Slashdot Mirror


How Big Pharma Hooked America On Legal Heroin

pigrabbitbear writes "The active ingredient in OxyContin, oxycodone, isn't a new compound. It was originally synthesized in Germany in 1916. The patent on the medication had expired well before Purdue Pharma, a Stamford, Connecticut-based pharmaceutical company and the industry leader in pain medication, released it under the brand name in 1996. The genius of Purdue's continued foray into pain-management medication – they had already produced versions of hydromorphone, oxycodone, fentanyl, codeine, and hydrocodone – was twofold. They not only created a drug from an already readily available compound, but they were able to essentially re-patent the active ingredient by introducing a time-release element. Prior to the 1990s, strong opioid medications were not routinely given for miscellaneous or chronic, moderately painful conditions; the strongest classes of drugs were often reserved for the dying. But Purdue parlayed their time-release system not only into the patent for OxyContin. They also went on a PR blitz, claiming their drug was unique because of the time-release element and implied that it was so difficult to abuse that the risk of addiction was 'under 1%.'"

332 of 499 comments (clear)

  1. Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    That just proves that Rush Limbaugh is part of the 1%.

    1. Re:Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That just proves that Rush Limbaugh is part of the 1%.

      Whatever drug Rush Limbaugh is on is way stronger than OxyContin.

    2. Re:Well you know... by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, how twisted does one have to be to get themselves hooked on heroin, yet thinks pot and people who smoke it, is evil? And people listen to this guy.

    3. Re:Well you know... by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People who yell the loudest often have the most to hide. He's simply a drug addict who hates himself, his ego won't allow that so he projects his behavior onto others.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    4. Re:Well you know... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I think the last time I actually listened to Rush was in 1997, so I really can't remember... does he hate teh gays as much as teh druggies? I'm just asking.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    5. Re:Well you know... by emarkp · · Score: 2

      Can you please point to where Limbaugh said "pot and people who smoke it, [are] evil"?

    6. Re:Well you know... by jfengel · · Score: 5, Informative

      "The FDA says there's no -- zilch, zero, nada -- shred of medicinal value to the evil weed marijuana. This is going to be a setback to the long-haired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking crowd."

      Radio broadcast, Apr. 21, 2006

      No, he's not literally calling the smokers evil, but the OP didn't put it in quotes. It's clear that he thinks they're bad people, and he did explicitly call the marijuana itself evil.

    7. Re:Well you know... by Hatta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He supports candidates that support the criminalization of cannabis. That's close enough. Yes, that applies to anyone who supports Obama too. The War on Drug Users is an atrocity.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    8. Re:Well you know... by mrchaotica · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not a "have you stopped beating your wife" kind of question if the latent assumption (e.g. that Rush Limbaugh "hate[s] teh druggies") is previously established as true (which earlier posts claim is the case).

      In other words, it's not a fallacy to ask "have you stopped beating your wife?" if the previous question, "did you ever beat your wife?" had already been answered in the affirmative.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    9. Re:Well you know... by crazycheetah · · Score: 5, Informative

      Wrong. The first is prescribed by a doctor and is highly addictive. That part you got right. Congratulations.

      Cannabis, you're wrong on, though. It is prescribed by a doctor in growing number of states in the US, and I can't speak for outside of the US on that, so I'll leave that to someone who knows better (as far as I know, it may or may not be the case elsewhere in the world that doctors prescribe it). So, a little right on the first one there, but equally wrong.

      As for addictive... Cannabis IS addictive. Psychologically for sure (you can be psychologically addicted to all kinds of things, though). Physically, despite popular, bullshit lies, you CAN be physically addicted to cannabis. Physical Dependence requires Tolerance and Withdrawal. You definitely get tolerance with cannabis, specifically because the receptors that the cannabinoids attach to begin to down regulate or stop functioning so that you need more cannabinoids to have the same effect. As for withdrawal, there is very clear withdrawal symptoms associated to stopping cannabis use suddenly: irritability, anger, aggression, restlessness, difficulty focusing, increased appetite, weight gain, sleep disturbances (insomnia, disturbing dreams, etc.), anxiety, depressed mood, cravings, sensitivity to light, stomach pain, increased sweating, fever, chills, and headaches, to name a few. In fact, because this has become accepted fact throughout the psychological and medical fields, they are adding official diagnosis of Cannabis Withdrawal to the latest diagnostic standards (mind you, they are also dropping the terms Abuse and Dependence and moving to simply Substance Use Disorders, with a spectrum of No Diagnosis, Mild, Moderate, and Severe).

      Reputable facts are a good thing to know if you're going to make claims...

    10. Re:Well you know... by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only thing you need to know is that he loves money, and has found a niche that happily pays him plenty of it.

      Frankly, I long ago gave up any hope that any of the major Conservative commentators was being sincere. There's so much money to be made preaching to the choir, and it does matter how over the top the rhetoric they will lap it up, that I think Conservative talk shows are about as real as a carnival side show. Think of Rush as the bearded woman and you've figured out the secret.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    11. Re:Well you know... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      But I do know what he has said about druggies, and his opinion of them is not open to question here. So, same question, but this time can I get a non-masturbatory answer?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    12. Re:Well you know... by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the last time I actually listened to Rush was in 1997, so I really can't remember...

      Oh, you're missing out. While Test for Echo was pretty good, that's no way to leave yourself hanging. Rush is still touring, and in fact they released Clockwork Angels in June this year.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    13. Re:Well you know... by kermyt · · Score: 1

      Rush was hooked on Oxycontin not heroin.

      OxyContin is time release Heroin. Next time read the article before trying to defend that fatass lying piece of shit.

    14. Re:Well you know... by emarkp · · Score: 1, Troll

      I'm going to need a bit more context and proof than that. I've seen many false quotes attributed to him (just like I've seen many false quotes attributed to Obama, GW Bush, Clinton, and other public figures). In particular, that quote without context is cut/pasted all around the pro-legal-marijuana sites but they don't have more than what's there. Nor can I find the segment in particular for that date on Limbaugh's site (though that may be just because it's from several years ago).

      Is there audio anywhere so I can tell if he's joking? Or if it's part of a bit he's doing?

      (Personally, I don't care if marijuana is legal, I just like to have my facts right.)

    15. Re:Well you know... by crazycheetah · · Score: 2

      I will add terms that will work, though:

      Of the two drugs mentioned, one can fairly easily be taken in high enough doses to kill you, while the other you practically need an IV with ridiculously high doses for it to kill you. That is a pretty big difference.

      Neither one has withdrawal symptoms that are likely to kill you, though (opiate withdrawal is significantly more severe and also more likely to interact with medical conditions that could lead to death as the withdrawal makes those medical conditions worse, however).

    16. Re:Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes your facts follow that Cannabis overdose is the main reason for ER visits.... lol....

      The legal effects are far more dangerous to the individual than the substance.

      Withdrawal from sugar is far more pysically rough, so whats your point?

      Anyway oxycontin kills daily....

      Here is a fact for you..

      How much cannabis does it take to kill a lab rat? 2.5 pounds if you drop it from about 3 feet.

    17. Re:Well you know... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1, Troll

      So, same question, but this time can I get a non-masturbatory answer?

      That's called "projection". Why don't you drop the attitude if you want a discussion, instead of just trying to insult people you haven't really listened to in the first place?

      The answer is "yes" he hates the people the same amount. That is, not. That's what you could have gotten from the previous answer if you thought about it for a minute.

      Nice try with the "not open to question". It's a good trick when you don't want to support the claims you make. It's the real masturbatory tactic in this discussion. Just so you know, most people realize that calling weed evil isn't the same as calling the people who use it evil. Even the person who posted the "quote" as proof of how he hates smokers admitted that it wasn't an admission that he called them evil. Maybe you didn't notice. And gosh, maybe you also noticed that pointing that tiny detail out was placing the claim fully in question.

    18. Re:Well you know... by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 1, Troll

      where the hell are you getting this information? i have gone thru cannabis "withdraw" and your "symptoms" other than irritability are bullshit. in fact it makes you lose your appetite, but im sure the PSYCHOLOGISTS who wrote the manual know this with their godlike observations (is my bitterness at this pseudoscience shining thru to you at all?)

      also, comparing the withdraws of cannabis to real drugs like heroin, meth, cocaine and oxycodone, is both ignorant and insulting.

    19. Re:Well you know... by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I am a medical marijuana patient in California.
      I also was a habitual pot user 25 years ago when I was a teen, for about a year.

      I agree that "harmless" is a stupid thing to call anything that you ignite and inhale into your lungs, and would concede that it might be mildly physically addictive.

      If so, however, it is FAR less physically addictive that caffeine (coffee, soda). The withdrawal symptoms, if any, are FAR less severe than those of a Starbucks addict going cold turkey.

      As far as psychologically addictive, there is no such thing. Addiction is bio-chemical. You cannot be "addicted" to gambling, shopping, masturbation, etc. These are compulsive behaviors - they are NOT addiction. That is not meant to insult sufferers, compulsive behavior patterns are an illness and are FAR worse to deal with than simple physical addition. With physical addiction, you simply need to detox.

      But compulsive behavior cannot be blamed on the object of that compulsion, whether it be cannabis, eBay shopping, sex, or collecting beanie babies.

      Beanie babies are not a gateway drug. But they have bankrupted people and destroyed lives. Ban THEM? Of course not.

      If anything can be said to be addictive about these things, it is an addiction to brain chemicals the behaviors cause the release of. If you are addicted to your own serotonin, you are NOT a "stamp collecting addict."

      You need treatment, but stamps are not the cause.

      Cannabis, if it has a physical addiction component, has one that is far less severe than many substances that have no regulation whatsoever, and are sold to kids in machines in some of their High Schools.

      --
      This space available.
    20. Re:Well you know... by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously, though, there is a vast difference between taking a prescribed drug and becoming addicted to it and using a proscribed drug for the explicit purpose of getting high.

      Yes, the first is where you're being abused by people who are supposed to care for you, and the second is living your life like a free person.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    21. Re:Well you know... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      That's called "projection"

      No, he was right on target.

    22. Re:Well you know... by crazycheetah · · Score: 1

      Cannabis withdrawal, described nearly identically, is also in the ICD-10 classification, which would be the diagnostic criteria followed by every medical doctor out there as well, if you prefer the science of medicine over the "pseudoscience" of psychology. At this point, it's well known in medicine, pharmacology, psychiatry, neurology, and any other field that has any interest in these things that the withdrawal symptoms are fact. Not everyone has the same symptoms, however, so you can't dismiss them based on you or anyone else not having them. And I did mistype increased appetite and weight gain--it's actually decreased appetite and weight loss, as pointed out in the link I provided. My mistake in typing quickly off the top of my head.

      There's no comparing in my post. As I also posted in reply to my own post, if you compare, opiate withdrawal is more severe. The point wasn't to compare, though. I was simply refuting the claim that cannabis isn't addictive, which it is.

    23. Re:Well you know... by msauve · · Score: 1

      This is much simpler. Some people have addictive personalities - opiates/nicotine/alcohol/endorphines, not much difference. Who's to say that sitting in an opium den is worse than running a marathon to get your fix?

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    24. Re:Well you know... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The answer is "yes" he hates the people the same amount. That is, not

      Bullshit. I know you want to parlay the admission of ignorance of his opinion on homosexuals into not actually having listened to him at all, but this is not true and you can't just lie to my face like that. He spoke on the subject more than often enough for your words to mean anything.

      Just so you know, most people realize that calling weed evil isn't the same as calling the people who use it evil.

      Yeah and calling them maggot-infested is both accurate and a compliment. LOL.

      I didn't say he said they were "evil", I said he hates them, and he does. How much vitriol does someone have to spew at a group of people before it is clear that they hate them? The answer is much less than he has.

      If you're going to do a word-mincing jerk-off session, at least make sure you're stroking the right verbiage.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    25. Re:Well you know... by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 2

      calling being pissed you dont have weed a "withdrawal symptom" is like calling a headache a "major neurological disorder".

      And being a doctor or psychologist does not necessarily mean that they are "truthful" or "unbiased". in fact i would wager that being in the medical field would ensure a healthy bias. And doctors definitely, as a whole, OMIT information from the public about many things: like side effects of drugs, the over prescription of drugs, useless treatments and the 30,000 dead each year in hospitals from C.Diff, preventable with just a bit more money spent on sterilization.

      I DONT TRUST DOCTORS BOSSMAN

    26. Re:Well you know... by guises · · Score: 1

      Your link, which you use to demonstrate the existence of physical dependance, is to the American Psychiatric Association. I don't think anyone has ever questioned that cannabis is psychologically addictive, you can be psychologically addicted to literally any activity with, more or less, the withdrawal symptoms that you've given - I get irritable when someone tells me to stop biting my nails, for example.

    27. Re:Well you know... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      It's not a "have you stopped beating your wife" kind of question if the latent assumption (e.g. that Rush Limbaugh "hate[s] teh druggies") is previously established as true (which earlier posts claim is the case).

      "Earlier posts c;laim" is not proof, especially when they provide at best a context-less, unsupported quote and admit that he didn't actually call the users evil, only the weed itself.

      Is the quote valid? Dunno. What was the context? He's done entire shows in irony mode. He did an entire show claiming to be supporting a democrat candidate. It provides lots of fodder for Rush bashers to quote forever, but little light on the subject of what he really thinks. As if most people cared what he really thinks.

    28. Re:Well you know... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

      OxyContin is time released oxycodone, not heroin.

      Heroin is diacetylmorphine, a different (if related) chemical compound.

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    29. Re:Well you know... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      You want to present calling them maggot-infested as not hateful, and therefore are a liar. No meaningful conversation with a liar is or was ever possible. So bye.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    30. Re:Well you know... by crazycheetah · · Score: 1

      The bigger deal is not that it's DOCTORS saying it. The bigger deal that I'm trying to say is that it's multiple research studies, published in peer reviewed, scientific journals, and repeated multiple times over using accepted scientific methods that say it.

    31. Re:Well you know... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      If you had read both links, you'd realize two things:

      1) Oxycodone operates on different receptors than morphine does, the latter being what heroin converts into metabolically (giving a clue the two are not chemically interchangeable).

      2) The article never says oxycodone is heroin; it says an addict switched from oxycodone to heroin.

      Your entire comment applies much more aptly to you than to the person at which it was directed.

    32. Re:Well you know... by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yep, and I am one of them. I am compulsive. I have tried, sometimes very successfully, to channel that compulsion into productive activities.

      For me, cannabis actually helps me chill out and CONTROL that behavior which otherwise has often overturned my life chaotically.

      --
      This space available.
    33. Re:Well you know... by dbraden · · Score: 1

      OxyContin is time-released oxycodone, not heroin. And the article doesn't say that it is.

    34. Re:Well you know... by fatphil · · Score: 2

      > ... in the ICD-10 classification, which would be the diagnostic criteria followed by every medical doctor out there ...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICD-10
      """
      Some 25 countries use ICD-10 for reimbursement and resource allocation in their health system. A few of them made modifications to ICD to better accommodate this use of ICD-10.
      """

      So there're 200 countries which don't use it, and of the 25 that do use it, some of them have rewritten parts of it, and yet you say "every medical doctor"? That's a significant rounding error.

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    35. Re:Well you know... by jfengel · · Score: 3, Informative

      He definitely used the "long-haired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking" line elsewhere, on more than one occasion:

      http://mediamatters.org/video/2011/03/02/limbaugh-wisconsin-protesters-are-long-haired-m/183331
      http://thepoliticalcarnival.net/2012/06/06/audio-limbaugh-poor-romney-accused-of-bullying-a-long-haired-maggot-infested-dope-smoking-type-kid-back-in-prep-school/

      and it's obvious he's not joking, and it's clear that he doesn't care for marijuana users.

      The other one may be too far in the past for people to dig up, but this seems sufficient to confirm the OP's point. And given that much, it seems unlikely that the above quote is faked or taken out of context. If it is, it shouldn't be that hard for a dittohead capable of listening to this dreck to dig it up the specific broadcast and refute it.

    36. Re:Well you know... by sjames · · Score: 1

      If he had an ounce of personal integrity he would either apologize and tell us he now understands that he was wrong about drug users OR he should report himself to the nearest prison and request incarceration.

    37. Re:Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Be careful relating Cannabis withdrawal to opiate withdrawal. While there is some withdrawal from Cannabis it is very mild compared to opiate withdrawal. After smoking everyday for 15 years I quit. The first week did technically include the withdrawal symptoms you referenced but the psychological addiction played a much bigger part. More than anything you find yourself having to keep from being bored. Instead of getting high you actually have to do something. With opiate withdrawal you feel like you're going to die.

    38. Re:Well you know... by crazycheetah · · Score: 1

      Not sure if your post was actually meant towards me or the other poster, but I actually agree with you overall (hence the quotes on "pseudoscience"; although, there is still some schools of thought in even modern psychology that the major criticism is the lack of ability to really test their theories). I've just let people hold on to that if there's other fields of science they might see as more legitimate that back up the same point anyway, though.

    39. Re:Well you know... by ortholattice · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In fact, because this has become accepted fact throughout the psychological and medical fields, they are adding official diagnosis of Cannabis Withdrawal to the latest diagnostic standards (mind you, they are also dropping the terms Abuse and Dependence and moving to simply Substance Use Disorders, with a spectrum of No Diagnosis, Mild, Moderate, and Severe).

      In fact, because this has become accepted fact throughout the psychological and medical fields, they are adding official diagnosis of Caffeine Withdrawal to the latest diagnostic standards (mind you, they are also dropping the terms Abuse and Dependence and moving to simply Substance Use Disorders, with a spectrum of No Diagnosis, Mild, Moderate, and Severe).

      It seems to me that the listed symptoms of Cannabis Withdrawal are less severe than those of Caffeine Withdrawal.

    40. Re:Well you know... by tsotha · · Score: 2

      Wait... he supported Obama?

    41. Re:Well you know... by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If someone tells me that Rush is an idiot, my usual response is to remind them that he probably works about eight hours a day to make millions a year. He might endorse some stupid opinions, but dumb he ain't.

    42. Re:Well you know... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Cannabis is substantially less dangerous in terms of direct physical effects and also in terms of dangerous or high risk behavior done under the influence and also in terms of risk of addiction versus alcohol. The fact that one is legal and the other is not is absurd, both should be banned or both permitted.

    43. Re:Well you know... by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

      But his voice is so mesmerising! He sounds just like Wallace Shawn!

      --
      sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
    44. Re:Well you know... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      applied neurology. And hence a very hard, clean and proper science. Not different from any other. Plain and simple for your simple, simple mind.

      You're crazier than a cocaine addled psychiatrist. We're working on making psychology applied neurology but we are quite a long ways away from it.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    45. Re:Well you know... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      The only countries that don't use the ICD 10 are the US and North Korea.

      I'll leave it up to you to decide what that means.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    46. Re:Well you know... by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Say it brother!

      Also, pass me that would you? Sounds like you have the good stuff.

    47. Re:Well you know... by Shoten · · Score: 1

      People who yell the loudest often have the most to hide. He's simply a drug addict who hates himself, his ego won't allow that so he projects his behavior onto others.

      So...he's secretly a woman who smokes pole, too?

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    48. Re:Well you know... by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Informative

      As far as psychologically addictive, there is no such thing. Addiction is bio-chemical. You cannot be "addicted" to gambling, shopping, masturbation, etc. These are compulsive behaviors - they are NOT addiction. That is not meant to insult sufferers, compulsive behavior patterns are an illness and are FAR worse to deal with than simple physical addition.

      Compulsive behavior is stuff like hair pulling, counting, excessive showering or hand washing, and a hundred other things.
      Psychological addiction is the reason drug users who want to stop cannot, or why smokers have oral fixations, or the cravings you experience once the physiological addiction is conquered.

      Psychological is almost always caused by a physiological addiction.
      There are people who have physiological addiction but not a psychological one.
      Those people can quit smoking or quit heroin on a whim and never have a relapse or craving.

      If you want to argue that physiological addiction leads to compulsive behavior, fine.
      But compulsive behaviors and psychological addictions only overlap, neither is a subset of the other.

      TLDNR: There is a difference between physical needs, mental cravings, and mental compulsions.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    49. Re:Well you know... by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 1

      no its all mine im not sharing!!

    50. Re:Well you know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      lol cannabis withdrawal lasts like a day. I should know, i'm a lazy stoner that doesn't plan far enough ahead to make sure i always have a solid supply. So I end up going months without it. It's a bummer when I run out, but it's not the end of the world. When I have it, I pretty much smoke it non-stop after coming home from work.

      Then again, my qualitative assessment is far from the quantitative data you would clearly want.

    51. Re:Well you know... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      The only thing you need to know is that he loves money, and has found a niche that happily pays him plenty of it.

      Frankly, I long ago gave up any hope that any of the major Conservative commentators was being sincere. There's so much money to be made preaching to the choir, and it does matter how over the top the rhetoric they will lap it up, that I think Conservative talk shows are about as real as a carnival side show. Think of Rush as the bearded woman and you've figured out the secret.

      Sometimes I wonder if that's what FOX News is about. Is Murdoch a right-winger, or did he just figure out that there was a big niche to be explopited?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    52. Re:Well you know... by Genda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm sorry but cannibis has one of the longest and most illustrious histories of any cultivated plant, up until the time that well monied interests decided to demonize it to bury the hemp industry. The only thing evil about marijuana is that the pharmaceutical industry has spent millions to ensure it remains unavailable to the millions of people suffering from cancer and chronic pain.

      After California legalized medical marijuana, a pot cooperative in the Santa Cruz area was targeted by the Fed. In 2002 they marched into a quiet and peaceful community, held a single woman pinned to the floor with a shotgun to her head, and proceeded to tear up the pot plants in the back yard. The members of the coop began arriving, many in wheelchairs and on oxygen. They simply parked themselves in the driveway. The woman of the house commented "Seems we 're holding the big bad Marshals hostage."

      The incident lead to the painful and untimely deaths of dozens of coop members. The incident was also a PR disaster for the Federal Marshals, and neighboring police departments made it very clear they'd have nothing to do with any future such events hosted by the DEA and Federal Marshals. I'm looking and the number of people dying of prescription drugs in our society is simply shocking, nobody dies of pot, save the victims of the illegal trade made possible by the idiot laws preventing the legal trade, control and taxation of marijuana. At this late and ridiculous point in the process of a product more widely used than any other save perhaps alcohol, is not time to say, Okay, this war was lost, perhaps diplomacy is now a better track.

    53. Re:Well you know... by CrashandDie · · Score: 1

      I'd like to know how many people die on the roads, or from accidents related to cannabis, though.

      Do we also take into account the fact that cannabis (much like other drugs) can be a trigger for a number of mental and cardiac problems, or should we just suppress that information because it doesn't fit in nicely with our views?

    54. Re:Well you know... by Genda · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is no particular intellectual component to pandering. The fact that the mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging masses that gobble up his swill are less bright than he, only tells me that his IQ isn't in the single digits... there's still plenty of room for profound idiocy, and Rush has publicly uttered inanities that remain classic even to this day. You do remember his verbal assault on Michael j. Fox for "Faking his Parkinson's" after doing a commercial for Democrat in Missouri. By the way, the year before Mike did a similar commercial for a Republican in another state whose voting record on stem cell research was admirable. Because Mike is passionate about curing the disease that will ultimately kill him. Russ is like Samson from the bible. He kills with the jawbone of an ass.

    55. Re:Well you know... by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Well, he will put anything round into his mouth.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    56. Re:Well you know... by dala1 · · Score: 1

      I remember taking some medication for a sudden, severe condition and realizing after about a week that I was craving it. Little thoughts like, 'if I just take one of those pills I will be able to sleep' or 'I really should have some of those pills in case this suddenly gets worse while I'm out.' I found out after that the drug I had been prescribed was actually highly addictive. Now, at that point I was not quite so hooked that I couldn't wean myself off, but had my condition been worse, or if I hadn't caught the warning signs despite my state of mind, I might easily have had my prescription end and found myself utterly dependent on the medication. As it was, I found myself carrying a couple pills around like a security blanket for a good six months. I have since refused medication for this particular condition out of fear that I will become addicted despite my best efforts.

      It's easy to judge others when you haven't been there and seen how addictive substances weasel their way into your thoughts. It's not about being strong- or weak-minded, its about your brain chemistry being profoundly altered by the substances that you take, and realizing that you can no longer function without those substances. This is what happens when you mess around with brain chemistry in such profound ways.

      I am of the opinion that all addictive medications like this should be prescribed with the patient in full understanding of its addictiveness and such that the patient is weaned off slowly. Anything else is setting the patient up for failure.

    57. Re:Well you know... by zoloto · · Score: 1
      Oh that classic misapplication of Psychology 101 students.

      People really need to get a real perspective over this.

    58. Re:Well you know... by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

      C Diff is not so easily preventable. It is out there in the wild because antibiotics are routinely fed to meat animals in the US, and many people carry it asymptomatically in the gut. When my mother was admitted to hospital with pneumonia, the antibiotic used to treat it killed the pneumonia bacteria but allowed the C Diff to multiply unchallenged, causing an infection that took months to treat. No improved hygiene in the hospital would have had any effect whatsoever.

      --
      From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    59. Re:Well you know... by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 1

      well something must be done, with nearly as many dieing there as in autowrecks. until then i recommend people to think twice about stepping foot into a hospital, except for the most dire of emergencies. i hope your mother pulled through.

    60. Re:Well you know... by GarretSidzaka · · Score: 1

      once again, you use that word "addictive" like it should apply to something like cannabis. that word is meant for oxycodone, cocaine and things that can KILL you from withdrawals.

      to quote half baked and bob sagat: "You ever sucked some dick for marijuana?"

    61. Re:Well you know... by bmimatt · · Score: 1

      ... and the FDA is theig bad gubiment he hates with passion.  Freak show ringmaster is what druggie Limbaugh is.

    62. Re:Well you know... by fatphil · · Score: 1

      > You cannot be "addicted" to gambling, shopping, masturbation, etc. These are compulsive behaviors - they are NOT addiction.

      I know that in the 80s and 90s graduate psychology classes in the UK were using the word "addiction" for those, but I can't remembr precisely which modifier came before it. They're almost always maladaptive uncontrolled habits - which is what addictions in the broader sense are. The fact that you felt the need in the rest of your paragraph to use the modified term "physical addition" rather thn just "addiction" is telling.

      And let's go back to

      > Addiction is bio-chemical.

      Are you really saying that my orgasms are not biochemical? What 2nd century medicine book have you been reading? Can compulsive masturbation be cured by canting Hail Mary and sacrificing chickens?

      --
      Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
    63. Re:Well you know... by AchilleTalon · · Score: 2

      You have it wrong, a lab rat will surely survive a drop of 2.5 pounds of cannabis from 3 feet. Do your math properly, you are on news for nerds' website.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    64. Re:Well you know... by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      There are people who have physiological addiction but not a psychological one.
      Those people can quit smoking or quit heroin on a whim and never have a relapse or craving.

      If you can "quit on a whim and never relapse" you were never addicted. Addiction is all about having some need that would not present in an otherwise healthy individuals, which is so acute you would engage in behaviors that have an outsized detrimental effect on your quality of life to satisfy it. The smoker who always drempt of travel for example, but never does because they need the $1500 for cigarettes.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    65. Re:Well you know... by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      I firmly believe this is obligatory.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    66. Re:Well you know... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Where the hell was anyone suggesting information be suppressed? No one was saying weed was a perfect substance which had absolutely no problems. It does cause problems, much as every other physical thing out there does.

    67. Re:Well you know... by demonlapin · · Score: 1
      Pandering is easy. Building a multimillion dollar business out of it is not. Just ask Air America, if you don't believe me.

      The fact that the mouth-breathing, knuckle dragging masses that gobble up his swill are less bright than he

      That's quite the olive branch there. I can't imagine why you're not capturing more people with this charming rhetoric. Have you ever wondered why blue-collar guys vote for Republicans?

    68. Re:Well you know... by DoctorBonzo · · Score: 1

      "very clear withdrawal symptoms ... difficulty focusing, increased appetite, weight gain, sleep disturbances ..."

      Gee, shouldn't symptoms of withdrawal be something other than symptoms of use?

    69. Re:Well you know... by Cytotoxic · · Score: 2

      Shhh.... don't tell them that people with a big (D) after their name are no better, and in some cases much worse than people with a big (R) after their name on the drug war. Next thing you know they'll be looking into Gary Johnson's candidacy.

      Don't talk about pot legalization. It is a gateway drug to all sorts of evil ideas about personal freedom. Stay asleep and choose between your giant douche and turd sandwich.

    70. Re:Well you know... by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      As far as psychologically addictive, there is no such thing. Addiction is bio-chemical. You cannot be "addicted" to gambling, shopping, masturbation, etc. These are compulsive behaviors - they are NOT addiction. That is not meant to insult sufferers, compulsive behavior patterns are an illness and are FAR worse to deal with than simple physical addition. With physical addiction, you simply need to detox.

      Recent research seems to indicate that the brain reacts the same to psychological addiction as to substance addiction. So both seem to be physically addictive.

      From http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21528810.200-the-people-who-are-addicted-to-addiction.html:

      Addiction researchers have turned to neuroscience to understand the mechanisms underlying different addictions. But the more they have tried to tease apart substance and behavioural addiction, the more similarities they find. For one thing, the brains of people with addiction look similar whether the addiction is to a substance or to a behaviour. When the brains of addicts are scanned using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) while they are shown videos of the addictive behaviour or of people using their drug of choice, the same reward centres are activated, says Robert Malenka, a Stanford neuroscientist who studies addiction.

    71. Re:Well you know... by CannedTurkey · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up if I could.

      --
      Ingredients: Turkey, Mechanically Separated Turkey, Water, Salt, Flavour.
    72. Re:Well you know... by Filip22012005 · · Score: 1

      I appreciate this perspective a lot, especially the first part. My problem with the second part is that you are arguably not a free person anymore if you're addicted. You're still being abused by some producer/seller. This is where freedom is impaired in quite a subtle way. It happens continuously, of course, and is a slippery slope. For example, my own limit in freedom of choice lies somewhere between THC and cocaine. This opinion is formed by my culture, as the former is considered a "soft" drug and the latter a "hard" drug. Incidentally, my culture is another one of those subtle impairments of my freedom.

      --
      When the policeman of the tie, rule you violate, hello punishment of the kitty?
    73. Re:Well you know... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Rush Limbaugh isn't interested in a civil conversation either, but he seems to be getting on alright.

    74. Re:Well you know... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Gary Johonson privatized prisons in New Mexico. He thinks that it's appropriate for there to be a profit motive in keeping our citizens behind bars. That's a complete non-starter for anyone who truly values liberty.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    75. Re:Well you know... by Cytotoxic · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is indeed no true Scottsman....

    76. Re:Well you know... by emarkp · · Score: 1

      In these examples, he's using it as a subgroup of pot smokers. That is, the image we have of the "loser stoner" who spends all his day baked. The hippie dope-smoker head-in-the-clouds stereotype disconnected from reality. It's hardly a screed against "marijuana users."

      The full exchange in the first example is about the people making a mess of the Wisconsin capitol, where I think people did in fact have bongs IIRC:

      GROTHMAN: No, of course not. But the people who are staying overnight are largely making a mess of our capitol. That's what you're addressing. Why are we keeping people out of the building? Because we do not want to have so many people there overnight defacing our beautiful capitol. If you would interview all the people who are creating a ruckus, the vast majority who are here today are not police officers or nurses. They're either college students or hangers on -- or unemployed people just looking for somewhere to hang on.

      RUSH: Right. The Democrats and the media want you to think it's just a bunch of average, hardworking out of working, valiant teachers, firefighters and so forth, and it's a bunch of slobs. Maggot-infested, dope-smoking, damn it, hell, longhaired, the whole nine yards. You got longhaired, maggot-infested, dope-smoking FM rock 'n' roller types, exactly who they are. Bong pipes, you name it. Now, I'm gonna tell you something: What Governor Walker and other governors around the country are offering public sector unions is beyond generous. It's outlandish, it's irresponsible. Wisconsin bureaucrats ought to be kissing this governor's feet for what he's offering them during these economic times.

    77. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      That just proves that Rush Limbaugh is part of the 1%.

      Yes, two kinds of 1% -- the top 1% of earnings, and the bottom 1% of intelligence and ethics. Oops, that's three...

    78. Re:Well you know... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      Smoking pot makes a person consider the world around them and their own place in it. People with power are automatically opposed to this. The fact smoking pot makes people behave in ways outside those prescribed by their mainstream culture is enough to set people against them.

      This is a good point, and one that I don't hear often enough. Consciously or not, those in power do not want people thinking for themselves and analyzing their own situation.

      I fail to see how you reach the conclusion that people listen to Limbaugh. In simple terms he has the most listened to radio show. Nothing suggests that people who hear his show actually really listen (as in believe what he says and form opinions based upon it). Perhaps it's wishful thinking, but I rather see people listening to him for entertainment value.

      I'll introduce you to my cousin. He listens to Rush Limbaugh and clearly forms opinions based on it. That or his own opinions are quite similar to Rush's, and are reinforced by Rush. I don't know specifically, since he and I don't talk politics (nothing good would come of it).

      Earlier I watched Piers Morgan interview Jesse Ventura. To my mind both hold views that are somewhat extreme albeit at opposite ends of the spectrum. That might have been the most watched TV show in history (I'm aware it wasn't). It proves little of the views of the people that watched it though.

      Also heroin is no worse than caffeine. We allow one and make it available everywhere, the other we do not. We tolerate companies like coca-cola selling addictive products to our children. We should not.

      In saying that heroin is no worse than caffeine, I think you need to define "worse".

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    79. Re:Well you know... by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      I have thought the same thing. But then I remember that it is hard to make a man understand something when his salary depends on him not understanding it.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    80. Re:Well you know... by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Have you ever actually listened to Rush (or most of the rest of conservative talk radio)? Even if this quote were made up, the content is perfectly in-character for him.

      Is there audio anywhere so I can tell if he's joking?

      Either he's joking a *lot* -- enough that nobody would ever really know what he's serious about -- or the dude really believes the vitriol he spews on a daily basis about stereotypes his target audience hates.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    81. Re:Well you know... by DiEx-15 · · Score: 1

      That just proves that Rush Limbaugh is part of the 1%.

      ...and a hypocrite too!

    82. Re:Well you know... by TJNoffy · · Score: 1

      He yells the loudest because his addiction made him deaf.

    83. Re:Well you know... by tibit · · Score: 1

      I second that. My wife is the same. There's a class of antibiotics that she simply cannot take, and it doesn't matter what bacteria supplements she'd take orally, even in huge doses -- in about 24 hours she gets GI distress, and in about a week she's in sepsis. BTDT, now we know.

      --
      A successful API design takes a mixture of software design and pedagogy.
    84. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      As for addictive... Cannabis IS addictive. Psychologically for sure

      The term for that is habituation, not addiction, and as you alluded, anything can be habitual. Drink a glass of orange juice every morning and when you're out, you have a bad day. It's not anything in the orange juice, it's the act of drinking it every day. marijuana is no different.

      Physical Dependence requires Tolerance and Withdrawal.

      Correct. That is addiction. Coffee, alcohol, tobacco, all addictive. Withdrawal from alcohol or heroin or oxycontin can kill you.

      You definitely get tolerance with cannabis, specifically because the receptors that the cannabinoids attach to begin to down regulate or stop functioning so that you need more cannabinoids to have the same effect.

      Actually with marijuana, if you smoke a joint first thing every morning and keep smoking all day every day, being high will be normal to you and you'll have to smoke more to FEEL high. This is far different from alcohol. Seven beers and I can barely walk at all, but my alcoholic friend Amy walked to the hospital with over a .4 BAC, that's twice as much as will kill most people. If she went without a drink for two weeks, half that amount would kill her. THAT is tolerance. Many heroin addicts who go through treatment or are incarcerated die soon after they're released; they get their first hit and overdose, because they've lost their tolerance and do the same amount they did before thwy dried out.

      As for withdrawal, there is very clear withdrawal symptoms associated to stopping cannabis use suddenly: irritability, anger, aggression, restlessness, difficulty focusing, increased appetite, weight gain, sleep disturbances (insomnia, disturbing dreams, etc.), anxiety, depressed mood, cravings, sensitivity to light, stomach pain, increased sweating, fever, chills, and headaches, to name a few.

      Odd, I've known pot smokers all my adult life, many of them very heavy daily users. Quite often the supply dries up and there's none around for a couple of weeks, but I've never seen these symptoms in anyone, with a couple of exceptions:

      irritability, anger, aggression, restlessness

      These are symptoms of bipolar disorder, not of drug withdrawal, and marijuana is a good treatment for these symptoms. You could say that schitzophrenia is a symptom of Haldol withdrawal and you'd be equally wrong -- the Haldol is prescribed to keep the schitzophrenic from being batshit insane. Folks with bopolar disorder often self-medicate with pot and don't even know they're self-medicating.

      difficulty focusing

      Think about that one for a minute... you've been high for a week and you have difficulty focusing when you quit??? That's insanely illogical.

      increased appetite, weight gain

      LOL, you get the munchies when you're high, not when you stop.

      sleep disturbances (insomnia, disturbing dreams, etc.),

      I never heard anyone having trouble sleeping when quitting pot, but the disturbing dreams, yes -- because when you smoke pot, you don't remember your dreams at all; I suspect that remembering your dreams is a bug, not a feature, of the human brain. But when you haven't had a dream for two years, any dream is going to be disturbing.

      anxiety, depressed mood

      Again, these are symptoms of mental illness that the marijuana simply masked.

      stomach pain

      Not just stomach pain, all pain. Pot is a weak analgesic that works for lots of pains, including arthritis. Again, I must be addicted to aspirin and naproxin, because a withdrawal symptom of those drugs is often arthritis!

      Reputable facts are a good thing to know if you're going to make claims

      You mean REFUTABLE facts. Your "facts" are incorrect, and I don't care who told you, they're incorrect.

      Psychology is almost science, it is where astrology was before it became astronomy. I took a psychology class in collge, and I quote the instructor: "There isn't a psychologist alive that there's not another psychologist calling him a gold-studded liar." Freud and his "everything comes down to sex" is pretty much how scientific psychology is. Where are your controlled studies? Your link cites none.

    85. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You are correct except for opiate withdrawal -- that can kill without medical conditions. So can withdrawal from alcohol. Caffiene withdrawal won't kill you but the headache isn't nice.

    86. Re:Well you know... by demonlapin · · Score: 2

      Like I said, with charm like that, I can't imagine why they're not beating a path to your door.

    87. Re:Well you know... by VENONA · · Score: 1

      You are one brave individual. I would find the prospect of debugging Rush Limbaugh daunting.

      --
      What you do with a computer does not constitute the whole of computing.
    88. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Do we also take into account the fact that cannabis (much like other drugs) can be a trigger for a number of mental and cardiac problems,

      From your "cardiac problems" link:

      Conclusionsâ"Smoking marijuana is a rare trigger of acute myocardial infarction.
      .
      Smoking marijuana is known to have hemodynamic consequences, including a dose-dependent increase in heart rate, supine hypertension, and postural hypotension; however, whether it can trigger the onset of myocardial infarction is unknown.

      Know what the most pronounced trigger for myocardial infarction (heart attack) is? Getting up in the morning!

      As to your other link, they have the cart firmly in front of the horse. people with mental illnesses are usually crazy long before ever taking any drug. From your link: "What research has failed to show is if cannabis use is a consequence or cause of psychiatric disorders."

      I guess you either didn't read your own links, or figured nobody else would, because they don't say what you say they say.

    89. Re:Well you know... by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      But reality is not that simple! You can't just dumb things down at will, until it is simple enough for you to feel comfortable. Reality doesn't care if you feel comfortable. It just is how it is. You have no choice but to accept that.

      See: Religion

    90. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Who's to say that sitting in an opium den is worse than running a marathon to get your fix?

      I've said for a long time that runners are worse than heroin junkies. The runners get the endorphin high, and heroin wouldn't do anything if it didn't fit endorphin receptors.

      Shooting heroin won't ruin your knees (this is especially a problem with women, whose sleletons weren't evolved for running) and what's more, heroin addicts don't run blindly out from behind a dumpster into the street right in front of my car like the runners, shitfaced stoned on the endorphins, do.

      OTOH the runners don't burglarize my house or rob liquor stores...

    91. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      no its all mine im not sharing!!

      We're talking about pot here, not crack.

    92. Re:Well you know... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      I'm high right now, you dumb shit. Logic fail

    93. Re:Well you know... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      In that case, let's just throw all of science out of the books, because all of these scientists are bought and paid for tools of the establishment.

      Better yet, try relying your own experience for a change instead of believing whatever horseshit the establishment wants you to, which is for their benefit of course, not yours or mine. Who benefits more from locking up cannabis smokers--society, or the prison industrial complex?

    94. Re:Well you know... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      It was a comparison to Nazi Germany....which is growing more and more apt as the months pass.

    95. Re:Well you know... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I'm not running for office, but if I were the Tea Partiers would be beating a path to my door... with torches and pitchforks.

    96. Re:Well you know... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Interesting regarding the caffeine withdrawal. As a Mt. Dew addict (seriously...I go through about 6-10 a day), I was put on South Beach diet by my cardiologist several years ago (my cholesterol count had spiked over 300) , which allows no caffeine for at least the first phase. I went through severe headaches for a couple of days while going cold turkey. After dropping 28 lbs. and going on Lipitor, I'm all good now. What I didn't know was that my family had a history...everyone with high cholesterol, and nobody bothered to share that. If you haven't, be sure to discuss these things with your blood relatives.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    97. Re:Well you know... by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Funny that half of the responses here are now about Rush instead of the original topic. And all because of one AC.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    98. Re:Well you know... by Macklyn · · Score: 1

      Pandering to the uninformed is easy, pandering to the intelligent is not. FTFY

    99. Re:Well you know... by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Ok, that's pretty funny.

    100. Re:Well you know... by shiftless · · Score: 1

      It's easy to judge others when you haven't been there

      "You?" I have been there....and yes, it's easy to judge others.

  2. Dont forget the low cost by jhoegl · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They keep the cost low even though other drugs have increased considerably in cost.
    Why is that, one might ask.

    1. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      "They keep the cost low even though other drugs have increased considerably in cost."

      I don't think so. Street value for an Oxy 80 is $80.00 or more..

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    2. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1, Funny

      Kind of makes all the rest of us feel like worthless garbage, doesn't it.

      You must be on OxyContin.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    3. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Stickerboy · · Score: 4, Informative

      They keep the cost low even though other drugs have increased considerably in cost.

      Why is that, one might ask.

      Low cost? OxyContin is one of the most expensive PO pain medicines doctors use.

      I have insurance companies tell me all the time that they would rather I use one of the cheaper alternatives if OxyContin comes up.

      --
      Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
    4. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The man made his income by giving up any semblance of a soul he had to become as close to a literal mouthpiece for a powerful political party as is possible while still being considered "human". His entire career is built around echoing talking points and riling up a voter base according to the whims of the bigwigs in the party. Nothing more. He has no opinions, he has no thoughts, he has no ideas that aren't specifically vetted by whoever's pulling his strings to make him talk and spread hate and fear over the airwaves. He made his income by being a complete tool, plain and simple, cut-and-dry.

      And you're saying that makes US feel like worthless garbage? Pfui! Looking at that man's "life" makes me more proud than ever of how my own life turned out!

    5. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, personally I'm kind of glad Rush Limbaugh hasn't OD'd yet. Everything about him makes me feel like I'm an amazing, intelligent, thoughtful, caring human being. Well... at least by comparison. Otherwise I'm not so impressive.

    6. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      The man made his income by giving up any semblance of a soul he had to become as close to a literal mouthpiece for a powerful political party as is possible while still being considered "human".

      A more apt description of James Carville and Paul Begala would be hard to find. Although the former might have slipped over the "still being human" line a few times.

    7. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      I don't think so. Street value for an Oxy 80 is $80.00 or more..

      That's like buying a McDonalds dollar menu burger from a scalper on the street for $10 and then blaming McDonalds for overcharging you.

      Street price is what you pay to guys who get the drugs illegally and charge you dearly for the privilege of avoiding the risk of doing that yourself. OTC price is what you pay a pharmacy, and I suspect that $80 is not what they'd charge you.

      OTH, I did once pay $1100 for a about 30 anti-seizure pills when they were necessary and the insurance hadn't gotten processed for them yet. That's still only $36 each.

    8. Re:Dont forget the low cost by jersey_emt · · Score: 4, Informative

      OxyContin is many things, but one thing it is definitely not is cheap. A month's prescription costs hundreds of dollars.

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    9. Re:Dont forget the low cost by jhoegl · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't get this?

      So you folks want people to suffer in pain and have to spend a lot of money to get less release from their pain?

      And, yes, I think Rush is in the top 1% of American income earners. Self made man, also. Kind of makes all the rest of us feel like worthless garbage, doesn't it.

      I have to pay ~$170 for two vials of insuline every 1 1/2 weeks, which keep me ALIVE...

      So fuck you.

    10. Re:Dont forget the low cost by jersey_emt · · Score: 1

      80mg OxyContin tablets cost $7-$10 each from a pharmacy without insurance.

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    11. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Obfuscant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The street price is higher because the pharmacy cost is higher.

      The street price is higher because the drug is on the federal schedule of drugs as something to be restricted. The street price is higher because the demand for it is significant. The street price is higher because the risk of getting caught dealing is higher, and the penalties greater. The street price is higher because people will pay it. For every person who walks away because they think $80 a pill is too high, there is someone next in line who will pay it.

      The point was, however, that using the "street price" as some indicator that the manufacturer charges too much is just silly. It's not the stadium's fault when you buy a ticket from a scalper for a sold-out game for ten times the box office price, nor is it the stadium's fault when the scalper charges you a service fee to make up for his costs in getting tickets and the risks of doing so.

    12. Re:Dont forget the low cost by sjames · · Score: 1

      According to TFA, at least one user switched to black tar heroine because it was less expensive than oxy.

    13. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If you want to see something REALLY messed up, check out the cost of generic Desoxyn (d-methamphetamine, prescribed for ADHD). It's approximately $5-10 per 5mg tablet, with 15-30mg/day being a normal adult dose. Yeah, you read that right -- approximately a thousand dollars per month for a drug that costs almost nothing to manufacture, and whose patent expired before our parents were born. All courtesy of the war on drugs.

      The really sad thing is that due to public and political hysteria over "meth", people act like it's radioactive and deadly. The truth is, at ADD doses (a recreational user consumes more as a midnight snack than somebody with ADHD would take in an entire month) d-methamphetamine is one of the safest CNS stimulants available. It has basically no cardiac side effects to speak of, in stark contrast to the levoamphetamine in Adderall... or caffeine, which is PRIMARILY a cardiac and PNS stimulant that happens to have minor CNS stimulant properties as an accidental side effect.

    14. Re:Dont forget the low cost by sjames · · Score: 2

      And they wonder why people can't afford healthcare.

      That is outrageous.It's unfortunate that some people abuse methamphetamine but that's no excuse to make it so expensive for people using it legitimately. It really shouldn't cost much more than generic aspirin at this point.

    15. Re:Dont forget the low cost by TubeSteak · · Score: 2

      I have insurance companies tell me all the time that they would rather I use one of the cheaper alternatives if OxyContin comes up.

      Methadone is dirt cheap, but its use as a painkiller is leading to its outsized share of overdose fatalities.
      It's being prescribed by general practitioners who aren't monitoring patients like they do in methadone clinics, leading to accidental overdoses.
      Nationally, methadone represents 2% of prescriptions and 30% of fatalities.

      The CDC's websites have some information:
      http://www.cdc.gov/features/vitalsigns/methadoneoverdoses/
      http://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/MethadoneOverdoses/

      But what they don't tell you is that these deaths are highly concentrated amongst those on Medicaid
      "In Washington, the poor have been hit the hardest. While Medicaid recipients make up about 8 percent of Washington's adult population, they account for 48 percent of the methadone deaths."

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    16. Re:Dont forget the low cost by Yomers · · Score: 1

      This site does not have any PM system? I could send you insulin by post from Thailand, payment after you receive it, no prepament at all - I just need you address.

    17. Re:Dont forget the low cost by rylin · · Score: 1

      Funny.
      I was on OxyContin (timed release) and OxyNorm (quick release) for about a year.
      I paid roughly $90 for that.

      Then again, we have socialized healthcare where I live.

      Unsubsidized, $90 would cover roughly one month.
      And that's the 40mg ones. 5s and 20s are cheaper.

    18. Re:Dont forget the low cost by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      And, yes, I think Rush is in the top 1% of American income earners. Self made man, also. Kind of makes all the rest of us feel like worthless garbage, doesn't it.

      Considering how he makes his money, no, not really.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    19. Re:Dont forget the low cost by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Sweet arbitrage opportunity.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  3. History repeats itself by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Informative

    And of course, heroin itself was introduced as a "non-addictive" alternative to morphine.

    From Wikipedia:

    From 1898 through to 1910, diacetylmorphine was marketed under the trademark name Heroin as a non-addictive morphine substitute and cough suppressant. Bayer marketed the drug as a cure for morphine addiction before it was discovered that it rapidly metabolizes into morphine.

    Funny how history repeats itself.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    1. Re:History repeats itself by k6mfw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I cannot help but think of the huge numbers of people in this country are druggies whenever I read articles like this or all these drug commercials and ads. I'm talking about the "legal" ones which I think are higher numbers than your typical addicts that get non-regulated non-prescript from the dealer on the street. And then to think there was a time in China when much of the population were opium addicts which made much of the country dysfunctional and was easily overran by foreign powers (i.e. the Opium Wars). I see the USA going the same route. If I could wave the magic wand, my first would be to prohibit advertisements of prescription drugs on television and internet and magazines. Restrict it to only medical magazines and journals.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    2. Re:History repeats itself by reub2000 · · Score: 2

      And how many people are addicted to booze? People are looking for ways to alter their minds. Restricting advertising isn't going to do any good.

    3. Re:History repeats itself by swalve · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, oxycodone and heroin are two different drugs with different methods of delivery.

    4. Re:History repeats itself by rmdingler · · Score: 1

      Not so Kemosabe...opiate addicts use Senior Needle to administer Oxy too.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    5. Re:History repeats itself by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      Is there a pain-killer that isn't addictive?

    6. Re:History repeats itself by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Acetaminophen
      Aspirin
      NSAIDS (Ibuprofen and it's relatives)

      The problem is that they don't work as well and have other medical issues.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    7. Re:History repeats itself by Telvin_3d · · Score: 2

      Restricting advertising isn't going to do any good.

      It's illegal to advertise any prescription drug in Canada. Makes a huge difference. Also makes US television commercials seem unwatchable by comparison. A full third of them seem to be for drugs.

    8. Re:History repeats itself by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      If I could wave the magic wand, my first would be to prohibit advertisements of prescription drugs on television and internet and magazines.

      IIRC, it used to be prohibited in the USA. And (IIRC) ads for lawyers as well.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    9. Re:History repeats itself by zazzel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's something fundamentally wrong with the "there's a drug for everything!"-attitude in the U.S. I've been brought up by my parents to know that a) most small aches go away anyways, b) medication ALWAYS comes with side effects and c) I should go for the causes of my problems, not the symptoms.

      So, in essence, even for most cases of diagnosed "depression" (not: clinical depression!) these days, I would rather look for changes to my life style (work environment, friends, family, sports, food...) than take medication.

      ESPECIALLY considering the absurd cost of prescription drugs and the insane marketing pressure behind them.

    10. Re:History repeats itself by reub2000 · · Score: 1

      So, in essence, even for most cases of diagnosed "depression" (not: clinical depression!) these days, I would rather look for changes to my life style (work environment, friends, family, sports, food...) than take medication.

      Most of the time the doctors are just writing prescriptions for placebos. No harm done.

    11. Re:History repeats itself by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I like the advertising being out there for one reason - side effects. The worse doctors don't seem to want to discuss side effects, and it's good to go in somewhat informed and know the right questions to ask.

    12. Re:History repeats itself by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      I think your history is a bit off the mark. I was taught that the Opium Wars were initiated by the Brits to force China to allow the Brits to import opium - a substance produced in Britain's colony, India, that the Chinese government wanted to ban. Yes, Britain had a superior military force, but that was because of their superior technology, not some sort of drug stupor that all of China was in.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    13. Re:History repeats itself by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Suicide?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  4. 1% is probably true for all opiates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The vast majority of people who are prescribed opiates do not become addicted to them. Most people who have try heroin or cocaine do not become junkies/fiends who destroy their lives in an attempt to stay high all the time. The "one hit and you're hooked for life" thing is just prohibition propaganda.

    1. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by PeterM+from+Berkeley · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure. I think virtually everyone who is on opiates for any length of time becomes habituated to them and suffers withdrawal if they're not careful about how they come off the drug. Maybe that's not what you'd call "addiction", but it sure smells like it to me.

      --PeterM

    2. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please define "any length of time." The vast majority of patients who are prescribed opiates don't take them for much longer than for an acute pain issue whether it's trauma, surgery, or otherwise. The vast majority don't get "habituated" to them. Yes, opioid misuse and abuse is a serious concern, but your implication that anyone who fills the prescription and takes a pill two separate times will become an addict is downright wrong.

    3. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by sdguero · · Score: 3, Informative

      How many people do you know that have tried heroin and not gotten addicted? How many people do you know that have been "prescribed" heroin? I can think of one person, a roommate I had in college that got violently ill after trying heroin and never did it again. I also know several people that have gone the other route, tried the stuff, loved it, and had sustained heroin addictions for at least a couple months before weaning off. That or they never quit and are now either dead or lost to me. In my experience, heroin addiction is remarkably similar to oxy addiction but is VASTLY different from cocaine (It's not an opiate!!!). The only drug I have seen that is more destructive than heroin/oxy (i.e. opiates) is meth. Meth is really really fucked up.

      Seeing your buddy quit a "mild" oxy addiction cold turkey is enough to make someone never want to touch the stuff. It is brutal.

    4. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by jersey_emt · · Score: 1

      What you are describing is physical dependence, not addiction.

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    5. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by radtea · · Score: 1

      The "one hit and you're hooked for life" thing is just prohibition propaganda.

      Depends on the person. I had one shot of morphine medically as a teenager and I would never, ever go near any optiate ever again. It just feels too fucking good.

      On the other hand, I know people who've had morphine and found themselves thinking, "What's the big deal? When do I get this awesome warm glow people talk about?"

      Anecdata, for sure, but not implausible, and not inconsistent with the notion that while the majority of people don't face any major issues with most drugs (except meth, which has clinically observable and apparently permanent effects on brain structure in just a few hits) there is a small population of adicits who cause the big problems--although the problems the cause aren't nearly as severe as the prohibitionist policies that misguided moralists often engage to deal with them.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    6. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by pepax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I tried heroin once. Back in my hitch-hiking days I smoked it (believe it or not) with one of the drivers. It was absolutely wonderful. It felt like I just totally aced a toughest college exam. A complete euphoria. Pure happiness. In fact, it was so wonderful that I decided not try it ever again, because I could see how easily one can become addicted to it. But I did not get addicted. Then again, even back then, I was a motivated student, and my goal was to pursue science. Wasting my life doing drugs wasn't my plan. I might possibly try it again, given a chance, since it's now been almost 20 years. I am not planning on seeking it out, though, and I don't hitch-hike anymore, so I don't think it's going to happen, which is probably for the better.

    7. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How many people do you know that have tried heroin and not gotten addicted?

      Quite a few, actually. A lot of people I knew experimented with heroin at my college, and very few (if any) developed an addiction. I don't think the overall percentage is 1%, but I don't think most people will get physically addicted on first use.

      As for psychological addiction ("loving the stuff"), that's a different story. But the notion of psychological addition and the "addictive personality" is mostly a cultural construct anyway. Not entirely, since some people clearly have a biological susceptibility to certain chemicals -- but mostly.

      Everyone has emotional pain in their lives, but if a person can't resist the urge to constantly turn to intoxicants to make that pain go away, saying that they have an "addictive personality" is basically a gussied-up way of saying that they lack self-control and the ability to make rational choices. They haven't learned to say "no" to the bratty toddler inside them; they expect to get what they want, when they want it, and can't handle the fact that life is both pleasure and pain, joy and disappointment, excitement and boredom.

      ("Oh, but it's not their fault, they have an addictive personality"...well, nothing is anyone's fault then, is it? What bad or destructive act can a person commit that can't be blamed on society, parents, or biology? At what point do we say that a person has some free will, and if they're a shitty person it's their own fault more than anyone else's?)

    8. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by TheRecklessWanderer · · Score: 1

      I have one ex-coworker, and one ex-friend who both destroyed their lives (or rather had their lives destroyed) by oxy-contin. The ex-co-worker used to grind it up and snort it. When he was terminated, he got a nice severance package, i hope he survived.

      --
      Mean what you say...say what you mean.
    9. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by sjames · · Score: 1

      I have been on prescribed opiates a couple times. Each time I ended up stopping before the prescription was done. I didn't miss them (and certainly didn't miss the pain they were prescribed for). Sure, it's anecdotal but others I know have the same experience and I don't know anyone who suffered withdrawal, so I'd guess it is less than virtually everyone.

      Oxy might be worse about it, in part because doctors were told addiction wasn't a concern, so they might have been less cautious about dosing and duration of treatment. I wonder if the extended release combined with not using an NSAID adjunct is actually part of the problem.

    10. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by SternisheFan · · Score: 2

      That's opiate addiction for you. As a rule, addicts are selfish people, it's what their addiction demands. Take away the addiction, and you might have a normal, selfless person again, though some people will always be jerks, such is people. I've learned kids start out by raiding their parent's pills (medecine chest), when their parents get wise and lock away their medecine, now the kid is cut off from his/her supply and has to go look elsewhere. (And perhaps the kid has learned that if you crush and snort the pills, you get the pills time released dosage all at once, major rush. Now the kid is hooked for sure. "Friends" show them to heroin dealers, and now the kid usually has to steal to get the money for the dealer. Burglarizing homes is the easiest method, stealing cars for the catalytic converters is another. One kid I talked to told me he stole 30 cars a day! I asked him where his morals were, he just said nothing. Unless you can afford the addiction, you have to steal to satisfy it. Addicts are really the hardest working people. They wake up from their last shot with no money on them, but you can bet that by the end of the day they'll have hustled up that money some way or another. People never intend to become addicts. Some wouldn't steal no matter how bad the withdrawl gets. Bottom line, love the addict, but hate addiction. It might be your kid someday.

    11. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by TheRecklessWanderer · · Score: 1

      I understand your sentiment, but I reject it. People do things, they should live with the consequences. If you take drugs, you take drugs. Unless someone pinned you down and injected or whatever it into you, then you took the drug. It's a slippery slope, yes it is, so the best thing to do is not start down the path.

      --
      Mean what you say...say what you mean.
    12. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by similar_name · · Score: 1

      If you take one Lorcet you're not going to have any withdrawal from it. At some point a certain amount of opiate over a certain period of time creates noticeable and increasing withdrawal symptoms. I think that's all the parent was saying. Properly dosed and administered the chance of addiction should be low. Of course there is always Suboxone to treat opiate addiction. Ironically, it's also an opiate and addictive.

    13. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      I understand your sentiment, but I reject it. People do things, they should live with the consequences. If you take drugs, you take drugs. Unless someone pinned you down and injected or whatever it into you, then you took the drug. It's a slippery slope, yes it is, so the best thing to do is not start down the path.

      I respect and understand your opinion. On Long Island where I live it's an epidemic, opiate abuse. Good kids, they don't all have fully developed maturity, though you'ld think with all the public awareness campaigns that there wouldn't be such a large problem.

    14. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      No it's not addiction, it's habituation. Addiction is defined as inappropriate use of a drug. Habituation is when you need more and more of a drug to get the same effect and suffer from ill effects when you stop the drug.

      The terms are, unfortunately, poorly understood.

      Note that habituation can occur with a lot of drugs that one might not expect - caffeine, antidepressants and many other drugs that work on the brain.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    15. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by NJRoadfan · · Score: 1

      Doesn't grinding it up defeat the time release the manufacturer boasts about?

    16. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by mellyra · · Score: 1

      How many people do you know that have tried heroin and not gotten addicted?

      Because why trust statistics when we can share anecdotes instead?

      According to the NIDA it is estimated that "about 23 percent of individuals who use heroin become dependent on it".

      According to the 2011 Monitoring the Future" report about 1.4% of 12th graders have tried heroin at some point within their lifetime (which is a lower level than the late 90s but has been stable since 2003).

    17. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by Yomers · · Score: 1

      Opiates are really addictive. I have friends who used to be junkies, now they live normal lives but if they see possibility of getting the stuff - they just can not control themselves. So from what I see this urge does not go away, stays with them for a lifetime.

    18. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Doesn't grinding it up defeat the time release the manufacturer boasts about?

      Sure does. Start out just swallowing the pill as it's intended to be used. someone clues the user in on the 'rush' of getting all the effects at once by crushing the pill to powder. Then it's swallowed or snorted, and you've got yourself a full blown addict. The next step would be snorting heroin, when that's not enough, injecting via needle. After some time the veins used collapse, forcing the user to use any 'good' veins left. I worked for a former hard core heroin addict, he told me about when he was in a Harlem shooting gallery, a place where you can go and shoot up. He watched another guy who had his shot ready, but couldn't find a usable vein. The guy got frantic, then smiled, and injected it directly into the large blue vein of his dick! I doubt that guy lived much longer after that vein finally collapsed. Addiction is a terrible thing.

    19. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by jersey_emt · · Score: 1

      No, physical dependence is most definitely not addiction. This is a very common misconception, one that even many doctors believe.

      Take for example a chronic pain patient who has been taking opioids for an extended period of time to manage their pain. They take it exactly as prescribed, do not get high, never run out of medication early, and do not constantly ask for a higher dose (unless their condition worsens or because of tolerance). They take opioids because it treats their severe pain well enough for them to lead a normal life and to be able to work full-time.

      These patients of course have developed a physical dependence on the opioids, and if the underlying cause of their pain is cured, they will need to taper down their dosage to avoid physical withdrawal symptoms.

      But they are certainly not all addicted to opioids.

      --
      My spoon is too big.
    20. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      I once asked a former boss, himself a former hard core heroin addict, "What is so great about heroin?" He was driving us to a job, and I watched his eyes get a 'far off' look as he thought about it. Basically he told me that when on it, everything is wonderful, nothing bothers yo. It's a cheat and a lie, of course, a false reality. I know a guy hooked on pain pills, you'll never convince him he's an addict, after all , he's got a doctor issued prescription. To his mind, having a prescription from a doctor means he doesn't have a drug problem, even though he has no actual physical pain, which is the only good reason for these legal opiates. He takes the pill for the effects, to go back to his "La-La land world". It's sad to see, I'm just SO grateful I don't live in that world, it's not a real life, and nothing ever gets done.

    21. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by Chickan · · Score: 1

      The problem is drugs DO make you feel good. They make you feel great. That is what keeps you coming back for more, until you are physically or psychologically dependent. You don't feel like shit until you sober up, then you want more.

    22. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by TheRecklessWanderer · · Score: 1

      Yes it does. For him, that was the point.

      --
      Mean what you say...say what you mean.
    23. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by metaforest · · Score: 1

      I had a similar experience in my late 20's. Smoked a cigarette dipped in diluted "brown sugar" A cigarette prepared in this manner used to be called a 'Sherm'. (maybe still is)

      It was fantastic. The most amazing most peaceful clarity of mind and spirit I could have imagined at that point in my life. Of course it was the drug messing with my brain chemistry. I knew very well it was highly addictive. It scared me really badly that I liked it so much. I would go so far as to say it haunted me that I liked it so much.

      I very quickly distanced myself from those that had anything to do with it or any other opiates. I never tried it again.

      The only way I'd ever put opiates (licit or illicit) in my body again is if I was on death's door, with no hope of survival, and I needed that kind of relief to be at peace.

      I have had broken ribs, back injury etc. since then... I'd rather deal with the pain (meditation works surprisingly well at least for me) than risk another dance with that Succubus.

    24. Re:1% is probably true for all opiates by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1
      You should probably look up the definition of addiction. Addiction is defined as

      compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal;

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  5. lies, damn lies by craftycoder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The son of a colleague of mine chewed up a few at a party and promptly over dosed. Happy 19th birthday kid, you dead.

    1. Re:lies, damn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If it was OxyContin, then he probably died from acetominophen overdose. They add huge amounts (near lethal doses) to keep people from taking too many pills. Unfortunately, some people don't read the label nor understand the toxicity of Tylenol.

    2. Re:lies, damn lies by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Informative

      If it was OxyContin, then he probably died from acetominophen overdose. They add huge amounts (near lethal doses) to keep people from taking too many pills. Unfortunately, some people don't read the label nor understand the toxicity of Tylenol.

      And unfortunately, reading comprehension is a problem with at least some ACs.

      Oxycontin DOES NOT have acetaminophen (Tylenol for USer's, paracetamol for the rest of the world).

      Percocet, Roxicet and various other short acting formulations do.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:lies, damn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He died from a case of stupid.

    4. Re:lies, damn lies by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Is it any wonder this gets confusing? Every drug has a minimum of three different names: The unpronounceable chemical name, the generic name, and the brand name. But most of them are sold under many, many brand names in different countries and by different manufactuers, and sometimes even by one manufacturer in one country. Even the one you refered to you have to mention under three different names, and that's before you even get into formulation differences and different regulatory classification schemes. Only a specialist could hope to keep track of them all.

    5. Re:lies, damn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a pharmacist, I can tell you that Oxycontin DOES NOT have any acetaminophen (APAP) in it. However, Percocet and its various generics do.

    6. Re:lies, damn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Only a specialist could hope to keep track of them all.

      Even specialists sometimes can't. One of the problems with our health care system is that the sheer amount of medications have overwhelmed the average doctor's ability to keep up. Pharmacists are typically much better, but that's because they focus entirely on prescription drugs.

      Then again, at no time in our history have we, the patients, had as much information at our fingertips. There are online drug databases where we can look up information on the prescriptions we take. It's beyond stupid to take any drug without reading the 2-3 pages of text on precautions, interactions and other general information. Google searches will yield even more information. If you have any concerns, it's very easy to bring your concerns to a pharmacist who will most likely be able to help you on the spot or will, at a minimum, look up the information necessary and figure out how to answer your questions.

    7. Re:lies, damn lies by Anne_Nonymous · · Score: 1

      Clearly Purdue Pharma is to blame.

    8. Re:lies, damn lies by Mashiki · · Score: 2

      Ah crock of shit. What a crock of shit, I take endocet(oxycodone hcl 5mg/acetaminophen 325mg) every 4-6 hours as required for my back along with long acting Hydromorphone(10mg twice daily). And I'll be honest, if I didn't I couldn't even function, I fractured my C2 and C3 a few years ago, and let's be honest here. I'm damn lucky I didn't die from it, or am a paraplegic, or partially crippled(though I would be without the pain killers--though from people who read my posts this would explain why there is sometimes a lack of coherence, especially between that and the 60mg of baclofen I take for the spasms).

      Now before I was on the endocet, my family doctor gave me tylenol 3's(that's 325+30mg codine) and I was taking two of those every 4hrs and it wouldn't do shit, but before that regular over the counter acetaminophen w/codeine didn't do shit. And here in Canada, you get them without a prescription. Now his advice was "as many as you could stomach, not exceeding 20 in a 24hr period" yeah that's a lot of pills(325x20=6500mg acetaminophen+codine) . And I was in a lot of pain. Needless to say, I'm still alive, and my liver is fine.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    9. Re:lies, damn lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      your liver would be better off w/o the tylenol. it is extremely hepatoxic at high enough doses, period. you'd function fine without the tylenol and just the pure opiates. the dea pushes doctors into rx'ing drugs that will harm junkies but this ends up hurting lots of people that take opiates medically.

      also, for "naive" opiate users, the lethal dose can be quite low. my granfather takes methadone for pain. according to wikipedia, if I took five of his pills (which is a very, very low dose compared to heroin addicts on methadone therapy) I could actually die from respiratory failure. fun facts!

    10. Re:lies, damn lies by Warhawke · · Score: 1

      My dad had been prescribed Oxycontin following a painful surgery but had to dispose of his medication when he found himself starting to get addicted. He had asked about breaking the pills apart so as to take smaller doses, and the doctor blanched. Apparently the time-release portion of Oxycontin has to do with a coating of the pill that takes longer for your stomach acid to digest. If you chew it up or break it apart, the slow-fuse release no longer works, and you metabolize it all at once. Apparently this is one of the leading causes of overdose on Oxycontin.

    11. Re:lies, damn lies by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Plenty of folks drink themselves dead, so what?

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    12. Re:lies, damn lies by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      Four different names for Oxycontin. The unpronounceable chemical name, the generic name, the brand name, and the mispronounced name.

      How many people have you heard call Oxycontin "Oxycotton"? Damned near everyone, even reporters on television.

    13. Re:lies, damn lies by tsotha · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the guy most likely just stopped breathing.

    14. Re:lies, damn lies by Alastair+Gilfillan · · Score: 1

      Only a specialist could hope to keep track of them all.

      I doubt any database has a full listing of all of the names. In the designer scene, names are being decided upon by committee (read: IRC channel/forum) after people are already taking these substances or they're pulled after a fatality before being christened.

      Being able to recognise a non-proprietary name of the few most-consumed non-prescription compounds is a bit of a worry though (paracetamol, ibuprofen).

      Sent from my generic iPhone-like device.

    15. Re:lies, damn lies by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      Plenty of folks drink themselves dead, so what?

      That's a slower death, takes decdes, but it'll still get you there via liver failure. Alcohol IS a drug, the FDA has recognized it as a drug for a couple decades now, I believe. It's legal, and is the worst drug, ravaging to lives and relationships, imho. I finally quit it over 6 years now, beer was my problem, turns out. Gave up pot last year, and it's such a great feeling to have a fully sober and repaired brain again. I take life on life's terms now, and I'm frickin' grateful today. Grateful for the day I wake to, whatever the weather is. For anyone struggling with any alcohol/drug issues, from my 53 year old viewpoint, I would highly reccomend sobriety. If it's for real pain, then use prescribed drugs as suggested, and get off them as soon as you can. There's too many people suffering from drug abuse and alcohol abuse, and if they just stopped banging their head against the proverbial wall, in time, the 'pain' goes away. Have a great day, all. :-)

    16. Re:lies, damn lies by organgtool · · Score: 1

      Of course he was stupid - he was 19! Your tone of smug superiority is sickening and I'm sure people who know you well would be happy to point out the stupid things you did at that age. You were just lucky enough that none of those things happened to kill you. Try gaining a sense of empathy - it'll help you appear like you're a human being.

    17. Re:lies, damn lies by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

      He died from a case of stupid.

      To be fair, it's more like ignorance about drugs.

  6. More hype and angst by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Another Slashdot 'article' full of slant and hyperbole.

    Yep, Purdue over marketed the drug, Pharma always does that.
    No, it was never considered 'safe' - oxycodone has always been DEA schedule II (the most 'dangerous of legal drugs').
    What isn't discussed is that the reason that long acting opiates were allowed by the FDA was the increasing realization that medicine has done a historically poor job of treating pain.

    Now, allopathic medicine has used, and continues to use a very immature and inadequate model both pain control and addiction. The former is hobbled by limited good research on the issue and the fact that the opiates (heroin, morphine, oxycodone and similar drugs) have been the most effective against serious pain while being significantly addictive. The latter hobbled by addiction being both a legal and a medical problem in the US. The legal system and the medical system tend to work poorly with each other and this is not an exception to that rule.

    And I've not even started on the human propensity to stuff whatever it can down it's collective gullet in order to achieve some different level of consciousness.

    Yep, Purdue did some poor marketing and a lot of docs (for some bizarre reason) fell for it, but they are hardly the only players in the game.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    1. Re:More hype and angst by aabrown · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree with you for the most part, but... Mr. allopathic: there are two kinds of medicine: medicine and NOT medicine (homeopathic, reiki, acupuncture, and the rest of the (S)CAM stuff). That is all.

    2. Re:More hype and angst by Sarten-X · · Score: 2

      Another Slashdot 'article' full of slant and hyperbole.

      My thoughts exactly. None of this is news (or even noteworthy) to anyone following the medical industry. Drug patents are not on just a chemical, but on exact formulations and their use to treat specific diseases in specific ways. Double the strength of each pill and have doctors prescribe one daily rather than two, and it's a new patentable drug. Mix in a practically-irrelevant bit of aspirin and it's a new combination that relieves symptoms and pain!

      It's not that Purdue was particularly evil in their marketing of the drug. They're no worse than anybody else. Of course, rather than decry the whole medicine business and its ludicrous inefficiencies and rent-seeking, the author picks one particular scapegoat for today's Two Minutes Hate.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    3. Re:More hype and angst by Nursie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With you right up until 'allopathic'. The use of that word outs you as an 'alternative' medicine nutjob.

      If the pain model used in medicine is immature and inadequate, it still represents the best we have. I very much hope that if it is immature and inadequate that some serious research is going into that area.

      Because any of the alt-med crap may as well have been pulled out of my butthole. I'd rather have immature than a blend of fantasy and charlatanry.

    4. Re:More hype and angst by Swarley · · Score: 1

      Acupuncture is based largely in astrology. Little more need be said about it.

    5. Re:More hype and angst by Warhawke · · Score: 1

      A few years ago I was saying the exact same thing, and I still have major reservations about homeopathic medicine, but I will be damned if I don't have first-hand experience of acupuncture therapy actually working.

      My cat had been hit by a car when she was chasing a squirrel across the road. Fortunately, the car tire only caught the very tail end of her (quite literally her tail and the vertebrae that connect it to hips). She survived, thankfully, due to us being there to take her to the emergency vet, but for a year her tail was completely and totally paralyzed. It was long and it would drag behind her, much to her irritation, and you could touch it and she would never notice. There was no measurable nerve function at all, and she stayed this way for the better part of twelve months.

      One of the vets techs at the clinic had been studying animal acupuncture in addition to her clinical rotations, which I thought was the most laughable thing in the world. But she was sweet and didn't like seeing our cat grumpy about tripping over her tail all the time, so she offered, along with the permissive curiosity of our vet, to perform acupuncture therapy sessions on her tail free of charge, just to see if anything would happen at all. Assured of zero risk to any further damage, and because I was curious and try to give anything its fair shot, we agreed.

      Two months later, my cat could not only lift her tail, she could swish and flick it with the same mobility she had prior to its injury. It was a recovery so amazingly rapid that I cannot scientifically attribute it to coincidence, especially considering the deterioration that had occurred in the twelve months prior. I'm still flabbergasted. My dad, who has since started massage therapy school and studies a combination of Western and Eastern healing techniques, basically summarized it best: "Each side has their own ideas, and each method maybe has its merits, but neither side has a complete picture. I can't say that energy channeling is as effective as pharmaceutical remedies, but then I can't say that pharmaceutical solutions are the only right solution, either. There's more to us than chemicals, and there's more to us than harmonic healing crystals. Both perspectives are wrong in that they think they have a complete picture, and while I don't have a good answer as to what is a complete picture, I sometimes wonder if that's not the point."

    6. Re:More hype and angst by Tinbuktu · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thank you, ColdWetDog

      I find that many people who have not personally experienced years of serious chronic pain tend not have the slightest idea of what they are talking about. For these people Oxycontin=Rush. That's all they really need to know. Nevermind the solid, repeated research that shows only 2% of chronic pain patients on long term opiate therapy become addicted. Nevermind the conflation of addiction and physical dependence. Nevermind the studies showing that when properly managed, long term opiate therapy is both safe and effective over periods of 20 years or longer. Nevermind the strict protocols in place for both doctor and patient when initiating chronic opiate therapy (COT) for chronic non-cancer pain (CNCP). Nevermind the legally binding agreement

      The truth is that for many people, opiates are the only medicine that provides relief from excruciating pain. But opiates do not make the pain go away, it only reduces the pain to the point where the other tools you are given - relaxation techniques, breathing, exercise, guided imagery, etc. to have a chance to make positive contributions to your condition.

      Frankly, I'm not at all surprised that the community here at Slashdot would hold long-ago disproven ideas and stereotypes about opiate therapy. It doesn't bother me all that much - it is human nature to fear what we do not understand (take Linux for example). I won't try to change your opinion. But I am truly offended by the large percentage of medical professionals who are both willfully ignorant and tragically arrogant on this issue. And because these medical professionals have no desire to enlighten themselves, many people who are in constant pain will not recieve the relief they need.

      "Fear paints pictures of ghosts and hangs
      them in the gallery of ignorance."

      ~Robert Green Ingersoll

    7. Re:More hype and angst by Bacon+Bits · · Score: 1

      Acupuncture has nothing to do with homeopathy.

      Homeopathy refers to a specific form of alternative medicine, and one that boggles the rational mind. The basis is that "like cures like". That is to say, if you are poisoned, you can cure it by exposing yourself to more poison. If you have a disease, you can cure it by exposing yourself to more disease. Wait, it gets better. They say that diluting the substance increases it's potency. A 1:1 solution is diluted to 1:10 (called X1) or 1:100 (X2), but can be diluted to 1:1000000 (X6) or more. There are dilutions that go up to X24 (1 part in 10^24, which often means there will be no actual molecules of the substance in the dilution) and even higher such as X60 and X400. Yes, that's 1 part in 10^400. So, how does the active ingredient work? Well, you see, it imprints itself on the water! Water has memory, and this causes the healing! Scientific testing has shown that homeopathic cures are (unsurprisingly) just as effective as placebo. James Randi has famously taken massive overdoses of homeopathic cures and suffered absolutely no ill effects (or any effects at all, truly).

      Acupuncture, on the other hand, has shown real beneficial effects under scientific observation, but it's mechanism of functioning is not well understood. That is to say, it works for many people but it's difficult to explain why and it does or does not. However, many organizations such as the WHO and NIH have recognized the benefits of acupuncture. There is debate about the efficacy of acupuncture, but at least it can be shown that you're doing something other than drinking water or eating a sugar pill.

      In short, I agree acupuncture probably helped your cat, but it is an insult to everybody involved to call it "homeopathy".

      --
      The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
    8. Re:More hype and angst by sjames · · Score: 1

      FYI, acupuncture for pain control has been demonstrated through blind studies and in fMRI.

    9. Re:More hype and angst by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      With you right up until 'allopathic'. The use of that word outs you as an 'alternative' medicine nutjob.

      With you right up until 'nutjob'. The use of that word outs you as a judgmental pedant.

      Whatever ColdWetDog's particular beliefs are, the facts remain the same: modern medicine's treatments for pain are indeed inadequate, but they're the best we have, and the American legal system treats addicts like societal scum who don't deserve help.

      Then, of course, there's another perspective that must be considered: by using the particular word, ColdWetDog's post preemptively excludes the inevitable posts claiming that mainstream medicine is terribly off-base, but this woo-woo treatment from the rainforests of northern Niger is so much better!

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    10. Re:More hype and angst by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Two months later, my cat could not only lift her tail, she could swish and flick it with the same mobility she had prior to its injury

      *obviously* the placebo effect...

    11. Re:More hype and angst by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Oh, I don't agree with what Purdue did and I'm glad they got caught on it. They did cross the line but the line is pretty blurry. I don't like that line and we would be much better off figuring out how to get medications out without the disaster that big Pharma has created.

      I was whining about the breathless nature of the article - it's more complex that it seems.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    12. Re:More hype and angst by thePig · · Score: 1

      You should really read about Ayurveda.
      This was/is a very widely used/implemented/tested set of traditional medicine in India, and can be very effective in many cases.
      The studies associated with it are not very scientific, and the efficacy of the medicine for many serious diseases are not very good compared to Allopathy, but it can be very effective for many types of diseases - especially minor but quite debilitating diseases.
      Do read about it, because it is not correct to completely disregard some types of medical practices without intimate knowledge about them.

      I had done a study myself - we come from a very large family of very accomplished doctors - all of them allopathic - and my current view is that the Homeopathy, Reiki etc are quite a sham, while Ayurveda is quite a serious area of science. YMMV though.

      --
      rajmohan_h@yahoo.com
    13. Re:More hype and angst by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      Not to misunderstand you, but it's not as if "Alternative" medicines founded in ignorance and general silliness don't often accidentally hit the nail on the head. My favorite on that score is Chiropractic manipulation. A history of well respected effectiveness at treating general pain, and it's considered useful as long as your practitioner doesn't actually believe in the pseudo-science behind it.

      I've never had it or acupuncture, but supposedly it too can be effective, although research is mixed and while slightly pro- than anti-, not exactly definitive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acupuncture#Effectiveness_research

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    14. Re:More hype and angst by Nursie · · Score: 1

      They try to fix things using the best techniques we have, based on the best evidence we have. If that ain't good enough for you then please, please come up with something better. The whole world will thank you.

      Alt med ain't it though. It's a mixture of ignorance and charltanry.

  7. Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 4, Informative

    I won't touch the stuff. My former dentist gave it to me for a toothache to last thru the weekend till I could be seen. Taking the recommended dose for 2 days and I was already hooked enough to experience withdrawal symptoms for the next 3 days. Unbelievable.

    On the next two occasions where I was offered the drug after surgery I said no, just give me ibuprofen. It's just not worth it.

    1. Re:Which is why... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe you have a predisposition for dependency. I took hydrocodone for about two weeks after having surgery, and the only part about it that I enjoyed was being pain free. I was more than happy to not have to take it anymore once I had healed enough.

    2. Re:Which is why... by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 2

      I took Oxycontin for kidney stones after increased tolerance from taking opiates over the years for kidney stones. With pain like that, it never goes away, but it made it tolerable. Apparently, I am an exception to the rule, but once the kidney stones were out of me, I felt no compulsion to take anymore. No kidney stones since, and nothing stronger than ibuprofen. Perhaps it is because I haven't gotten "high" off of a pain killer in 20 years. Regardless the reason, it really isn't black or white.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    3. Re:Which is why... by PRMan · · Score: 1

      I had surgery on my finger recently and didn't bother to fill the pain medication prescription (it's just a cut finger, come on). Ibuprofen DID help the pain significantly, and for a lot less than $18.40 for a single dose (all I would have needed).

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    4. Re:Which is why... by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      The worst I had from taking the things for my dental surgery was a mild hangover like brain fuzz/ache after waking up each day.

    5. Re:Which is why... by redmid17 · · Score: 1

      The the pain was from inflammation or the effect was entirely related to the placebo effect

    6. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Appendectomy and cholecystectomy. I'd say both are pretty invasive. Of course in the hospital right after the surgery they gave me dilaudid or something similar (still bad, but highly limited in use). It was after that first day when they wanted to give me a Rx for a week's worth of oxycodone pills and I said no. Ibuprofen and tylenol, that was it. Just enough to take the edge off.

    7. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that's the withdrawal. For me it felt like I had the worst flu ever. Massive headache, body aches, chills, nausea. It was pretty awful. I actually had to continue taking it and wean down for 3 days.

    8. Re:Which is why... by geekoid · · Score: 1

      withdrawal doesn't equal hooked.
      You can have withdrawal symptoms from non addictive medications or drugs.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    9. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Umm, I'm pretty sure that's exactly what it means. Unless you're talking about psychological dependence, which is something completely different.

    10. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      No, I acknowledged that one day of an opioid is my limit and only when absolutely necessary. After that, when the doctors are more than willing to keep pushing the stuff on me like a corner dealer I say "no thank you".

    11. Re:Which is why... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Addiction is psychological. Dependency is physical.

      Most people use the term "hooked" to indicate a psychological desire to consume the substance because they enjoy the feeling.

      If you're taking smaller doses so you aren't miserable from physical withdrawal but couldn't care less about how they make you feel otherwise, you were not ever "hooked" according to the parlance common in every portion of the US I've ever lived in (so everywhere but the southwest and Great Plains states).

    12. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      So you're arguing semantics over your interpretation of the word "hooked"? I think it was pretty obvious I wasn't talking about a psychological dependence and therefore wasn't using the term in that way.

    13. Re:Which is why... by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      In relation to addiction, yes, the semantics is fairly important. There is an incredible amount of misinformation spread as a result of conflating "addiction" with "dependency." And yes, it was clear to me from your second post that you meant only the physical effects.

      I was simply noting that, in my experience, the usage of the term "hooked" has universally dealt with the psychological side (addiction), rather than the physical side (dependency).

      The distinction may seem to be pedantry to you; I don't feel the same. My post was not intended as a slight, but was intended to highlight the problem with confusing two very distinct aspects of drug use. You may know exactly what you meant, but I've encountered many others who have approached the discussion the same way and come away with the opposite conclusion. My post may not have any worth to you, but if it has worth to others who may have been confused it has served its purpose.

    14. Re:Which is why... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Sorry buddy. We can't help you out. You'll have to get it yourself.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    15. Re:Which is why... by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      There not pushing it on you like a corner dealer. They are offering you something to relieve the pain. If they wanted to give it to you after the reasonable recovery period then you could make such a claim. You sound like an over-reacting loon at this point.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    16. Re:Which is why... by sjames · · Score: 1

      If you up the dosage of ibuprofen from the usual 200mg to 800mg (aka grunt candy) it is actually quite effective on all types of pain (but not as strong as when combined with opiates).

    17. Re:Which is why... by StormReaver · · Score: 1

      On the next two occasions where I was offered the drug after surgery I said no, just give me ibuprofen. It's just not worth it.

      I can't imagine taking Ibuprofen for after-surgery pain management. The stuff has no effect on me beyond helping a minor headache. After my hemorrhoid surgery, I was prescribed a small dose and small supply of Hydrocodone, and a larger supply of Ibuprofen. The Hydrocodone completely shut off my pain for about two hours, with the Ibuprofen supposed to carry me through for the next two hours; at which time, I could take another dose of Hydrocodone.

      At about the three hour mark, I was in quite a bit of discomfort; so I took the Ibuprofen as prescribed. It took the worst of the bite out of the pain, but just barely. After I was able to take the Hydrocodone again, the pain went away for a couple more hours. This repeated for the entire two and a half weeks I spent recovering from the surgery (the doctor didn't prep the area correctly, so I ended painfully re-injuring the surgical wound many times).

      I had to refill the Hydrocodone prescription four or five times, since the doctor would prescribe only a few days' worth at a time. Near the point where I thought I should check the progress of my pain, I cut back to half the prescription. I did this a few times, as each time, the pain was still there (largely because of inadvertently ripping the surgical wound several times). But eventually, I reached a point where the pain was so minimal, I didn't need the pain killers anymore. I felt no desire to keep taking them, since they blunted my mind. I may be an exception (or may not be), but I just don't understand the big fear of addiction surrounding Hydrocodone. It's a great pain killer with minimal side effects (don't drive, etc.). I would not only take it in a heartbeat if I ever needed another surgery, but would demand nothing less.

    18. Re:Which is why... by under_score · · Score: 1

      I recently dropped a PS3 on my toe, broke the nail mostly off and broke the bone. Hurt like hell! I went to the hospital to have it looked at. The doctor gave me local freezing (which incidentally only affects pain receptors, not heat/cold receptors). He tore my nail the rest of the way off, dressed the wound. Then he gave me a prescription for pain killers. I asked him, "is the pain going to be any worse than what I originally felt when I dropped the PS3 on my foot?" He said it wouldn't be. I didn't fill the prescription.

    19. Re:Which is why... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nope. The NSAIDs (ibuprofen, etc) ARE analgesics - they work directly on the pain pathways. They ALSO are (weak) anti inflammatories and inflammation often plays a part of pain.

      And it's also in your head (where else would it be?).

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    20. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      Everyone is different I guess. I must be very susceptible to it, and you just the opposite.

    21. Re:Which is why... by jittles · · Score: 1

      You must become easily addicted to things. Do you have the same problem with caffeine? I had a very invasive and painful surgery on my shoulder, with complications after the fact and was taking 2- 10x325 perocets every 4 hours for over a month and I only felt a little bit of discomfort coming off the medication. It lasted a day or two were I had the sniffles and felt a little achy.

      Of course someone above also said that caffeine is significantly worse than the side-effects from stopping habitual pot smoking. I wouldn't know. I am completely unaffected by caffeine and have never had a headache (or had one get better) by drinking or not drinking it. I think I read a study somewhere indicating that people with certain enzymes in their liver can metabolize caffeine so fast that it has almost no effect on them. This could be my issue.

      I will say that there are pain meds that are far stronger and more effective than hydro or oxycodone. If you cannot go 2 days without having problems with hydrocodone (what they usually prescribe for a toothache), then I strongly recommend you do not touch any other, more effective pain meds. In fact you may want to stick with tramadol or darvocet if you ever need a narcotic pain medicine. Something like Fentanyl is very effective, but your body gets used to its presence very quickly, and it is very uncomfortable to stop taking it. There are people in this world who would be miserable without such drugs, due to accidents or injuries. While these medications can often make them feel bad in other ways, it can also help people who would otherwise consider suicide and such things to end physical pain.

    22. Re:Which is why... by TomJetland · · Score: 1

      When I had my Appendectomy (old style, not key-hole) I woke up 8 hours afterwards and had zero pain!

      It never hurt once, even though the nurse told me they were authorised to give me pain relief all the way up to morphine if I needed it. I assumed they gave me something after the surgery which hid the immediate pain for a day or two.

    23. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      It was the same for me when I had my gall bladder taken out. I was woozy, and it definitely smarted, but I was never really in any serious pain when whatever they gave me wore off. I wasn't in the hospital long either, just a few hours and then home.

      My appendectomy was a different story. I wound up with a post-op infection and was in the hospital for a week. They gave me one of those "push the button to get high" devices with dilaudid. but I think I used it maybe 2 or 3 times and then switched to tylenol.

    24. Re:Which is why... by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      It's entirely possible. I can quite easily get caffeine withdrawal headaches if I drink too much coffee and then stop.

      Funny you mention tramadol cause I actually have a bottle of the stuff and use it once in awhile for when I get my special tension headaches that ibuprofen or tylenol doesn't even dent. It makes me a little loopy but I feel no pain and have never yet had to take more than one.

      I can't even imagine what it would be like to be in so much pain that you're willing to become addicted to pain killers for relief. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

    25. Re:Which is why... by jittles · · Score: 1

      It's entirely possible. I can quite easily get caffeine withdrawal headaches if I drink too much coffee and then stop.

      Funny you mention tramadol cause I actually have a bottle of the stuff and use it once in awhile for when I get my special tension headaches that ibuprofen or tylenol doesn't even dent. It makes me a little loopy but I feel no pain and have never yet had to take more than one.

      I can't even imagine what it would be like to be in so much pain that you're willing to become addicted to pain killers for relief. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

      You must be especially sensitive to them. Maybe you have extra Mu receptors or something? I can take a tramadol and not feel a thing. In fact, I had a really bad neck and head injury from playing ice hockey a few years ago and the neurologist I saw for the concussion only wanted to give him tramadol and anti-depressants. He insisted that the pain I was feeling was due to depression and couldn't possibly have been to the recent physical trauma I had experienced.

      If you get hurt badly enough, you'll find that there are few things you would refuse to do to ease the pain. And for most people, the addiction they feel from those opiods is from physical dependency more than anything else. The people who abuse them for the high they feel would likely abuse alcohol or something else in its place. But for some people they literally have two choices: A) Stay in bed in complete pain and misery or B) take some meds that don't make them feel all that great, but allow them to try and live their lives. It's a choice that one hopes they never have to make.

  8. Patenting the active ingredient? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    I don't know how hard is was to introduce that time-release element. However easy it is to defeat it, it might just be a bit harder to come up with than "xyz with rounded corners" or "abc, but on teh interwebz", thus worthy of a patent. And if they indeed patented their proprietary time-release coating rather than the idea of applying such a coating to this specific ingredient, it would seem trivial for other pharma companies to circumvent the patent.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Patenting the active ingredient? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      If this was a computer thing, the company wouldn't have patented just their time-release system. They'd also have patented 'use of a time-release mechanism for delivery of drugs' to make sure someone else couldn't just invent an alternative.

      While the pharmacutical industry is certainly very patent-driven, they havn't yet reached the point of routinely using the over-broad patents now common in computing and consumer electronics.

    2. Re:Patenting the active ingredient? by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      That's probably because, if you think computer industry battles are bad, the scorched earth tactics used against a pharma company who tried that would probably end up in the implosion of the pharma industry and/or a complete patent system overhaul. Nobody wants either. Nobody with money, anyway.

  9. CBC The Fifth Estate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you live in Canada, CBC put out an excellent documentary about Perdue Pharma labs and oxydone marketing: http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2011-2012/timebomb/

  10. I like the effort at sensationalism... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Note: when trying to be sensationalist, pick some element that's not already common knowledge to the people you're trying to get agitated.

    Yes. oxycodone is "legal heroin" -- i.e. a synthetic opioid that's supposedly just like heroin but safe and addiction-resistant, just as heroin was "legal morphine" -- a synthetic opioid that's supposedly just like morphine but safe and addiction-resistant. In both cases, it's not really a whole hell of a lot different (in heroin's case, it metabolizes to morphine; oxycodone is different and acts through a different receptor, so the "legal x" label is less justified), but a big pharmaceutical company persuades everyone it's safe, produces it for a while with no legal competition (because the drug is patented, and whatever drug it replaced is effectively banned), then everyone realizes it's just another opioid with all the risks you'd expect. Meanwhile, the manufacturer is rolling in profits from their restricted competition, and moves on to the next one.

    Everyone knows this -- everyone knows the odds of any drug being able to deliver effective pain relief on the order of opioids being otherwise benign and non-recreationally usable is vanishingly low. But we play along, choosing to believe the new drug really is harmless this time, because we're scared that if anyone could legally sit around getting high all day until they go broke or OD, then everyone would, and because we're not willing to ban all painkillers for people who legitimately need them -- and the drug companies play along, persuading us each new drug is as safe as we want to believe, because they make big bucks.

    It may be a lamentable state of affairs, but when everybody already knows about it, it's hardly any use for sensationalism...

    1. Re:I like the effort at sensationalism... by Hatta · · Score: 3, Informative

      oxycodone is different and acts through a different receptor

      No, oxycodone acts primarily through the mu opioid receptor just like morphine.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:I like the effort at sensationalism... by fafalone · · Score: 3, Informative

      oxycodone is different and acts through a different receptor

      No it doesn't. It has different selectivity and binding affinity among the subtypes of opioid receptors, but acts through the same receptor as heroin (i.e. predominantly the mu-opioid receptor) and every other drug classified as a full agonist opioid.

    3. Re:I like the effort at sensationalism... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      We're both right. Oxycodone affects both mu and kappa receptors, with mu agonism being responsible for most of its analgesic action.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  11. I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

    After I donated my Kidney to my son, I was given Oxy for pain management....I hardly used the PCA when I was still in the recovery/observation unit...the nurse had to remind me. So when they gave me the Oxy, I started taking it for a few days on a 6 hour schedule. I decided to hold a dose on the 3rd day I was taking it and the most pain I felt was the punching of the staples (the removed the kidney through my belly using laparoscopicprocedures) I did feel like crap though, run down and a little irritated. That is when I knew I did not need the Oxy. My pain was no worse but my body was getting used to it so I went cold turkey and tossed the remaining 30 day supply (CVS drug disposal bag)

    1. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why in hell would you throw away a legal supply of opiate painkillers ? You put 'em in the back of the medicine cabinet, and take them with you on camping trips and such, so if a member of your party has a real problem (crushed limbs, deep lacerations, etc.) you have something for the pain on the way back out, or (worst case) waiting for a medevac.

    2. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I was on Oxy for 3 months for pain after cancer surgery on my kidney, it is an amazing pain killer, I tapered down my dose, and when I stopped, I was irritable for about 3 days. My surgery was not laporoscopic, so there was more pain. Oxy allowed me to get back on my feet, exercise and aided my recovery, It is NOT a drug to be taken lightly though, for the first time I experienced proper pain management.

      I have read the lurid tales of withdrawal agony, placebo effect works both ways.

    3. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      +1 if I had points. I have some left over vicodin (filled the prescription, never took it, thanks doc) for just this sort of emergency.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    4. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Don't be ridiculous. You take them with you on camping trips because being high as a kite on painkillers is the only way camping is remotely enjoyable.

    5. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Any emergency I have the requires Oxy would involve me being in a doctor's care and thus I would not need it.

    6. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 1

      Sorry.....no.

    7. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 1

      I'm not saying that I wouldn't do the same if I happened to have the medication in an emergency but let us be clear. Giving prescription drugs to someone who hasn't been prescribed them can be extremely dangerous especially if you don't know without any doubt that they aren't allergic to them. There is also the risk of complications when they are able to be treated by paramedics or when they reach hospital. The pills you gave them to dull the pain in the short term may react badly with later drugs or anaesthetic needed for surgery. Raising the possibility that your altruistic actions could cause serious harm to the person either through unanticipated drug reactions or delaying surgery.

      Aside from the safety concerns, giving prescription drugs to a person who hasn't been prescribed them is illegal and you open yourself up to prosecution for supplying narcotics. In a real emergency a prosecution probably isn't that likely but recommending that people hoard drugs so they can hand them out to others if necessary is pretty irresponsible.

    8. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      You lock them in a safe - not leave them in the back of a drug cabinet. Those pills are dangerous for stupid people, and there is no telling when some knuckle head may be in your bathroom.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
    9. Re:I had Oxy after my Donor surgery by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      It seems like you worry a lot. I don't like to worry. That's one of the reasons I keep a stock of opiates and encourage my friends to do the same. When I split my thumbnail with a power tool I was sure grateful for the pain relief, turned a potential late night 10 hour trip to the ER into a pleasant 1 hour trip to urgent care the next morning. I told the doc that I took a percodan from my personal stash to get through the night and he asked if I needed any more. He seemed pleased with my resourcefulness.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  12. This is nothing new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It amazing how Americans justify always going/being on "meds" like it's some kind of cool thing. I left the US for Europe about 15 years ago and am shocked by the current drug culture/mentality that has taken hold there. I'm glad I don't live there any more.

  13. The Oxycontin Express (Vanguard, CurrentTV) by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7DHMqHFSB8
    Watch it and you'll never touch that stuff without a long pole.

  14. Purdue Pharma are lyin' sacks of excrement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    My son died from an accidental overdose of Oxycontin and alcohol (moderate amounts of each) six months ago yesterday.

    Purdue knows how addictive their product is; they could do something to at least radically alleviate the problem; they refuse to.

    I have written much on this here:

    http://this-machine-kills-pharma.posterous.com/

    most recentlly (yesterday) here: http://this-machine-kills-pharma.posterous.com/occupy-purdue

    1. Re:Purdue Pharma are lyin' sacks of excrement by Hatta · · Score: 1

      As much as you want your son back, nobody can do anything to make mu opioid agonists less addictive. Purdue's marketing is absolutely dishonest, but if they had a way to make opioid analgesics non-addictive they would make a huge pile of money by displacing every other opioid analgesic on the market. Mu opioid receptors exhibit desensitization, that's just how they work.

      I'm sorry to hear of your loss, and keep up the good fight.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:Purdue Pharma are lyin' sacks of excrement by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Just a note: Oxycodone is a K-opioid, not a Mu-opioid.

    3. Re:Purdue Pharma are lyin' sacks of excrement by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Oxycodone is both, with predominantly mu opioid action.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Purdue Pharma are lyin' sacks of excrement by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I had someone disagree with that in a previous comment. I was going on something I had read quite a while ago, which appears to be in dispute.

  15. Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by trentfoley · · Score: 5, Informative

    I was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer almost one year ago (7 Oct 2011) and have taken my share of oxycontin/oxycodone. All during chemotherapy, and especially after my surgery, I was taking oxycontin for base pain management, along with oxycodone for 'breakthrough' pain. My tumors responded to chemo wonderfully so that I was a candidate for surgery to have my primary tumor removed, colon ressected, metastatic liver tumors ablated, etc. At this point, I was taking 100mg oxycontin per day and an additional 50mg of oxycodone for 'breakthrough' pain. The narcotic effects slow down one's digestive system so much that I was also taking a shitload of stool softeners... pun intended.

    By the time I finished my chemotherapy treatments (2 Jun 2012) I was thoroughly addicted to oxy. The only remaining pills I was taking were the pain meds and the stool softeners. I decided enough was enough and stopped taking oxycontin. It took a long week before I felt like myself again, escaping the cloudy buzz of oxy. Having gone through so much discomfort, I saw it as just another part of my recovery. Note: 'feeling like myself' is a relative term - after so much chemo, I wasn't myself anymore.

    Now, my cancer is back and I'm starting chemo again this Thursday (20 Sep 2012). Having firsthand knowledge of addiction, kicking a 30+ year smoking habit and an oxy addiction, I will most likely resume taking oxy and get addicted all over again. Why? Because it helped me before. It will help me again. One week of mild discomfort from withdrawal symptoms is nothing compared to the pain and discomfort of chemotherapy.

    1. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Best of luck in your struggle, Trent. My wife is an oncology nurse, so I know what you're going through and hope you can continue to keep us updated on /.

    2. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by waferbuster · · Score: 2

      Best wishes on your upcoming therapy, I hope it works for you.

      --
      I'm an individual! Just like everyone else!
    3. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by trentfoley · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Cannabis, of course, is ALWAYS an option :)

    4. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by fafalone · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well it's nice that overcoming your addiction was so easy, but quite honestly 150mg a day is a very low dose. People with a permanent condition that take it for years, and serious abusers, 150mg might not even be enough to not feel withdrawal symptoms.
      When you take 10-20x that, every day, for years, it's not "part of recovery" and "not feeling like yourself" to stop. It's over a week of vomiting nothing but stomach acid and shitting clear jelly because you can't even keep down a cup of water for more than 10 minutes. when you're not laying in bed screaming, for cold turkey. Tapering from a very high dose is also very different than tapering from a low dose. You'll still feel shitty because you're not taking enough, only it will take 3 or more weeks to get down low enough to stop, and that kind of willpower is not easy.

      Mild discomfort my ass.

    5. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Totally agree - I've been on chemo for colon cancer and I have to say that giving up a drug habit is mild in comparison.

    6. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      It is 2012. Nobody on the planet should be in needless pain.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    7. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I feel for you. 31st Sept, 2007 myself, but sadly no hope of ever getting my guts re-attached. On the plus side, that means I have never had to worry about constipation problems. Opiates have actually made my ileostomy more manageable.

      One thing I would mention: if you have the option of switching to fentanyl patches, for the love of $deity do not do so. They are fantastic unless you ever have reason to stop using them, and then they're a nightmare. If you think oxycodone withdrawal was bad, it doesn't touch fentanyl withdrawal (actually, taking oxycodone doesn't touch fentanyl withdrawal symptoms, either). I ended up on cetuximab therapy, which caused serious skin problems. That means the fentanyl patches release far faster than they're supposed to, so you spend a day in a fog, a day feeling fine, and a day in withdrawal. Rinse and repeat.

      Hope things work out for you. Good luck.

    8. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      there's a world of difference between what you are going through and the millions of wussies who are demanding opiates for situations where asprin could do, and also millions more just using opiates for fun or to escape reality. It's fine for you to either be addicted or not, really. to be able to break the habit if in remission, or not.

    9. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      People addicted to it for longer periods for non-medical reasons experience more discontinuation discomfort through PAWS (post acute withdrawal syndrome). You felt the acute withdrawal for a week, and no post acute problems, I'd posit because you used them legitimately. Good luck with your illness.

    10. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by sjames · · Score: 1

      Naturally it is a bigger problem after years, but then if you're on it for years the pain is a big problem itself. NOT taking strong painkillers wouldn't exactly be a walk in the park for those patients either. I wopuld argue that for those patients tolerance is a much bigger problem than the addiction itself.

    11. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Maow · · Score: 1

      I was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer almost one year ago (7 Oct 2011).

      Now, my cancer is back and I'm starting chemo again this Thursday (20 Sep 2012). Having firsthand knowledge of addiction, kicking a 30+ year smoking habit and an oxy addiction, I will most likely resume taking oxy and get addicted all over again. Why? Because it helped me before. It will help me again. One week of mild discomfort from withdrawal symptoms is nothing compared to the pain and discomfort of chemotherapy.

      Fuck.

      I'm at a loss for words, but want to strongly extend my best wishes! Hope to see you posting back here in short order.

      (And prior mods to this thread be damned - not posting this one anonymously.)

    12. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      Looks like you go in for chemo tomorrow. Good luck, and I hope it knocks out this relapse. Cancer sucks ass, no pun intended.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    13. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by geschild · · Score: 1

      Please make sure you get a vaporizer? No need to cough your lungs up during the other... 'discomforts'.

      There are several options to choose between. This one I know to be good: http://www.de-verdamper.nl/uk

      All the best to you in these difficult times.

      --
      Karma? What's that again?
    14. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by trentfoley · · Score: 1

      I got a Volcano with the solid valve kit for xmas from my wife (she truly loves me) and I use it almost exclusively. But sometimes, the situation just calls for a rice paper. I also picked up a Magic Flight Launch Box which is great for on-the-go situations... which are occurring less and less as the months progress.

      Thanks for the tip though - I've been spreading the word on vaporizers as well.

    15. Re:Breaking the addiction is easier than you think by geschild · · Score: 1

      Good to hear you've your arrangements in place.

      Thanks for those links, I know people wanting to take a look at that MFLB :)

      Again, all the best to you and your loved ones.

      --
      Karma? What's that again?
  16. Here's the problem by Stickerboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    15-20 years ago, doctors were written up and called out for not treating enough pain. As a profession, we understand intimately the inherent dangers of opioid pain medication, and we were hesitant to use them. But patients were hurting, articles were written, and I'm sure somewhere doctors were sued. So practices changed, "pain management" is now standard curriculum at medical schools and now look, deaths and hospitalizations from prescription pain medication are at all-time highs. Purdue was likely riding the wave of the change in pain management philosophy at the time when they introduced OxyContin. The right drug at the right time, etc.

    --
    Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
    1. Re:Here's the problem by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and before that, doctors were perfectly willing to let patients suffer. It's shocking how much they Just Didn't Care about people in pain. I can see from the tone of your comment that you're rather pissed off about the situation. Sucks to be you. The "all time highs" of the negatives are from people who are abusing opioids as recreational drugs, not those getting the drugs in hospitals. But hey, if it makes you "feel better" we can go back to the old way. You see what I did there?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Here's the problem by tsotha · · Score: 3, Insightful

      15-20 years ago, doctors were written up and called out for not treating enough pain.

      As they should have been. You had people in the last few weeks of life being denied effective pain treatment because submitting too many of some particular government form might be a headache for the doctor. As far as I'm concerned when someone is near death they ought to be able to get whatever they want. So what if the patient is taking more than he needs for the pain. Are we really worried about addiction in someone who's going to be dead in a few weeks?

    3. Re:Here's the problem by sjames · · Score: 1

      No doubt deaths from pain medication are up, but there is still the question of quality of life. How many of those deaths are balanced by patients not committing suicide when untreated pain becomes too much? How many of those deaths ARE suicide when the pain management is inadequate?

    4. Re:Here's the problem by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      15-20 years ago, doctors were written up and called out for not treating enough pain.

      I read somewhere that the new "keep the patient comfortable" philosophy stemmed from the personal experience of an administrator at a big influential hospital, who was suddenly beset with excruciating pain of unknown cause for several months or years. When he went back to work, he had a different view of a hospital's priorities.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    5. Re:Here's the problem by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      There is something to be said about this. I know somebody with an invasive and chronic health problem and I really do get concerned about their will to live.

      If you measure the effectiveness of painkillers the way you measure the effectiveness of other drugs you'll come up with the same result across the board - they don't make people "healthier" and they often harm people. However, this kind of evaluation is not unlike the kinds of "medical evaluations" used to justify torture in the last decade - "waterboarding doesn't cause permanent harm" and that sort of thing. Medicine is only a means to an end - and that end for most people is an enjoyable life, not simply a long one.

    6. Re:Here's the problem by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      A lot of good could come from more experiences like the one you speak of (whether true or not). I don't think anybody has a true appreciation of the US Healthcare system until they have sat at the bedside of somebody who has been hospitalized for at least a week with a major problem. You have everything from dealing with doctors who spend 5min/day with you to mind-boggling billing practices to the psychological torture of near absolute boredom to being told at 6PM that you'll be going home tomorrow and finally getting into your car almost 24 hours later after all the paperwork is done.

      For those with an IT background picture a 2-3 core CPU whose clock line pulses once a day and you'll get a sense of how things get done in a hospital. All decisions get made between 8-10AM Mon-Fri only, and everything else that takes place is about gathering data for the next tick of the "clock."

    7. Re:Here's the problem by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 1

      Are we really worried about addiction in someone who's going to be dead in a few weeks?

      Even for someone who's not terminal, if they're in so much pain that they need the strong stuff, they have something way bigger going on than a stupid opiate addiction. Withdrawal sucks, but it's way less of a deal than whatever the real problem is.

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    8. Re:Here's the problem by couchslug · · Score: 1

      " Are we really worried about addiction in someone who's going to be dead in a few weeks?" /Deity cannot savor your delicious suffering if you aren't suffering enough.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    9. Re:Here's the problem by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I strongly disagree. When many of my friends go in for painful medical problems they are often given minimal or no effective pain relievers. I had a toenail permanently removed with phenol and despite my repeated strong requests was given only a phone number to call if I was in pain. As expected, I was in intense pain that woke me up and the doctor on call was unable to prescribe anything over the phone. I had to go to the ER where they acted like I had ripped my own toenail out as a genius ploy to get painkillers. Gods help you if it is something difficult to see such as joint pain or migraines. I have a friend with crippling fibromyalgia and lupus, she has to go to special "pain clinics" that don't take insurance, charge hundreds per visit, and are filled with junkies. It is humiliating and degrading. They take her money, ask her how many of what kind of pill she needs, and don't even examine her.

      Pain relief in many fields of medicine is barbaric right now. I can't believe you think we're handing them out too much. I'd like to see much more aggressive pain management at the real doctors so legitimate patients don't need to patronize the junkie-enablers.

      I have started stockpiling narcotics so the next time I have dental surgery or some painful medical procedure with an incompassionate doctor I don't have to suffer needlessly or spend hours and hundreds of dollars at the ER or a bullshit pain clinic.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  17. What are the alternatives? by drwho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After being the victim of a serious accident, I was in an enormous amount of pain. Oxycodone was a real goddsend. Maybe it takes a soul-shattering amount of pain to really appreciate the value of this drug. Yes, there are lots of addicts - but far more people are addicted to nicotiene. These slams against 'big pharma' for the black market in this drug are counter-productive and quite maddening. Doctors are becoming afraid to prescribe painkillers because they'll be accused of being 'pill doctors', so many people who don't know they have to advocate for themselves in this situation have to suffer unnecessarily. Tip: if you get a prescription, get as many pills as you can. Save some for later, because you'll never know when the anti-drug lobby will cut off the supply.

    BTW this isn't news for nerds. Is this the new direction of Slashdot under new ownership? Rage-news in all categories, not just tech?

    1. Re:What are the alternatives? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      You think going after the doctors is scary? The DEA is trying to shut down pharmacies (Walgreens and CVS) that are filling legitimate pain medicine prescriptions with absolutely NO evidence of diversion. They are trying to simply revoke their license without any hearing or evidence or any procedure of any kind.

    2. Re:What are the alternatives? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Are pharmaceuticals not technology?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:What are the alternatives? by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1
    4. Re:What are the alternatives? by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      BTW this isn't news for nerds. Is this the new direction of Slashdot under new ownership? Rage-news in all categories, not just tech?

      My gf works in a pharma lab. She plays with beakers, test tubes, million dollar scientific equipment. What could be nerdier than that? Writing stupid code on a computer? Hell, hipsters do that these days.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  18. Cold Dead Hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just had surgery two weeks ago, with lots of complications. Dilauded was fine in a PCS pump, but the hospital was not going to send me home on that. So I got oxy and fentanyl and it is just barely enough to keep me from passing out when wound dressings need changed. Then again, I've been through this many times. Last time I got high on narcotics was before pain pumps, when nurses just shot me up with 5ml every few hours.

    Want advice on how not to get addicted? Don't take strong meds if it doesn't hurt. If you get any kind of buzz from the meds, the dose is probably too high. Best is if they just stop.the pain, but falling asleep is good too; having a good time and seeing things is too much. That won't work for some people with addiction problems, but if you can handle your beer and smokes, you can probably use medicinal narcotics safely too.

  19. DEA written summary by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And the Anti-Drug lobby writes another opinion piece that medicine should not be treating pain and pharma is out of control by providing new pain management options.

    The reason pain prescriptions have gone up is that medicine isn't telling people to take 2 asprin and fuck off. The reason my father has a fucked up GI system is because of the asprin abuse because he was never given the option of real pain management.

    As a chronic pain sufferer I wish every one of these fucktards that think no one should be on pain management could experience a month of what I do every day. The constant thoughts of suicide, the near complete lack of life, enjoyment or any satisfaction in life, the exhaustion and the constant work just getting out of bed every day. There is a reason there is an ex law enforcement organization devoted to campaigning proper pain management and it's because some of those lucky people get to experience real chronic pain.

    Someone that's never experienced chronic severe pain has no fucking idea what it's like.

    1. Re:DEA written summary by sjames · · Score: 1

      I suspect these DEA wonks have never experienced real pain at all. They seem to think people are going on pain pills for a paper cut. If they had ever had the sensation of blacking out from pain, they would never question a prescription for pain killers again.

    2. Re:DEA written summary by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Someone that's never experienced chronic severe pain has no fucking idea what it's like."

      Many, MANY of the assholes who attack NOW will have chronic pain later in life. They deserve it.

      Yes, some people abuse meds. So fucking what? Make the chemicals affordable and MANAGE the problem.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    3. Re:DEA written summary by subreality · · Score: 1

      It's not so much that they're trying to keep the drugs from people with real pain. They're worried that GOD FORBID someone use the stuff recreationally. It's hard to sort out the two groups since there's no good objective test for pain. Thus, they just ratchet down on all opiate use. So sorry to inconvenience those of you with real pain.

      I personally think that it's a dumb approach. Junkies will be junkies; you may as well give them a cheap, clean supply, and the opportunities to clean up when they're ready. It costs less and results in less net harm. But the USA was founded by puritans, so this is what we get.

    4. Re:DEA written summary by sjames · · Score: 1

      That's just the thing, if they had ever PERSONALLY experienced real pain, they wouldn't be so willing to risk leaving innocent people in agony just to punish a few people who will ultimately end up punishing themselves anyway.

      Some people don't believe there is such a thing as evil, but the DEAs casual indifference to the suffering of others meets my criteria for evil.

    5. Re:DEA written summary by subreality · · Score: 1

      Well, I have to agree with you there. It's a really messed up set of priorities.

  20. Nice concept by Fuzzums · · Score: 2

    So if you push your product to 1.000.000 people, you will get 1.000 very satisfied frequent returning customers.
    Close to 0,999% is still under 1%. I'm sure if it was closer to 0,5% they would have said something like 'about 0,5%'.

    --
    Privacy is terrorism.
  21. SO that by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    added something tat makes it time release, thus fixing some of the major issues.
    I am supposed to be outraged..why? Becasue something was out of patent, that made something new and patented it.

    Well, that's how it's supposed to work.

    Shit you should be applauding the successful and proper use of the patent system

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:SO that by tsotha · · Score: 1

      The most legitimate complaint I've heard is the drug was sold as less likely to be abused because of the time release formula. It probably didn't even take a whole day for people to figure out you could crush the pills and snort them.

    2. Re:SO that by randyleepublic · · Score: 1

      I don't think applying a time release coating, itself a known entity, to a known drug is sufficiently novel to deserve a patent.

      --
      Social Credit would solve everything...
  22. Re:whats happened to slashdot? by Nursie · · Score: 1

    Was wondering the same.

    There is no tech/geek angle here. It may be an important news story, but between this and the diamond thing the other day, I'm left wonderng WTF?

  23. Bullshit by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    No, Mostly, it is stupid fucks abusing the drugs who are the ones becoming hooked. Don't abuse drugs and chances are you won't become addicted to any thing.

    Oh, and apparently prescription heroin is available in the U.K. Your argument is invalid.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  24. Re:Calling Dr. Bob! by Farmer+Tim · · Score: 2

    It's "subluxation".

    Let's examine the word: sub means less than or beneath, lux is a measure of brightness, ~tion is a suffix indicating a state. Therefore "subluxation" means "to be less than bright" or, as most people would say, stupid. The word is perfect as is.

    --
    Blank until /. makes another boneheaded UI decision.
  25. Chronic Pain. by couchslug · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is Chronic, so why not ACCEPT and MANAGE addiction?

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    1. Re:Chronic Pain. by Fjandr · · Score: 2

      From what I've read, the incidence of psychological addiction developing in people who take opiates for chronic pain is actually quite a lot lower than for those who take them for acute pain (post-op, injury, whatever). Unfortunately I cannot remember where I saw the reference to such studies, so anyone interested might wish to dig in that direction.

      Fortunately, cancer pain has so far been relatively insulated from the crackdowns in other areas. I know I'd be non-functional from pain without opiate-based pain management.

    2. Re:Chronic Pain. by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      That is exactly what is and should be done. In this context, physical dependence is just a medical issue that needs to be properly managed, just as diabetics can be said to be physically dependent on insulin. For the most part, people who take opioids for treatment of chronic pain rather than to "get high" do just fine. They don't tend to escalate their dose excessively, and if their pain issue resolves, they can be tapered off the opiate and are unlikely to seek it out on the street.

    3. Re:Chronic Pain. by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Actually, a huge amount of effort has been devoted to curing and preventing cancer, one major cause of chronic pain. So far, we've come up with a couple of quite effective ways to prevent cancer: stop smoking and stay out of the sun. And there are a few cancers, such as Hodgkin's Disease, that can often be cured, and others that can sometimes be cured. But it is a very hard problem--every type of cancer is different, and even in one person, there may be different types of cancer cells, which do not all respond to the same treatment, so it is very hard to eradicate permanently from the body.

    4. Re:Chronic Pain. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "How about the novel concept of CURING and PREVENTING it??"

      You know very well that there is no universal cure or preventive for the vast variety of chronic pain.

      The rest of your post is mere babble.

      If you resent taking pain meds, don't take them! I won't feel a thing, but I wouldn't restrict YOUR options because I have neither the right nor desire to do so.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    5. Re:Chronic Pain. by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Yup, that argument is like saying the solution to our budget deficit is to grow the economy.

      Nobody is going to argue that a cure for all human disease and economic woe isn't the best possible solution. However, until we have that figured out we have some treatments that work to some extent today, and it doesn't hurt to continue to refine those while we're still working on the panacea.

  26. You sound familar pigrabbitbear, by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 2

    You sound just like my junky ex-girlfriend. First heroin, then "roxies" and "xanies' all self-prescribed for "anxiety". She also said drug companies were making drugs more addictive to get people hooked. She convienently overlooks the fact all her junky friends were never prescribed their drugs of choice. She loved to talk about how herion was better than oxycontin because it was more natural.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  27. Cannabis cannot be PRESCRIBED... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 4, Informative

    because it is a Schedule I drug. Writing a prescription for a Schedule I drug would quickly bring the DEA down on the prescribing physician, most likely eliminating said doctor's ability to prescribe any other controlled drugs.

    It can, however be RECOMMENDED by a physician. The card you get in CA or other medical MJ states shows that your doctor thinks that cannabis might help your condition. It doesn't specify dosage, form, route of administration, or frequency of use like a standard prescription would.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Cannabis cannot be PRESCRIBED... by crazycheetah · · Score: 1

      You are correct. I'll retract my statement and say that it is more true that it is not prescribed. A lot of people view recommendations by a doctor equal to prescriptions, though, which is where it gets tricky. Not to say that they're right on any level. Actually, I will agree they're wrong in thinking so, but I hear "I was given prescription to cannabis" a hell of a lot more than "I was recommended cannabis". Looks like I fell into that myself this time.

  28. Hold the execs responsibile for financial damages by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    Hold them personally responsible for damages from anyone addicted to this shit.Pierce the corporate veil and go after individuals directly. If they declare bankruptcy, make the judgments non-bankruptable, you know, like student loans. Which is the bigger crime- trying to get an education of selling heroin and lying about how dangerous it was?

    That period in world history when people in corporations could commit any crime whatsoever and get away with it as long as it was big enough ... fast coming to a close in three ... two.... one ...

  29. Just REFUSE it by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    I've only had procedures, or had a problem needing prescription pain meds a couple times. Both times they wanted to give me a script for that crap & I refused, telling them to prescribe something else. Just because a doctor prescribes something, doesn't mean you can't ask for an alternative.

  30. Many names by zooblethorpe · · Score: 2

    Is it any wonder this gets confusing? Every drug has a minimum of three different names: The unpronounceable chemical name, the generic name, and the brand name.

    The names for that erectile dysfunction drug aren't all that bad:

    • Chemical name:
      1-[4-ethoxy-3-(6,7-dihydro-1-methyl- 7-oxo-3-propyl-1H-pyrazolo[4,3-d]pyrimidin-5-yl) phenylsulfonyl]-4-methylpiperazine
    • Brand name:
      Viagra
    • Generic name:
      Mycoxaphlopin

    ...

    I'm here all week. Try the veal!

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  31. Thought experiment: by ldunn1958 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Many chronic pain sufferers will tell you that they had never imagined it was even possible to feel so much pain. They live in a universe of pain unknown to most of us. Try to imagine yourself in bed with pain shooting through your body that is so intense that you cannot move. It seems it could get no worse, but any effort to move doubles, triples the intensity. So there you lie weeping but not sobbing because that would hurt even more. Now imagine that you know for a fact that there is a pill you could take that would let you get out of bed and go to work. But you won't get it. Why? Because the DOJ does not trust you not to sell it on the street. How does that make you feel?

    1. Re:Thought experiment: by minstrelmike · · Score: 1

      I tell folks that freedom from pain is addictive. I think that behavior might be genetically inbred.

    2. Re:Thought experiment: by ldunn1958 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Most "drug seekers" are really "pain relief seekers."

  32. Cheaper alternatives, like methadone by justthinkit · · Score: 2
    --
    I come here for the love
  33. DEA by WilyCoder · · Score: 2

    The fact that the DEA has any legal ability to interrupt the doctor patient relationship shows how messed up the drug laws are.

    Doctors need to prescribe opiates, they are the only drugs that can really manage chronic, debilitating pain. And then the DEA can swoop in and be like "drugs are bad mkay, enjoy your pain". That is so messed up.

    1. Re:DEA by lightknight · · Score: 2

      Indeed. I can remember the first time I tried oxycodone (wisdom teeth removed). Up until around that time, I was somewhat anti-drug -> purity of mind, all that jazz.

      I never realized that a drug like this existed, one which could treat my more powerful migraines. It was a bit like Neo realizing that he was in the Matrix -> everything I had been told were lies. Looking around in my heavenly mental state of mind, the first time in my life I felt some clarity, I realized that our society was built to not only cause suffering, but to reinforce it from all angles. Every exit blocked, the easily accessible medicines were placebos, the effective ones made illegal and restricted, salt in the wounds everywhere the light touched; and the truly hideous part was realizing that the enemy had been standing in our midst the entire time. So complete was the control, that escaping it is nearly impossible. The sheer number of people who go to work everyday, complaining of aches and pains, could easily be alleviated. Peace itself possible. And yet, fear tells people to avoid the very thing that could save them from a life of agony. Cigarettes and alcohol available everywhere, doing far worse things to the soul and mind, but the less dangerous stuff is hidden away. Speaking with my friends, I realized that they were not aware that their suffering could be alleviated, old wounds healed, a breathe of life for every man, woman, and child.

      These drugs do not cloud one's reasoning, they free it! And they are kept from it because some poorly documented psychology study somewhere says that slightly-depressed or slightly-suffering workers are a few percentage points more efficient. A lifetime of suffering, because someone wants an extra couch made that week! The nerve of these people. And what makes it worse, is that they knew! They knew the entire time! It was their own self-servings needs that they had put before the well-being of their friends and family! And as an insult to everything sacred and holy, they have the impetus to continue to peddle their bullsh*t, suggesting even now that pain is merely an illusion of the mind, so it is the belief that one is in pain that must be treated, not the sensory nerves that are transmitting bioelectric impulses to the brain! How much better the world would be if we could free ourselves of these charlatans, these wolves in sheep's clothing. I imagine that the Hippocratic Oath was just words to these people; or that perhaps they see their patients as less than human, less than deserving of sympathy or compassion. Their actions speak loudest to me, and I am ashamed, ashamed! that I once believed as they did. How could I ever make up for my transgressions, manufactured out of blind error? Having been misled, and righted myself, how can I ever be sure that I am not being led down similar paths of injustice, simply as a pleasure or convenience to others? An implicit agreement has been broken, Do No Harm, and it shan't ever be mended. The perpetrators of this travesty will, of course, remain free and at large, while the victims will continue to suffer.

      I can never look up to a doctor, ever again. When I gaze upon them now, I see a set of blind biases that have helped as many as have harmed. Whenever I see a psychologist or psychiatrist, I will see a man or woman with a notebook, quietly labeling and sorting every person their eyes touch, suffering from the bitter arrogance of believing they know more about a man's mind than they do, and calm in their recitation of committed lies. If every they lived in ancient Athens, they would not run the risk of admitting their lack of knowledge -> the words "I know only that I know nothing" would never part those dry lips.

      --
      I am John Hurt.
  34. Same receptors by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    Oxycodone, like heroin (which is largely transformed by the body into morphine), morphine, and codeine, acts through mu opiate receptors. All of them do essentially the same thing. All of the drugs of this class are excellent pain relievers (although heroin is not much used for that purpose since it has a bad reputation as a widely abused opioid) and is also highly habit forming, particularly when used recreationally rather than for pain relief.

    Time release oxycodone is an important and useful drug for people with severe chronic pain, as it produces pain relief without the user needing to be constantly popping pills.

    1. Re:Same receptors by Fjandr · · Score: 1

      I was going based on earlier reading I had done regarding oxycodone binding. Based on a bit of looking that appears to be in dispute.

      The rest stands. While they are related, they do not follow the same primary metabolic pathways, and they (and certain metabolites) cross the blood-brain barrier at different stages during metabolism. They also have large variances depending on the method of administration.

      The comparison I was responding to was akin to saying a lion is a big leopard with a different skin. It's more fiction than truth except in the most generalized sense.

  35. Acupuncture as placebo by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    Acupuncture may work by creating lots of little cuts/punctures. Each cut is too minor to bother you, but your body still wants to fix them. Each cut is followed by the body's healing responses such as ignoring the pain (I don't know all the terms of the related chemicals). All the healing effects add up and eventually you don't notice your original problem because you're too desensitized. Acupuncture is known to work by the WHO and the NIH for certain types of pain and nausea.

    Probably not. There have been controlled studies with sham acupuncture, which uses fake needles that don't penetrate the skin. It works about as well as real acupuncture.

    It looks like acupuncture is essentially an elaborate (and generally rather costly) placebo.

  36. Time release by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    Coming up with a good time release formulation can be quite tricky. It is certainly reasonable that it can be patented.

  37. Hence short-term by Chewbacon · · Score: 1

    I seem to see a similar pathway in a lot of patients with chronic pain. They are taught to not let their pain get "out of control." This sets them on the path of being hypersensitive to pain. They'll usually take another dose as soon as they feel the pain coming on. This can increase their dosing interval, which means taking more of the substance and potentially accelerating tolerance. It's not just an issue with oxycodone, but with all narcotics.

    --
    Chewbacon
    The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
  38. What in THE HELL are they talking about? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have been requiring Oxycodone on and off for chronic pain management since a grueling battle with Leukemia, one of the nastiest forms of cancer, about a year ago. Sometimes, the pain goes away on its own, other times it's back. The doctors are still trying to figure out the source, but in the mean time, the pain needs to be managed so I can actually go about my day normally. I get little-to-no physical side effects from it, I don't really get a high; it just takes care of the pain so I can get on with my day.

    Guess what happens on those days when there's no pain and I stop the Oxycodone ... absolutely nothing. No withdrawal, no misery, no depression, nothing. It's just a normal day.

    But, then, years of dealing an autoimmune disorder have forced me through withdrawals from Prednisone, Morphine, Fentanyl, Gapapentin and probably others that I can't remember off the top of my head. By comparison, Oxycodone "withdrawal" is nothing and mostly in your head (if you were never told that it was addictive, would you actually feel anything when stopping it?)

  39. Meanwhile in the UK by Kupfernigk · · Score: 1

    Several cannabinoid-based drugs are nearing production. By "monied interests" I assume you mean the Southern cotton producers.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
    1. Re:Meanwhile in the UK by berashith · · Score: 1

      Dupont wanted to sell nylon rope

    2. Re:Meanwhile in the UK by ZeroMS · · Score: 1

      and sadly these cannabinoid-based drugs will be the only form of legal cannabis in many western countries, while the plant itself is illegal. No way the gov't is gonna let Big Pharma lose money to people growing their own medicine. (GW Pharmaceuticals)

  40. Winners by Kupfernigk · · Score: 3, Insightful
    It is said that Murdoch tells his newspapers to support the political parties that look like winning, so that the can then frighten politicians by claiming to be an influence on elections, and get privileges like relaxed media control and access to senior Ministers. But I imagine that in the US, where advertising income is so important, it's more about appealing to the demographic that the advertisers regard as desirable - i.e. well off, sense of entitlement to material goods, and gullible.

    A direct marketer once told me that if he ever managed to get an accurate list of 500 rich, narcissistic and gullible individuals, he would never need to work hard for a living again.

    --
    From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
  41. the fault is heroin's legal status by DABANSHEE · · Score: 2

    Where heroin is prescribed legally, like Switzerland, virtually all it's so-called nasty side effects are negated.

    People prescribed it don't OD because quantity/quality consistencies are guaranteed. They don't catch things like HIV/HCV because IV equipment availability minimizes equipment sharing. The desire to rob or steal is minimized because prescription heroin doesn't cost much more to make than aspirin.

    Heroin is just a catalyst of morphine, that converts back to morphine in the body, & as such negative side-effects of long term use of prescription heroin are as minimal as they are for morphine, being simply a higher rate of dental cavities if one's dental hygiene isn't upgraded, due to DIDMS (drug induced dry mounth syndrome) like many other medications. Yes there are war veterans who have been on autonomous morphine pumps for over 40 years years (for things like shrapnel against the spin, etc) & that is their only negative side-effect. Even this side-effect can be negated through the regular use of a electric toothbrush & extra strong toothpaste like NF2K.

    BTW I know a number of people that were perpetual thieves/scammers/sex-workers till they got on prescription heroin & in very quick time became highly successful professionals in a number of different legitimate industries.

    I Also know many people that tried heroin & didn't like it & moved on, & also know people that don't have any problem using heroin infrequently enough to never get a habit (Simply no more than 2 days a week)

    It's not hard to tell the addicts from those that arn't. The fact is if a person does not have 1 of about 8 specif axis 1 mental disorders or 1 of about 12 personality disorders, the odds are they will never become a addict long term regardless of how much they experiment with drugs in their teens or their 20's. Mind you a large percentage of those that do have personality disorders are never diagnosed as, & thus arn't aware of their risk, are in denial, or are simply written off as junky scums. Adversely you could say that anyone that's over 30 that's still living a dysfunctional drug addict life style, odds on has a personality disorder &/or 1 of about 8 specific A1 mental disorders, whether they have been diagnosed or not. The classic junkie cliché of ripping off one's own grandmother is usually an indicator of a cluster B personality disorder. These facts outline the answers to the old questions of the difference between a heavy drinker & a alcoholic, or a recreational gambler & a compulsive gambler. Invariably the difference is that the alcoholic/compulsive gambler also has a personality disorder or a mental disorder.

    One could also define the 12 steps of AA/NA as a arguably functional lifestyle method for those that are on the wagon in regards their compulsions & have undiagnosed personality disorders or are in-denial in that regard (many addicts have many attitudes that have not matured from their days in high school, where to identify as having a mental problem was considered worse than to identify as a druggie).

     

  42. You were just conning yourself by DABANSHEE · · Score: 1

    No one gets real withdrawal after just 3 days use. Even the come-down from Crystal Meth is just a delayed side effect, analogous to a hang-over after a alcohol binge, rather than withdrawal to dependence/addiction (which in regards alcohol is the DTs)

    Mind you the major difference between the addict personality & others, is that addict personalties think they're hooked after 2 or 3 days use when they're not, & the mind is such a strong thing that it creates a false reality to match their thinking. So if you really did think you were hooked & had withdrawals after just 2 days, you made the right choice to stay away, because odds on you could be high risk of being a addict in the making.

    1. Re:You were just conning yourself by WillyWanker · · Score: 1

      I'd have thought the exact same thing. No one was more surprised than me. I'm totally not an addictive type. I've never smoked or done drugs. I rarely drink, and when I do it's one or two max. I don't gamble or binge, I'm not a shopaholic and I don't collect anything. I'm about as anti-addictive as one can get and not be dead. I will admit that if I overdo coffee/caffeine I am prone to mild headaches when I scale back, but that's about it.

      I just must be extremely sensitive to the stuff.

  43. Re:whats happened to slashdot? by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

    Was wondering the same.

    There is no tech/geek angle here. It may be an important news story, but between this and the diamond thing the other day, I'm left wonderng WTF?

    Because nerds are humans. Humans use drugs, for pain. This can lead to addiction if not completely understood. There is a lot of excellent information here for all nerds worldwide to learn, info that might keep them from falling into the trap of addiction. It's "news that matters".

  44. Re:whats happened to slashdot? by Nursie · · Score: 1

    So it's just going to become a generic news site then? There are plenty of those already. The decline in quality in this place has been sad enough, but turning it into just another news/comment site... Just another nail in the coffin of a once brilliant tech site.

  45. Supporting the Afghan economy by sproketboy · · Score: 1

    America needs to support the Afghan (tm) economy of course. ;)

  46. Licensed fools by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

    He did an entire show claiming to be supporting a democrat candidate.

    He's a clown alright and perhaps I have misjudged him from the few clips I have seen here in Oz. Maybe he's like Clarkson from Top Gear and I'm simply not "getting it" because...well...I'm not an American. However from what I have see he does portray himself, and is followed by some, as a court jester. Unfortunately the term "court jester" is not well understood in the US, so to clarify I would nominate John Stewart as the current US court jester, And no, it's not the obvious red vs blue difference that sets them apart.

    Shamelessly cut and paste from the obig WP link:

    "In ancient times courts employed fools and by the Middle Ages the jester was a familiar figure. In Renaissance times, aristocratic households in Britain employed licensed fools or jesters, who sometimes dressed as other servants were dressed, but generally wore a motley (i.e. parti-coloured) coat, hood with ass's (i.e. donkey) ears* or a red-flannel coxcomb and bells. Regarded as pets or mascots, they served not simply to amuse but to criticise their master or mistress and their guests. Queen Elizabeth (reigned 1558-1603) is said to have rebuked one of her fools for being insufficiently severe with her. Excessive behaviour, however, could lead to a fool being whipped, as Lear threatens to whip his fool."

    * My emphasis; In other words, I don't think Rush is clever enough to be the modern day equivalent of "ass hat" material. ;)

    Again, maybe I have misjudged him, as an English born Aussie who emigrated in the early 60's, there are a lot of things I don't understand about US style right-wing political humour, Rush maybe just one more of those things?

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  47. Big Pharma by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    The one true Drug Dealer.

  48. Didn't seem to work for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I had abdominal surgery a couple years ago. No laparoscopic; they cut me open. Afterwards I was in some pretty awful pain. They had me on a morphine drip and honestly it did nothing for me. I still had tons of pain. I felt loopy and in pain. One of the pain docs gave me Toradol. That's an intravenous NSAID, which is the same family as Advil (Ibuprofen) just a lot more powerful. BAM, pain nearly wiped out. I asked to be taken off the morphine and I stopped feeling so loopy. Pain didn't increase.

    When I was sent home they put me on Oxycontin. It was like the morphine only less loopy. Oh and my breathing was labored while on the Oxy; freaked me out because I felt like if I fell asleep I would stop breathing. I had to consciously breathe because when I didn't think about it, I actually stopped breathing. No real pain reduction. I ditched it and stuck with Ibuprofen instead. The Ibuprofen worked way better for pain management than the Oxy did.

    Perhaps I'm just one of those people for whom opiates don't work.

  49. implied that it was so difficult to abuse by koan · · Score: 1

    Yes because crushing the tablet to get all of it in one hit is so hard to do.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
  50. The base article is so 'yesterday' it's lame by lpq · · Score: 1

    I thought I was having a flashback -- at least 4-5 years ago... same exact article. Except then, it was still call Hillbilly Heroin" because most of the abusers were in Appalachia with the drug taking the place of more toxic and more dangerous heroin.

    But this article does bring the update of "yesterdays" crackdown on pain meds. From the base article:

    None of the men and women I spoke with used street heroin before taking OxyContin. All of them used it after using OxyContin. In fact, since Purdue Pharma introduced a reformulated OxyContin in 2010 containing chemical safety-nets meant to render it less easily abused â" the pills no longer dissolve in water, making them more difficult to cook and shoot intravenously â" the number of addicts switching to heroin has skyrocketed.

    It's a good thing the FDA has done their job and gotten people off the legally addictive drugs -- so now they can have to scrounge and take their chances of dying from O.D. just like every other addict.

    Meanwhile, those who really needed OC for pain find that since it doesn't dissolve in water -- it doesn't dissolve in your body as well either (we are over 60% water, w/the brain being over 70% water -- which is, of course, where the drug "acts" -- so the fact that it no longer dissolves in water significantly reduces its effectiveness requiring doubling or more the pain dosage. At the same time, Purdue was able to get the FDC to block out competitors in the market unless they could prove their 'generic' was as hard to abuse as Purdue's -- which Purdue had another 20-30 year patent on. The price for single doses tripled with the new formulation and now many health plans charge extra for that drug because it is 'brand' (despite there being no generic substitute on the market) -- and users need more of it.

    So AGAIN, the FDA, who was *paid* to do this (they call it a fine -- what Purdue paid to the FDA), so now Purdue's profits on the drug have skyrocketed even as usage has declined. Triple the price and reduce the effectiveness of the drug by 40%... That's. 4.8 x profit / pill. They expected a smaller market -- but made sure they have a 20-year patent to lock the market into them as the sole providers.

    So Purdue makes big money, the FDA look like 'tough guys', abusers move to heroin and everyone is happy! Except maybe those for whom the drug was designed in the first place who find they have their severe or chronic pain made all the worse with the higher prices, needing a higher dose, which doctors, not knowing about the formulation's effects (they don't take it, well not usually), always interpret as the patient developing 'tolerance' and and that "addiction is becoming a problem" --
    to which they then try to divert the patient to less effective or more dangerous alternatives (like injectible morphine).

    Yeah... another big win by BIG Pharma and a way to spin the story so that Big Pharma looks like they got punished, and the FDA protected us.
    And then you can read a bunch of red-neck commentaries on slashdot about the moral superiority of those aren't in regular pain...lording it over those who are:

                what a load of self-inflating, self-gratifying, crap.

  51. Re:Choose Life ? by SternisheFan · · Score: 1

    Choose to do the hard thing. For you, that's loving yourself enough to get off that shit any way you can. A lot of good things are in store for you when you decide to to care about yourself. But only you can decide to walk that walk. If you o.d. and die, you will never now what you could have been, what a waste. Happens every day. People get clear of it everyday too. It's totally your choice.

  52. If you've lived with chronic pain by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    You know something most people don't know.

    However, that doesn't mean a particular drug isn't over-prescribed.

    It's an undeniable fact that oxy's are over-prescribed in the US, and that IS a very real problem.

    I lived with chronic pain for years, and tried the oxy's for a while, and they worked. They worked a little TOO well. There are ways to manage chronic pain in addition to, and in replacement of just taking a particular pill that's being pushes on you for a companies bottom line.

    That Americans are so ready and willing to accept fake limited options presented tot hem by corporate interests that basically own the government speaks as ill of us as it does for our government and our corporations.

    Nobody's arguing against the use of oxy's for legitimate purposes. But when prescriptions have increased so rapidly for it in such a short period of time, and it's trafficked like heroin, you'd have to be a complete idiot to not see what's going on.

  53. Re:whats happened to slashdot? by Nursie · · Score: 1

    It's a tech site.

    It's not a tech story.

    This is happening more and more.

    I don't come here for generic news, there are literally hundreds of places that do it better. I come here for tech news, I will not any longer. Enjoy your third rate news site.

  54. Actually it is by DABANSHEE · · Score: 1

    & it's even prescribed in Switzerland for the treatment of opioid dependence, not just extreme pain. When the prescription heroin program was expanded more or less across the nation, it had such a effect on minimising certain crimes that certain insurance premiums went down in prrice too.

    I suggest you do a Google search for diacetylmorphine. Diacetylmorphine is the pharmaceutical name for heroin ('heroin' being the propriety trademark name Bayer gave diacetylmorphine). diacetylmorphine is still a legal prescription medication in many countries, including the UK & Canada.