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."
... good.
My prescription is 7.5mg hydrocodone, 500mg acetaminophen (standard - though there are a few variations on the amount of hydrocodone). The FDA has enforced that amount of acetaminophen, for two reasons. Hydrocodone is relatively addictive, and acetaminophen often induces a huge amount of nausea. This acts as a deterrent for anyone trying to "get high" off of the hydrocodone. Second, acetaminophen is a pretty decent pain killer, which hey, if you're taking lortab, that is the whole point.
My problem is the raw nausea induced. It's not uncommon for me to need to take one, and then develop a severe stomach, erm, 'problem' to the point where I can't do anything until a couple minutes after I've emptied my stomach into the nearby toilet. That is solely a side effect of the acetaminophen.
The "hey my liver is going to live" is a bonus effect from the removal of acetaminophen as far as I'm concerned.
The problem of course - is what they'd replace the acetaminophen with, should they want to continue shipping lortab (and friends). I somehow doubt it'd be any better in terms of side effects.
But I can hope.
'The people that are stupid and dont read the bottle that says" DO NOT TAKE MORE THAN XXX in a 24 hour period." It's clear as day on the fricking bottle.'
Not really look at a tylenol bottle. Yeah it says no more then 6 or 12 in a day but it's incredibly tiny and hard to read. And nowhere does it talk about using it with other drugs of that type other then a generic consult your doctor blah blah blah. And who talks about tylenol with your doctor? I means it's been on the market a while and is 100% safe right? I agree there is a lot of stupid shit out there but I feel this case isn't one of them.
Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
Drinking alcohol with it also will destroy your liver faster than either alone will. An over the counter cough medicine with both acetaminophen and alcohol in it is especially dangerous.
Tylenol has never worked for me, even Tylenol with codeine (percocet?). If I'm prescribed Tylenol with codeine, I have to take an aspirin with it to make it work. Perhaps they'll bring back Darvon (aspirin and codeine).
I don't see (aside from advertising and bribing doctors and hospitals) why acetomenaphine needs to be on the market at all, as there are a plethora of newer, more effective, and safer analgesics these days. Acetominaphine won't relieve swelling at all, while aspirin and other analgesics will.
Of course no drug is completely safe -- my friend Charlie had to be operated on for a perforated intestine that her doctor said was caused by taking too much naproxin. But that's far preferable to a liver transplant.
Free Martian Whores!
No, actually they will still inject, and they will have a higher chance of contracting Hepatitis or HIV.
Yes, but most anti-drug people are arguing from the basis of a puritan's punitive mythology, in which taking drugs is pleasurable and therefore drug takers "deserve" to be harmed. You can see this in puritans of all stripes: environmental puritans are often opposed to safe and effective means of disposal of nuclear waste because they would make nuclear power safer, which would be unacceptable because humans aren't supposed to have access to clean, cheap power, we're supposed to suffer for any pleasure we get, because we "deserve" to.
I have no idea what "deserve" means, other than, "I don't like what you're doing and want to see you get hurt as a consequence of doing it." It's a primitive, pre-scientific concept based on rudimentary rationalizations around social control behaviours in our primate ancestors, I think.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
Red Flayer, you are amazing! 13 posts in 7 different threads in 6 hours... impressive. And nearly every one of them confrontational to boot.
COX 2 inhibition is one mechanism of anti-inflammatory action typical of the NSAIDs. When Vioxx was introduced, it was thought to be a better anti-inflammatory agent because it preferentially inhibited COX 2 over COX 1 (and COX 3, whose functions are not well understood as yet), and that this would reduce the incidence of gastric irritation associated with aspirin and some other NSAIDs. But it has been withdrawn from the market as its use significantly increases the risk of thrombus incidents: heart attacks and strokes. And it is now thought that this happens when the balance between COX 1 and COX 2 is shifted in a bad way. Which would suggest that aspirin, which nonselectively inhibits both, is possibly safer than any of the COX 2 inhibitors.
So, Red Flayer, your facts are correct... and they undermine your argument.
Besides, we were talking of the analgesic use of these drugs, and specifically in their role as a synergetic for oral opiates. This is a very different purpose with a very different kind of dosage regimen, and the COX inhibition mechanisms may not even be involved.
Oh, this also needs some further comment:
Re: the higher margin between therapeutic level and destructive overdose level, I'm not sure, and I can;t be bothered to look up the LD50 and therapeutic levels right now. What I DO know is that the margin between minimum therapeutic level and minimum toxicity level is much smaller for ASA than APAP. For a lot of people, side effects from ASA are experience at a *lower* blood concentration than the minimum therapeutic level.
The "minimum toxicity level" you are talking about here is the fully reversible tinnitus that I described as an early warning sign. Your spin doctoring seems inappropriate. Aspirin's way of usually causing "ringing in the ears" before any irreversible damage occurs remains an important positive feature of the drug. (I do realize that for someone posting so frequently over such a broad range of subjects, looking up certain critical details can be a bother, and I believe me I fully understand where you are coming from with that.)
Okay, I've been a good boy scout and fed the trolls. Hopefully in a way that some third parties reading this will find something of interest here.
Will