FDA Tightens Hydrocodone Regulations To Curb Drug Abuse

HNGN ^ | Aug 25, 2014 | Ashley Helms

[JCG]

Stricter rules for the country's most commonly prescribed painkiller were rolled out on Thursday by the FDA, the last step in a policy change that has been coming down the pipeline for years, The New York Times reported on Sunday.

Hydrocodone will now be in a more serious and restrictive category. Doctors will be barred from calling in prescriptions by telephone, and patients will not be able to get refills on the same prescription, but will have to return to a physician for a new one. It will also have be to kept in special vaults in pharmacies. The Drug Enforcement Administration said it will take 45 days for the new rules to take effect.

[digger48]

We just had a local 78 yo doctor plead to a 30 year sentence for over prescibing pain killers that killed 27 of his patients. 95 felony counts against him, his wife and 7 other of his associates.

Of the 30 years, he was to serve 10, but because of his “clean record”, he is only going to serve 2 years with 8 years on home detention.

http://wishtv.com/2014/05/28/doctor-accused-in-overprescribing-deaths-pleads-guilty-to-drug-charges/

“According to the probable cause affidavit filed in the case, the Wagoner’s clinic was known as “the place to go if you wanted prescription drugs.” Former patients and former employees both told I-Team 8 that the Wagoner clinics were “cash and carry,” where patients paid their bills in full of up to $400 a week before being handed a prescription to get narcotics like hydrocodone, Xanax and Oxycontin.

Some patients were prescribed up to 500 methadone or hydrocodone pills per month, according to the probable cause.

Wagoner originally faced 20 felony counts related to dealing narcotics or conspiracy to deal narcotics.”

[Hoodat]

Isn’t this same government handing out methadone to anybody who wants it?

[JCG]

Your doctor won’t need to carry the script to the pharmacy, just give you a physical, signed copy rather than call into the pharmacy.

Right, so all I have to do is go by his office and pick it up, 30 minutes wasted. Then go to the pharmacy and waste another 30 minutes to get it filled or, more likely, schedule a return trip to pick up the medication. And for what?

It’s all about reducing the level of opiate addiction.

Oh, yes, that. But I have a legitimate use for the drug. How does this extra rigamarole reduce anyone's opiate addiction? If it's so damned dangerous outlaw it like Schedule I drugs. Otherwise it's just BS.

I just spent a couple months working on a story on local heroin addiction. Almost everyone started out with a doctor’s prescription for an opiate painkiller.

Oh, boo, hoo, you're killin' me.What're you going to do, outlaw prescriptions?

----

Send treats to the troops...
Great because you did it.
www.AnySoldier.com
(An entirely free service)

[kdot]

“Oxycodone has been like that for the 6 years that I have been taking it.”

That proves the point. If Oxy is already tightly controlled, and abuse is still rampant, then the controls aren’t working. Taking the same approach with Vic will have the same result.

[digger48]

That wasn’t my point at all.

Just noting that this is one of the reasons people who really need it are now treated like junkies

[Hoodat]

Every time I have to sign for the old sudafed at the pharmacy (since the new phenylephedrine doesn’t work), I remind the people behind the counter how easy it is to make methamphetamine from Vick’s nasal inhalers, and you don’t even have to cook it. The pharmacists usually nod their heads in agreement.

[JRandomFreeper]

It's a reason only in the minds of those that want to equate the two and punish the innocent.

It's not justifiable.

There can be NO excuses allowed for government over-reach.

/johnny

[Jemian]

This is an absolutely awful prohibition. Chronic pain needs to be treated continuously. I hope those who did these get such debilitating pain and never recover!

[Hoodat]

That proves the point. If Oxy is already tightly controlled, and abuse is still rampant

Last time I checked, heroin was tightly controlled too.

[digger48]

I agree.

I’m not equating the two, just pointing out the fact that this is happening

[kdot]

Interesting case. How would this new regulation have stopped that practice?

[JRandomFreeper]

So? Are you trying to justify the government position of over-reach where the feds, technically, aren't constitutionally authorized to operate?

No excuses allowed.

None.

Time for government budget cuts.

/johnny

[digger48]

Doesn’t sound like it would. But this guy was dishing them out to anybody with the cash, regardless of the medical need

[JRandomFreeper]

Your post indicated that you were somehow trying to justify the government position.

I reject that, in case I wasn't clear.

/johnny

[digger48]

I don’t know where you are getting the idea that I am justifying anything.

I never implied that at all.

sorry if you got that impression

[JRandomFreeper]

But this guy was dishing them out to anybody with the cash, regardless of the medical need

So? Not the federal government's problem, according to Art 1, Section 8. They don't get any authority on drugs.

It's a state issue.

It's way past time to cut some budgets.

/johnny

[Bobalu]

this guy was dishing them out to anybody with the cash, regardless of the medical need

Sounds like what the cashier at the local supermarket does with liquor and cigarettes.

The War-On-Some-Drugs

the stupidity of the prohibition era lives on.

[kdot]

“Last time I checked, heroin was tightly controlled too. “

Exactly! Sadly, if stupidity was tightly controlled we would still have stupidity.

If do-gooders were tightly controlled, we would still have do-gooders.

Maybe we should eliminate the control? Ha! Then what would the do-gooders do?

[digger48]

In this particular cae, it wasn’t the feds who prosecuted the doctor, it was the state.

He admitted to dealing narcotics.

[JRandomFreeper]

The case that had nothing to do with the thread, that you included, to justify the federal law.

Got it.

/johnny