Re:not really a ban by Craig+Davison · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the reasons that drug companies put acetaminophen in things like hydrocodone and dextropropoxyphene in the first place is because they make it more difficult (ironically) to overdose on or use recreationally.

    Of course, instead of the intended effect of less drug abuse, we now have more liver failures, at a higher societal cost. This is the same thinking that has people opposed to clean needles programs - does less clean needles mean people will inject less? No, actually they will still inject, and they will have a higher chance of contracting Hepatitis or HIV.

  7. Easy to OD on acetaminophen. Need better labels. by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This actually happened to me. A few years back I had open heart surgery. After spending a week in hospital, I was released with a big fat percocet prescription (having your sternum in 2 halves is remarkably painful). I was told to "try" to get by on Tylenol, but to take the percocet if the pain was too much. Funny thing about narcotics...it's pretty easy to forget how many and exactly WHEN you last took the medication. In 3 days, I managed to completely shut down my liver by taking two percocets every 4-6 hours. Back into hospital I went and it took about a week for my liver to "wake up." It could have just as easily failed permanently and resulted in my eventual death.

    The doctors and nurses who were responsible for prescribing the medication did a lot of finger pointing about WHO should have let me know about the risk of hepatic failure, but the end result was "you should have known better." I'm a programmer, not a doctor...for fook sake.

    Also, as someone else mentioned, it is remarkably easy to destroy your liver when you consume alcohol along with acetaminophen. That should be a big bold warning on the label, not fine print.

    Best,

  8. Re:not really a ban by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Which is really pretty damn fucked up, if you think about it.

    Adding an agent that can, and does, cause liver failure and unpleasant death, just to discourage recreational narcotics use, reflects a pretty disturbing set of priorities. Given that recreational narcotics use isn't wildly healthy to start with, it should be able to discourage rational actors without added acetaminophen(and, if it isn't actually that dangerous, why restrict it?). Adding it basically amounts to displaying a willingness to kill drug users, along with people too sick or old to read a bunch of warning labels and cross-check for potential drug interactions. Srsly. WTF?

  9. Re:not really a ban by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most people have no idea what the maximum safe dosage of acetaminophen is. And even if they do, the point is that it's easy to take your vicodin prescription and then take some Nyquil without realizing that Nyquil has acetaminophen as well. The average person is not a pharmacist, and really shouldn't be expected to be one.

    When I had surgery on my hand my doctor's instructions for frequency of use on the vicoden would have put me over the 4000mg limit. The pharmacist told me I needed to make sure I only took 5 a day instead of 6 (or something like that, can't quite remember what the frequency was anymore).

    Now imagine my doctor had written the prescription correctly for 5 doses a day. There's no reason for most people to know the maximum daily dose value. It would have been quite easy to take the maximum dosage just on pain pills, then take a few doses per day of some OTC med (maybe something for allergies) that lists acetaminophen in the small print and exceed the max dose by quite a bit. Nyquil Sinus for example has 650mg per dose and allows up to 6 per day. Accidentally exceeding 4000mg would be easy.

  10. Jaundiced junkies in the ER, by pigwiggle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    my wife sees it all the time - dead livers. The concern isn't for people taking this on prescription. They can get a different preparation if necessary. Good riddance. Better yet, get rid of the whole prescription regime. Many doctors are sick of being the narcotic gate keeper. On one side is the DEA looking to pull your license and prosecute, on the other a patient who may or may no be in pain. It's the doctors responsibility to correctly identify drug seekers. Chronic pain rarely kills. What would you do if your livelihood could be taken away for prescribing narcotics to a patient who you believed to be in pain, but was a very clever junkie? I have a feeling there are a lot of chronic pain sufferers that aren't having their pain managed correctly because their physician fears being accused of over prescribing narcotics. More senseless shit brought to you by the War on Drugs. As the late but not so great Bill Hicks said - it's not a war on drugs, it's a war on personal freedom.

    --
    46 & 2
  11. Re:not really a ban by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Out of curiosity, where exactly do you draw the line between "stupidity", which should be allowed to suffer, and unsafe products? All humans have finite cognitive capacity, finite reflexes, finite short and long term memory, finite rationality under emotional conditions, etc. Further, levels of those capabilities differ between individuals in a given population. Virtually any product could be made more or less safe by changing the design choices, and more or less safe by the degree to which the operator follows directions. Further, some sets of directions are more likely to be followed than others(either because they are onerous and people are lazy, or because they demand precision and people make mistakes). How often does a set of directions have to be not followed before we describe it as "unrealistic" rather than the people not following it as "stupid"?

    In this case, assuming suitable labeling, "stupidity" implies possession of fairly low cognitive capacity(for label cross checking) and/or memory(for tracking pills taken over time). Sounds an awful lot like, for instance, the sicker, more arthritic old people who, as a population, probably suck down painkillers and anti-inflammatory drugs like nobody's business.

    Obviously, product safety is a matter of degree, with the obviously absurd on one end, and the self-evidently necessary on the other. Navigating the middle, though, is far from obvious. Do you have a particular reason for assigning this case to the "obviously absurd" end of the pool, or is it just a gut reaction?

  12. Re:House, MD by plague3106 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about we leave it as it is, and let people read the warning labels.

    I'm tired of not being able to get a decent decongestent because of some stupid war on drugs, and now the ONLY thing that works on my headaches might be banned? Fucking enough already.. if you're too dumb to know you can even pop over the counter pills without thinking, maybe you should die of liver failure.

  13. Re:not really a ban by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While what you say is true, aspirin has the same synergistic effects with oral opiates as acetaminophen, and is equivalent in terms of antipyretic and anti-inflammatory action as well. However it has a much wider margin between therapeutic level and destructive overdose level, and since overdosing usually causes tinnitus (ringing in the ears) long before any permanent damage is done, it comes complete with an audible overdose warning system.

    So there is not, and has never been, a valid reason for creating acetaminophen based competitors to the aspirin based compounds that were prevalent before 1980. Such as Emperin #3 (replaced by Tylenol #3), APC, APC with Codeine, and so on.

    The problem with aspirin in this regard is that about three decades ago several marketing campaigns were pushing Tylenol products by putting undue emphasis on aspirin sometimes causing stomach distress in some people. This was before it was known that stomach ulcers were caused by a bacterial infection, and it was easy to suggest that too much aspirin could be causing some ulcers.

    The modern American health care industry is riddled with these kinds of bullshit pharmaceutical fads. "We'll do anything for a buck" seems to be the motto.

    Aspirin isn't without its own problems. High doses for an extended period of time can lead to long clotting times, for instance. But on the whole, it is a whole lot safer than acetaminophen. It just isn't as profitable.

    --
    Will