“The moral test of a government is how it treats those who are at the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the twilight of life, the aged; and those who are in the shadow of life, the sick and the needy, and the handicapped.” – Hubert Humphrey
passionate pachyderms
Pharmacist Steve steve@steveariens.com 502.938.2414
Missouri lawmakers this week passed legislation that appears to bar pharmacists from questioning doctors who prescribe the controversial off-label drugs ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for patients. The measure, which passed the House on a resounding 130-4 vote this week, was tucked into a bill related to professional licensing. After passing both chambers, the bill now heads to Gov. Mike Parson’s desk. According to its language, the bill would prevent state medical licensing boards from punishing or taking away the medical licenses of doctors who “lawfully” prescribe the two drugs. And it prevents pharmacists from contacting a doctor or patient “to dispute the efficacy of ivermectin tablets or hydroxychloroquine sulfate tablets for human use” unless the doctor or patient asks about the drugs’ effectiveness. Sen. Rick Brattin, a Harrisonville Republican, told The Star Thursday he added the amendment after he spoke with doctors who worried they would lose their medical licenses for prescribing the drugs. Brattin, who said he previously bought ivermectin for COVID-19 but has never taken it, described the drug as “politicized.” “Unfortunately, because of the politicization of those two drugs, [doctors are] being targeted,” he said. “I wanted to protect them from that.” The bill, specifically Brattin’s amendment, swiftly drew criticism on social media from people who pointed to the fact that the Food and Drug Administration has not approved ivermectin for treating COVID-19. The drug is authorized for humans to treat infections caused by parasitic worms, head lice and skin conditions like rosacea. The agency has received multiple reports of people who have been hospitalized after taking ivermectin intended for livestock, according to its website. “The Missouri legislature has chosen to ‘own the libs’ by issuing a gag order against every pharmacist in this state from offering their medical opinion on taking either one of those medications—even if it could kill their patient,” former U.S. House candidate Lindsey Simmons wrote on Twitter. Rep. Patty Lewis, a Kansas City Democrat who served on the committee that handled the bill, told The Star Thursday that Democrats agreed to the language in the bill to satisfy a group of hard-right conservatives in the Senate. She said the parts of the bill relating to the two drugs will not change anything in the medical community. She said medical licensing boards already would not punish a doctor for prescribing a drug lawfully. “This language, with a few buzzwords, is to keep some difficult, obstinate, conservative senators quiet,” she said. “It’s not necessary, it’s not needed. It’s ‘do nothing’ language only to make sure the bill does not fail in the Senate.”
One of the basics of the practice of medicine is the starting, changing/limiting , stopping a pt’s therapy. So besides these Pharmacists violating the American with Disability Act & Civil Rights Act… which both makes it illegal to discriminate against disabled people. It would seems that these Pharmacists are practicing medicine without a license.
I wonder if an attorney would file a complaint with the state’s board of Pharmacy and the Medical licensing board on behalf of all the pts being involved in this class action lawsuit, could be ignored by those licensing boards. Some states allow complaints against state licensing boards to be filed directly with the state’s Attorney General.
I have had some pts tell me recently that a CVS pharmacist told them that NO CVS PHARMACY will fill a particular controlled med in the immediate area. I have also been told that ordering of stock for CVS Rx depts is now managed by the pharmacy computer system. So it would seem that someone at CVS HQ could put a ZERO inventory to be maintained on certain meds at certain stores. Some state Pharmacy Practice Act, require a pharmacy to maintain inventory of meds routinely prescribed in their area. So if CVS HQ is prohibiting a CVS Rx dept to stock certain meds – even though the Pharmacist is regularly being presented prescriptions to be filled. Compounding the problem, C-II electronically sent, if they are not filled by the pharmacy/Pharmacist, basically become DEAD… because all paper C-II Rxs MUST BE SIGNED BY THE PRESCRIBER. I have read where the DEA has changed regulations that allows Pharmacist/Pharmacies to electronically transfer such electronic C-II to another pharmacy – HOWEVER – states would have to change their state control rules to allow this and pharmacy computer software would have to be changed. I do not know if any states and computer software companies have implement this.
This refusal to fill a pt’s controlled med Rx, seems that many different rules/regulations are being ignored and/or violated.
Here is a recent published article that shows that the MME SYSTEM has NO SCIENCE nor DOUBLE BLIND CLINICAL STUDIES behind it and/or supporting it. Also, I have not seen any FDA professional prescribing information that mentions the MME SYSTEM regards to prescribing opiates.https://www.acsh.org/news/2022/03/01/true-story-morphine-milligram-equivalents-mme-16154So what science or double blind clinical studies is CVS using in establishing this limiting pt’s opiate Rxs to 90 MME/day. I was always told/taught that all clinical decisions has to be based on CLINICAL FACTS
The survey shows that a significant percentage of pharmacy technicians are leaving their roles due to poor working conditions that are creating concerns for patient safety.
Under staffing, increased expectations and new COVID-19 era responsibilities are creating extreme burnout among pharmacy technicians, who are citing concerns about its impact on patient safety, according to a recent survey conducted by the National Pharmacy Technician Association.
The survey of 1,386 pharmacy technicians found that poor working conditions have driven 36% of respondents to plan to leave their jobs within the next three to 12 months. This is in addition to the record-setting 25.7% growth in job transition for pharmacy technicians observed from 2019 to 2021, according to NPTA.
When it comes to burnout, 91.4% of participants report experiencing burnout caused by unmanageable workloads due to under staffing and increased responsibilities, unrealistic expectations, low wages and even productivity quotas. On top of these demands, 44% of participants said their employers also do not provide legally required breaks.
Still, 91.6% reported that they have a passion for their work. That passion, coupled with concerns about the impacts of burnout, led 56% of respondents to report that these conditions are negatively affecting patient safety. Burnout in pharmacies can result in serious or even fatal medication errors, NPTA noted.
“As the largest organization of pharmacy technicians, our No. 1 priority has always been ensuring the quality and safety of patient care,” said Mike Johnston, CEO of NPTA. “We all have a responsibility to ensure pharmacies make significant changes to these working conditions, not only for the benefit of their employees, but also to protect their patients.”
To support these advocacy efforts to improve patient safety, NPTA has partnered with the Institute for Safe Medication Practices to invite pharmacy technicians to participate in a new, anonymous survey requesting specific accounts of how these working conditions are negatively impacting patient safety. Results from this survey will be shared with regulators, legislators, employers and industry organizations to provide the data needed to bring about change. Anonymous submissions can be made here.
The survey results come on the heels of news last month about a pharmacist shortage being the latest concern affecting the pharmacy industry. Currently, 80% of pharmacies are having trouble finding pharmacists, and many are offering huge sign-on bonuses of up to $50,000 to entice them.
Bridging the gap
The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists also is keeping tabs on the pharmacy technician employment situation.
A recent ASHP survey found that a majority of hospital and health-system pharmacy administrators reported turnover rates of at least 21-30% in 2021, and nearly 1 in 10 had lost 41% or more of their pharmacy technicians. The survey also showed that a growing number of health systems are responding to technician requests for professional development by implementing internal technician training programs.
In response, ASHP has launched PharmTech Ready, a resource to help bridge the professional development and training gaps that are among the drivers of the current nationwide shortage of pharmacy technicians.
PharmTech Ready provides healthcare organizations with tools to develop internal training programs to strengthen their ability to recruit, retain and advance the pharmacy technician workforce. The program aligns with the didactic learning requirements of the ASHP/Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education Model Curriculum. Users can adapt the training program to a variety of settings and methods of delivery for technician training programs. The program features over 160 hours of entry- and advanced-level content on more than 70 topics and includes supplemental materials that will allow healthcare organizations to leverage their sites for experiential training.
“The growing shortage of pharmacy technicians poses a significant challenge to achieving optimal medication outcomes and protecting patient safety,” said ASHP CEO Paul Abramowitz. “PharmTech Ready draws on ASHP’s extensive experience in developing education and practice resources for the pharmacy workforce and will help technicians build the skills needed to fulfill their essential role on the healthcare team.”
PharmTech Ready includes access to a range of exclusive ASHP continuing education, tools and other resources to bolster pharmacy technicians’ professional development and support their career advancement as critical members of the healthcare team.
Taking aspirin and ibuprofen as painkillers could be completely pointless, a study suggests.
Experts have now warned the cheap drugs may actually leave patients in agony for longer.
The findings call into question the conventional practice of treating pain with anti-inflammatory drugs, taken by millions around the world.
Researchers today praised the ‘excellent’ study, which was based tests in the lab on human cells and mice.
However, they have urged people not give up their painkillers overnight because the drugs are proven to be effective in the short-term.
Taking aspirin and ibuprofen as painkillers could be completely pointless, a study suggests. Experts have now warned the cheap drugs may actually leave patients in agony for longer
The study by researchers in Canada and Italy suggests inflammation may not be the nemesis after all.
Instead, it could be protective in the long-term. One researcher said that it ‘may be dangerous to interfere with it’.
Popular anti-inflammatories include diclofenac, naproxen, and piroxicam.
The research, in the Science Translational Medicine journal, also looked at steroids like dexamethasone, which works in a similar fashion.
Anti-inflammatory drugs work by blocking neutrophils, white blood cells which help the body begin the healing process.
Experts analysed blood samples, taken on three occasions, from 98 people battling lower back pain.
Patients whose pain eventually went away had significantly more neutrophils in their blood, compared to those still struck down.
This inspired the researchers to test blocking neutrophils in injured mice with anti-inflammatory drugs dexamethasone and diclofenac.
Scientists have found blocking neutrophils, a type of white blood cell which causes inflammation as part of healing tissues, actually prolonged the duration of pain in studies on mice. The experts were inspired to run the experiment after finding differences in genetic samples taken from people who suffered from ongoing lower back pain
HOW AMERICA GOT HOOKED ON OPIOIDS AND IS THE SAME HAPPENING HERE?
Research has shown hospital admissions for opioids has soared 50 per cent in the last decade in England adding to fears the UK could be facing a similar opioid crisis to the one in the US which has devastated thousands of families.
In the early 2000s, the FDA and CDC started to notice a steady increase in cases of opioid addiction and overdose. In 2013, they issued guidelines to curb addiction.
However, that same year – now regarded as the year the painkiller epidemic took hold – a CDC report revealed an unprecedented surge in rates of opioid addiction.
Overdose deaths are now the leading cause of death among young Americans – killing more in a year than were ever killed annually by HIV, gun violence or car crashes.
In 2019, the CDC revealed that nearly 71,000 Americans died from drug overdoses.
This is up from about 59,000 just three years prior, in 2016, and more than double the death rate from a decade ago.
It means that drug overdoses are currently the leading cause of death for Americans under 50 years old.
The data lays bare the bleak state of America’s opioid addiction crisis fueled by deadly manufactured drugs like fentanyl.
Most control mice stopped feeling pain within two months.
But rodents on the anti-inflammatory drugs experienced for pain for twice as long on average, with some in pain for 10 times longer than the control group.
Replicating the experiment with painkillers that don’t target inflammation, such as paracetamol (acetaminophen), did not produce the same extended pain response.
This suggested inflammation played a role in healing injuries and resolving pain, the authors said.
The findings were supported by a separate analysis of 500,000 people that showed that those taking anti-inflammatory drugs to treat their pain were more likely to have pain two to 10 years later.
Professor Jeffrey Mogil, author of the study from McGill University in Canada, said by interfering with this initial painful period medics could be doing more harm than good.
‘Neutrophils dominate the early stages of inflammation and set the stage for repair of tissue damage,’ he said.
‘Inflammation occurs for a reason, and it looks like it’s dangerous to interfere with it.
‘For many decades it’s been standard medical practice to treat pain with anti-inflammatory drugs.
‘But we found that this short-term fix could lead to longer-term problems.’
He added that while ibuprofen was not studied explicitly in the experiments, it would have been reflected in analysis of 500,000 Britons.
‘It is highly likely that a large percentage of those in the UK Biobank who reported taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were in fact taking ibuprofen,’ he said.
Fellow author, Dr Massimo Allegri, from Monza Hospital in Italy, argued the findings could mean medics need to treat painful injuries differently.
‘Our findings suggest it may be time to reconsider the way we treat acute pain,’ he said.
‘Luckily pain can be killed in other ways that don’t involve interfering with inflammation.’
Experts called for further trails comparing anti-inflammatory drugs to other painkillers that don’t disrupt inflammation.
Chronic pain, and the medications prescribed to counter it, are one of the drivers of the prescription painkiller addiction crisis in both the US and Britain.
Dr Franziska Denk, an expert in chronic pain from King’s College London, said the study was a ‘wonderful start’.
But she claimed further research needed to be done before changing how medics treated patients.
‘It would most definitely be premature to make any recommendations regarding people’s medication until we have results of a prospectively designed clinical trial,’ she said.
‘In my opinion, this study should not generate a debate around the use of NSAIDs in low back pain – much more research is needed to confirm these findings first.’
Professor Blair Smith, an expert on pain from the University of Dundee, said the latest study was an ‘excellent’ piece of research but people should continue to take their medications as advised until further scientific work is completed.
‘It is also important to note that anti-inflammatory drugs are effective in short-term pain management,’ he said.
‘There is good quality evidence to back this up and they should not be withheld unnecessarily.’
Ongoing chronic pain has been blamed for fuelling a painkiller addiction crisis in both the UK and the US which has blighted thousands of lives.
A London School of Economics study published in February found hospitalisations for opioid overdoses in England have soared by 50 percent in a decade.
Experts have also warned prescription painkiller use is likely on the rise as millions of patients suffer in agony while trapped on record-high waiting lists for surgeries like hip replacements on the NHS.
In the US the opioid addiction crisis has resulted in 600,000 deaths from overdoses since 1999.
Around 5million people a year in England are given prescription opioids, and more than half-a-million taken them for at least three years, according to a 2019 Government report.
The Board of Pharmacy is needing volunteers to create a Task Force/Committee for evaluating temperature excursions and the shipping of prescriptions by pharmacies to patients who are located in state and out of state.
This Task Force/Committee will more than likely need to evaluate the potential of creating rule changes to the existing rules.
All interested parties will need to submit the below items to Marty Hendrick via email at Mhendrick@pharmacy.ok.gov to be considered for this task force.
Letter of interest on serving on the Task Force/Committee.
Resume of pharmacy work experience.
Past experience in a pharmacy practice that involves shipping prescriptions to patients.
535:15-3-11. Prescription drugs
(f) Prescription shipping. The pharmacy shall maintain and use adequate storage or Cargo transportation services and use shipping processes to ensure drug stability and potency. Such shipping processes shall include the use of appropriate packaging material and/or devices to ensure that the drug is maintained at an appropriate temperature range to maintain the integrity of the medication throughout the delivery process. Visit this company for those looking for pallet suppliers in California.
(1) No prescription shipped to a citizen of Oklahoma should have a temperature excursion that exceeds the temperature storage conditions outlined within the package insert or by the manufacturer of the drug product.
(2) A pharmacy or pharmacist shall refuse to deliver by mail or common carrier a prescription drug which, in the professional opinion of the pharmacy or pharmacist may be therapeutically compromised by delivery by mail or common carrier.
(3) A mail order or non-resident pharmacy shall make available to the patient or patient’s caregiver the contact information for the Oklahoma State Board of Pharmacy.
The WHO is making a power grab over our health sovereignty by changing the International Health Regulations
In May 2022, World Health Organization (WHO) intends to amend the International Health Regulations to give greater control to itself and Tedros Ghebreyesus, Director-General of WHO. This pushes our world towards a centralized governance model of worldwide health surveillance, reporting, and management, where the people have no say.
Background
The International Health Regulations (IHR) was adopted by 194 member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2005. They enable the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) if it decides that an infectious disease outbreak has occurred in a member state, but with the consent of the member state. The World Council for Health (WCH) acknowledges this aspect of the current regulations because it recognizes the sovereignty of nations that adopted the IHR. But that is about to change.
Key Issues to Understand
On January 18th 2022, the United States Department of Health and Human Services proposed amendments to the IHR. These amendments give control over the declaration of a public health emergency in any member state to the WHO Director-General – even over the objection of the member state. The Director-General communicated the text of the proposed amendments on 20 January 2022, via a circular letter to State Parties.
The proposed IHR amendments also cede control to WHO “regional directors,” who are given the authority to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern (PHERC). Moreover, the proposed amendments allow the Director-General to ring an international alarm bell, by unilaterally issuing an “Intermediate Public Health Alert (IPHA).”
Properly understood, the proposed IHR amendments are directed towards establishing a globalist architecture of worldwide health surveillance, reporting, and management. Consistent with a top-down view of governance, the public will not have opportunities to provide input or criticism concerning the amendments. This, of course, is a direct violation of the basic tenets of democracy and can be compared to the separate new pandemic treaty.
Summary of Selected Proposed Amendments to the IHR
The WHO intends to amend 13 IHR articles: 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 48, 49, 53, 59
Increased surveillance: Under Article 5, the WHO will develop early warning criteria that will allow it to establish a risk assessment for a member state, which means that it can use the type of modeling, simulation, and predictions that exaggerated the risk from Covid-19 over two years ago. Once the WHO creates its assessment, it will communicate it to inter-governmental organizations and other member states.
48-hour deadline: Under Articles 6, 10, 11, and 13, a member state is given 48 hours to respond to a WHO risk assessment and accept or reject on-site assistance. However, in practice, this timeline can be reduced to hours, forcing it to comply or face international disapproval lead by the WHO and potentially unfriendly member states.
Secret sources: Under Article 9, the WHO can rely on undisclosed sources for information leading it to declare a public health emergency. Those sources could include Big Pharma, WHO funders such as the Gates Foundation and the Gates-founded-and-funded GAVI Alliance, as well as others seeking to monopolize power.
Weakened Sovereignty: Under Article 12, when the WHO receives undisclosed information concerning a purported public health threat in a member state, the Director-General may (not must) consult with the WHO Emergency Committee and the member state. However, s/he can unilaterally declare a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern. The Director General’s authority replaces national sovereign authority. This can later be used to enforce sanctions on nations.
Rejecting the amendments: Under Article 59, after the amendments are adopted by the World Health Assembly, a member state has six months to reject them. This means November, this year. If the member state fails to act, it will be deemed to have accepted the amendments in full. Any rejection or reservation received by the Director-General after the expiry of that period shall have no force and effect.
The World Council for Health’s Position On Proposed IHR Amendments
The WCH opposes the unnecessary and dystopian move toward centralized control of public health. This proven harmful model assumes that only one entity, WHO, understands how to manage the health policy of every state – and by implication, the health of each and every individual. It also assumes, incorrectly, that Big Pharma’s controversial model of medicine which is the WHO’s preferred model – is the expert guide to better health and wellness.
These proposed IHR amendments will be voted upon at the next World Health Assembly, which will take place in Geneva, May 22 to 28, 2022. The official agenda item is 16.2. It is not clear if the event will be broadcast for transparency. Thus, the WCH believes that it is essential to campaign against the proposed amendments and to build alternative pathways.
Why People Must Take Action Together
Due to the influence of private money at the WHO, a review in the Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy stated that the corruption of the WHO is the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time.” This is particularly true in relation to WHO drug recommendations, including its “list of essential medicines,” which a growing number of people believe is biased and unreliable.
Moreover, even though WHO’s documents highlight voice, agency, and social participation as drivers of equity and democracy, it is unknown World Health Assembly delegates who get to make decisions for us. To date, 13 days away from the World Health Assembly 75, the secretive list of each country’s delegates has been not been published. This is censorship.
Given consistent evidence that WHO is heavily conflicted and controlled by various industries, its usefulness as a guide to public health must be critically re-evaluated, while alternative paradigms and models for ethical health guidance and human rights are built.
Global #StopTheWho Campaign Activated
It is going to take each and all of us to campaign against the power grab through the IHR Amendments, this May, and onwards to November – just six months away. In the best campaigns for human rights, multi-pronged strategies are effective. Here are some ideas:
Speak: Raise awareness on the ground and online. Use articles, posters, videos
Act: Campaign through rallies, political mobilization, legal notices, and cases, etc.
Collaborate with health freedom coalitions such as the World Council for Health
Explore activist toolboxes such as: www.dontyoudare.info and stopthewho.com
Engage global indigenous leadership to take a united stand against the WHO’s IHR
Notify World Health Assembly country delegates to oppose the IHR amendments
Activate people’s parliaments, legislatures or referendums to oppose power grabs
You will also find #StopTheWho campaign resources uploaded to the World Council for Health website in the next few days.
Collectively, we are in the greatest awakening in history. Given our experiences the last 2 years, we know that we are the ones we have been waiting for. If not us, then who? If not now, then when? Let us join hands in taking back our health, our freedom, and our power.
I’m not sure if you already know, but the State of Minnesota has been openly discriminating against chronic pain patients enrolled in Minnesota healthcare programs. Here in MN, people with lower incomes who are enrolled in programs like Medicaid and Minnesotacare (these are a population mostly comprised of low income, disabled and minority enrollees) has been limited SEPARATELY in opioid prescribing. State officials have admitted pressuring Medicaid/MnCare providers not to prescribe specifically to low income enrollees and they are doing so under threat of physician disenrollment from treating individuals in state programs. For many doctors and prescribers, this is the threat of financial ruin in return for their compassion. Unfortunately, after almost 13 years of chronic pain, I have found myself enrolled one of these programs and experienced this discrimination personally. Recently, my diagnosis has worsened far beyond the herniated lower back that started my journey, and now I have fibro (possibly with fibro neuropathy in my feet, and they can’t seem to find the diagnosis for it). Very recently, after a fall, they discovered that my lower neck now has compressed discs and I have bone spurs and disc degeneration in my neck too. It burns so badly at night that it wakes me up and I can’t get back to sleep no matter what. Due to this new diagnosis, and also what I think have been really noticeable changes in medication potency of the hydro brand I’ve been taking for a long time (mallinckrodt hydrocodone 10/325), I respectfully requested a small increase in my pain medication to 70 mme (I’m currently at 65. I am a legacy patient with a very good record).
I was refused the small increase and told that I was at the “upper limit for my insurance”… I asked my provider with that meant and she said that under the kind of insurance I have (Minnesota Healthcare programs), I cannot be increased at all. I was also told that I can only be prescribed two kinds of medication…hydrocodone, and as she recently suggested Suboxone (I told her there was no way I would ever take Suboxone because I want to keep my teeth and I don’t want to be blackballed for the rest of my life). Schedule prescribe those two medications to me or nothing at all. Those are my options. Also, I found it frightening and insulting that she tried to throw me into Suboxone. After a short discussion I found she didn’t know anything about Suboxone AT ALL and that she was only considering prescribing that from a hyped up discussion she had with another PA practitioner. It was really kind of shocking that she would want me to take something that she didn’t know a thing about!
I did some research on her claims and I found that, yes…Minnesota Health Care programs are pushing doctors not to prescribe anyone beyond 50 MME of anything but Suboxone, and this was clearly designed to severely limit people like me who found themselves included with people from specific groups that the state decided were high risk. It was hard to accept that Minnesota, which likes to promote racial equity, was pigeonholing all of us together and discriminating against us all based on racial and income stereotypes. However I was not able to find where I was limited to only two different kinds of opioids, however, so that might also have been my provider fibbing, I’m not sure. Perhaps they were allowed to prescribe more hydrocodone? I don’t know.
But at any rate there are two articles that were published in the Minneapolis Star News Tribune that directly explains how the state is targeting people on Medicaid/Minnesotacare in Minnesota to be treated differently than people with private insurance. The people who initiated this were actually proud of blackmailing doctors to abuse low income people.
So this is where it’s at now. I’m not sure what I should do with this now, but I wrote a complaint of discrimination toward Minnesota Health Care programs. That was about a month ago now and I still have not received any reply.
Anyway, I was wondering if you knew anything about this and if you had any ideas to leverage this further for the cause. I do know that Kolodny has put up a remote office in Minnesota for PROP and we’re also dealing with the Steve Rummler Hope organization here too. I don’t have any other chronic pain allies in the state, unfortunately, which would be really helpful, but at this point I’ll take any help anyone can give me to move forward with this.
Commonly prescribed hypertension medications may be harmful in combination with ibuprofen.
Anyone who is taking a diuretic and a renin-angiotensin system (RSA) inhibitor for hypertension (high blood pressure) should be cautious about also taking the painkiller ibuprofen, according to new research.
Diuretics and RSA inhibitors are commonly prescribed together for people with hypertension and are available under various pharmaceutical brand names. Pain-relievers such as ibuprofen are available over-the-counter in most pharmacies and stores in popular brands including Advil and Motrin.
Researchers at the University of Waterloo used computer-simulated drug trials to model the interactions of the three drugs and the impact on the kidney. They found that in people with certain medical profiles, the combination can cause acute kidney injury, which in some cases can be permanent.
Ibuprofen is a medication in the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) class that is used to treat pain, fever, and inflammation. This includes painful menstrual periods, migraines, and rheumatoid arthritis. Common brand names with ibuprofen as the active ingredient include Advil and Motrin.
“It’s not that everyone who happens to take this combination of drugs is going to have problems,” said Anita Layton, professor of applied mathematics at Waterloo and Canada 150 Research Chair in mathematical biology and medicine. “But the research shows it’s enough of a problem that you should exercise caution.”
Computer-simulated drug trials can quickly produce results that would take much longer in human clinical trials. Layton and her team use mathematics and computer science to give medical practitioners a head start with issues like drug complications.
The research, in this case, can also speak directly to the many people who are taking drugs for hypertension and may reach for a painkiller with ibuprofen without giving it much thought.
“Diuretics are a family of drugs that make the body hold less water,” Layton said. “Being dehydrated is a major factor in acute kidney injury, and then the RAS inhibitor and ibuprofen hit the kidney with this triple whammy. If you happen to be on these hypertension drugs and need a painkiller, consider acetaminophen instead.”
Layton’s new research paper, with co-authors Jessica Leete, Carolyn Wang, and Francisco J. López-Hernández, “Determining risk factors for triple whammy acute kidney injury,” appears in the journal Mathematical Biosciences.
Here is a hyperlink to a page with all of these meds listed… it is pretty long… so I am just providing the hyperlink
When Jan 1, 2023 comes around and you are on Medicare Part D or Medicare Advantage Prgm … if the PBM’s do not change the contracts that they are “offering” independent pharmacies for 2023… your independent pharmacy will either be a “cash only” pharmacy or out of business.
Since the PBM’s came around in 1969-1970, their “contract negotiations” have always been “take it or leave it”… if you don’t take/sign the contract…”we” will make your customers/pts LEAVE your pharmacy because there will be some pharmacies in your area that will sign it..
back then, other than the manual forms that had to be filled out on every Rx filled and wait for a couple of months for the PBM’s to reimburse you..their reimbursement formula was not all that bad.
Today there is about <50% of the number of independents in our country as was in business at their peak in the mid-70’s. When I opened my independent pharmacy in 1976, in a small town/county seat of 30K-35K…there was 12 other independent pharmacies. 20 yrs later, I was burnt out, a new Revco store was opening up and I took the opportunity to sell our pharmacy… leaving only ONE INDEPENDENT PHARMACY left in town. That town now has two independent pharmacies and the newer one built his business on compounding. The town is now dominated by Walgreen, CVS & Kroger.
Since 1970, the top 4-5 PBM’s are owned by INSURANCE COMPANIES and currently they handle the payment of abt 80% of all Rxs filled and now each have multiple highly automated mail order pharmacies. Walgreens has already announced plans to implement regional “central fill, high automated pharmacies”… where they indicate that they will direct all non-control Rxs refills to be filled and transported by to the Walgreen’s store of the pt’s choice. Of course, they are counting on people being “trained” to order their necessary refills a few days ahead. It looks like Walgreen expects the PBM not to budge on the reimbursement in their contracts and CVS has already announced that they are going to close about 10% of current stores. Things appear to be changing, and the pt’s individual health care needs appears to at the very best second to the needs of the insurance industry to making increased profits
I have never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but after being a licensed Pharmacist for 52 yrs… I have never seen a new medication come to market in less than a DECADE of clinical trials and even then I have seen meds going thru 10 yrs of clinical trials get pulled from the market, within the first year on the market, because of some adverse event that did not show up in the clinical trials. And millions of people were persuaded – or forced- – to get vaccinations that were only available with EUA (EMERGENCY USE AUTHORIZATION) from the FDA. In my opinion, they were pushing two vaccine based on a process (mRNA) that was TOO NEW & TOO UNTESTED… I made sure that we got the J&J/Jansen vaccine because it used the same process that we have used for years creating our flu vaccination. Now “they” have decided because of a few blood clots in pts getting this vaccination… they are back to pushing the mRNA products… when you look at the data on those getting blood clots was in females 20y/o – 45/yo – the age which birth control meds are more likely to be used and BC’s are known to possibly create blood clots… It is getting hard to separate the FACTS from the DISINFORMATION
ABC News Affiliate Accidentally Discovers the Truth About COVID Vaccines
The World Tribune has a stunning story about an ABC News reporter’s effort to target the unvaccinated and support the Biden policy to force vaccines. WXYZ in Detriot, an ABC affiliate, asked viewers to share stories of loved ones who died of COVID after refusing or delaying to get the vaccine. This request produced an unexpected truth bomb.
By noon on Monday, the post had received over 39,000 angry and often heartbreaking responses. Virtually every string contains a firsthand report by people whose family members are grieving the loss of loved ones of all ages.
Typical of many of the responses, one woman wrote poignantly:
