Most Teens Who Abuse Opioids First Got Them From a Doctor (livescience.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Live Science: Most American teenagers who abuse opioid drugs first received the drugs from a doctor, a new study finds. Researchers looked at trends in the use of prescription opioids among U.S. adolescents from 1976 to 2015. They found a strong correlation between teens' taking the drugs for medical reasons and then later taking them for "non-medical" reasons, or in other words, abusing them, according to the study published today (March 20) in the journal Pediatrics. In 2015, the the most recent year of the study, 8 percent of adolescents reported abusing prescription opioids, and the majority of them had been prescribed opioids previously, the researchers found. The U.S. consumes about 80 percent of the world's prescription opioid supply. There has been consistent growth in the number of prescriptions written for opioids in the U.S., rising from 76 million prescriptions in 1991 to 207 million in 2013, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. However, the new study revealed that among teens, both medical and non-medical use of opioid medications has declined in recent years, starting in 2013. The decline may be due to careful prescribing practices, Sean McCabe, a research professor at the University of Michigan, said. There are several medical procedures that teens may undergo for which opioids are recommended for pain management. But doctors can be careful about the amount of these drugs they prescribe, and limit refills. Parents can make sure that any leftover pills are discarded. Another report was published today in the journal Pediatrics that analyzed data from the National Poison Data System. It found that of all 188,468 prescription opioid exposures reported for youth under 20 years old between 2000 and 2015, nearly all the exposures occurred at a home and were most common among children under 5, accounting for six of every 10 cases. According to NPR, those children were able to get their hands on the medication because it was improperly stored or was in a purse.

Comments

Re:Just stop incrementally

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it's actually a medical condition. Opiate withdrawal is not just a lack of feeling good. Addiction can happen even when the drugs are taken exactly as prescribed. Sometimes even that significant drawback is justified by the amount of pain the person would otherwise be in.

My brother passed away a couple years ago. He used a lot of pain medicine. I think it contributed. If nothing else it masked the pancreatitis for at least some time. He was on just far too much stuff. It was insane and all of it was legally prescribed. I flushed it all after he passed. It took several flushes.

From everything I've read, he might have lived a far longer life had he smoked pot instead for the pain. Again, not a perfect solution, and you really want to get off them if you possibly can, but the opiods seem a lousy long term solution.

If marijuana really is a better choice and less hazardous than many opiods and such, then we really should get rid of the ridiculous classification. Again, I'm certainly not espousing smoking it recreationally, but if it is the choice between one that will kill you and pot, then pot seems less bad.

This happened to my friend (he's now a Vet)

[Hadlock]

This happened to my buddy. He got in a car accident or something. This was shortly after he graduated from high school, and his father had just died. He ended up on pain meds, ended up getting addicted after a couple of months. When his prescription ran out, he called up our mutual friend who was in to drugs and got more. This went on for about 18 months before he decided he wanted to become a veterinarian, somehow his friends and family weaned him off pills, and after two years was accepted in to vet school. Through no small miracle he made it through grad school and graduated, he's now pretty successful.
 
I grew up in a pretty rich suburb, we had time to help him and his family through the addiction, and he had a strong goal to strive for. Many people don't have the opportunities or strong safety net that he did.

abusable by design thanks GOP

[globaljustin]

So what are we going to do about it? Point the finger of blame? Or defend ourselves? Your choice.

Both of course.

How can you defend yourself if you don't know what is attacking you?

Proper defense necessitates "pointing the finger of blame"...aka identifying the cause of the problem.

Fortunately we already know: Pharmaceutical companies make drugs abusable on purpose and incentivize doctors to prescribe them.

Democrats have been pushing for more pharma regulations for years, Repubicans opposing them.

Republicans have fought over and over to make it easy for these abusable drugs to get FDA approval.

Oxyconin is a perfect example, read up:

"In 2006, Giuliani acted as the lead counsel and lead spokesmen for Bracewell & Giuliani client Purdue Pharma, the makers of OxyContin, during their negotiations with federal prosecutors over charges that the pharmaceutical company misled the public about OxyContin's addictive properties. The agreement reached resulted in Purdue Pharma and some of its executives paying $634.5 million in fines"

source

Re:Just stop

[Anonymous Coward]

Alcoholic here going AC for this topic.

The only context the word "disease" appears in any of the articles is "Centers for Disease Control".

Personally I don't care if you call it a disease or not. I consider it a disorder but the AMA has considered it a disease since the 1950s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

The modern disease theory of alcoholism states that problem drinking is sometimes caused by a disease of the brain, characterized by altered brain structure and function.
The American Medical Association (AMA) declared that alcoholism was an illness in 1956. In 1991, the AMA further endorsed the dual classification of alcoholism by the International Classification of Diseases under both psychiatric and medical sections.

(emphasis mine)

And although you can find sources which argue that addiction is not a disease, you might want to consider this link too:

Why Is Alcoholism Classified As A Mental Illness?

I don't think it's a choice to be an addict, however I do make a choice whether or not to drink every day and on days that I choose not to drink I'm making the choice to be sober multiple times throughout the day.

I'm on my first drink of the day. I'm not doing it to "feel good". I'm doing it to stop shaking. I'm doing it just to feel "normal".

I can't speak for other addicts, but I'm sure I would feel a lot better overall if I did manage to quit completely. I might start feeling "good" after at least 5 drinks - Incidentally 5 drinks is considered binge drinking by many (if not most) medical professionals and is generally taken as a sign of possibly having a problem. Most drinkers I know scoff at the idea that having 5 drinks in one sitting is a problem. I know I won't feel good when I wake up whenever I wake up tomorrow.

And I'm generally depressed, but sometimes I get really depressed and being drunk and really depressed at the same time is definitely not feeling "good". In fact just knowing I get that way sometimes is a big reason I do not own a gun.

I've quit many times and withdrawal really sucks the first few days. That is quite the opposite of "feeling good".

Some recovery groups reject the disease model of addiction because like the First Step in 12 step programs it means we are "powerless" although having a disease doesn't necessarily mean you're powerless, but some people seem to use it as an excuse.

I consider myself fortunate to never have become addicted to opiates. I've never needed them long term, but I really like them. (benzos too). The benzos can really help alcohol withdrawal, but it's my understanding that a full-blown benzo addiction is no picnic either. I've never asked for them, but I've been prescribed them twice for alcohol withdrawals - both times just a week-long supply.

Usually I just go it alone at home. That is not actually recommended as alcohol withdrawal can kill you and there is something called "Kindling". (Don't try this at home.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Kindling due to substance withdrawal refers to the neurological condition which results from repeated withdrawal episodes from sedative–hypnotic drugs such as alcohol or benzodiazepines. Each withdrawal leads to more severe withdrawal symptoms than the previous withdrawal syndrome. Individuals who have had more withdrawal episodes are at an increased risk of very severe withdrawal symptoms, up to and including seizures, and death.

So why do I keep drinking if it's so bad? I can't fully explain it but I have some ideas that I'm not even going to delve into here.

I really don't think I'm "narcissistic" either. I generally have a low self-esteem

Re:Just stop

[Kiuas]

None of that makes it a "disease".

The approach people take on addiction has a surprising connection to their political stance. For decades, the right has been approaching addiction as a mental/moral weakness: that those succumbing to addiction are not sick or diseased but mentally weak and need to be punished so that they will correct their behavior. This is the driving force behind the 'war on drugs':

Those on the left have taken more of a medical approach and insisted that addiction is a neurochemical issue which needs to be treated by doctors.

When we actually look at research and data it turns out the truth is slightly more complex than either of these models. Turns out, it's not just about character or chemicals, but the combination of addictive chemicals and the environment the individual is in. Around 20 % of US troops in Vietnam were addicted to heroin. However, upon returning to the States, only about 5 % of them continued using. This by itself has given researchers some insight into key components of addiction and the affect environment has on it. Quoting the link above:

Soon a comprehensive system was set up so that every enlisted man was tested for heroin addiction before he was allowed to return home. And in this population, Robins did find high rates of addiction: Around 20 percent of the soldiers self-identified as addicts.

Those who were addicted were kept in Vietnam until they dried out. When these soldiers finally did return to their lives back in the U.S., Robins tracked them, collecting data at regular intervals. And this is where the story takes a curious turn: According to her research, the number of soldiers who continued their heroin addiction once they returned to the U.S. was shockingly low.

"I believe the number of people who actually relapsed to heroin use in the first year was about 5 percent," Jaffe said recently from his suburban Maryland home. In other words, 95 percent of the people who were addicted in Vietnam did not become re-addicted when they returned to the United States.

This flew in the face of everything everyone knew both about heroin and drug addiction generally. When addicts were treated in the U.S. and returned to their homes, relapse rates hovered around 90 percent. It didn't make sense.

"Everyone thought there was somehow she was lying, or she did something wrong, or she was politically influenced," Jaffe says. "She spent months, if not years, trying to defend the integrity of the study."

But 40 years later, the findings of this study are widely accepted. To explain why, you need to understand how the science of behavior change has itself changed.

"Once a behavior had been repeated a lot, especially if the person does it in the same setting, you can successfully change what people want to do. But if they've done it enough, their behavior doesn't follow their intentions," Neal explains.

Neal says this has to do with the way that over time, our physical environments come to shape our behavior.

"People, when they perform a behavior a lot — especially in the same environment, same sort of physical setting — outsource the control of the behavior to the environment," Neal says.

Outsourcing control over your behavior sounds a little funny. But consider what happens when you perform a very basic everyday behavior like getting into a car.

"Of course on one level, that seems like the simplest task possible," Neal says, "but if you break it down, there's really a myriad set of complex actions that are performed in sequence to do that."

You use a certain motion to put your key in the lock. And then physically manipulate your body to get into the seat. There is another set of motions to insert the key in the ignition.

"All of this is actually very complicated and someone who had never driven a car befo