Doctors Are Protesting Medicare Change That Would Let Pharmacists Deny Opioid Prescriptions

https://gizmodo.com/doctors-are-protesting-medicare-change-that-would-let-p-1823544391

In response to the opioid epidemic that is killing tens of thousands of Americans a year, the U.S. government is poised to further restrict the amount of opioids Medicare patients can have access to at any one time, via a policy that would tell pharmacies to reject certain prescriptions on the spot. But a group of doctors and researchers is pleading with officials to reconsider, saying the move would harm cancer patients and others who desperately need pain relief.

In a proposal paper released last month, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) laid out two policies affecting opioid prescriptions obtained through Medicare Part D that would come into effect starting in 2019.

 One would call for a “hard edit” of opioid prescriptions made to patients on Medicare Part D that exceed a specific cumulative daily dose—the equivalent of 90 milligrams of morphine (MME). Pharmacists would be allowed to deny payment at the register for these prescriptions, while notifying the doctor(s) who prescribed the drugs. Patients would still be allowed to obtain their prescription, but only after an appeal and acknowledgment from their doctor that they qualify for certain exceptions, such as having cancer, being terminally ill, or otherwise having pre-existing approval for a higher dose.

The second proposed policy would tell pharmacists to deny prescriptions made to first-time opioid users, flagged via a database that tracks prescriptions obtained through Part-D, that provide more than a 7-day-long supply, regardless of their diagnosis.

The new limits would be a step up from the current ones encouraged by the agency, which implement a “soft edit” for Part D prescriptions at 90 MME, and a hard edit for those at 200 MME. Soft edits still dictate that a pharmacist deny the prescription, but they can then approve it based on their own judgement of the patient and their medical history. The CMS estimates that the change could affect up to 1.6 million Medicare patients, based on data showing the percentage of patients without an approved exception who received more than 90 MME worth of opioids for at least a day in 2016.

 CMS argues that the new rules would encourage prescription plan providers to “do more to address chronic, high prescription opioid overuse.” However, more than 150 doctors across the addiction, pain, and rehabilitation field have signed an open letter addressed to the CMS that claims otherwise. Though they acknowledged that doctors’ prescribing standards for opioids have needed to change, they say the wide-sweeping policy would only harm chronic pain patients while doing little to address the actual problem of addiction.

“While a strong case can be made for consensual, supported opioid dose reductions for voluntary patients, no data support nonconsensual/forcible dose reductions or curtailment in otherwise stable patients that have become common as prescribers react to regulations, mandates, insurers and fear for professional security,” says the letter, which was signed by clinicians from medical schools at Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, among others, as well as former presidents from various medical organizations, including the Society of General Internal Medicine and the Association for Medical Education and Research on Substance Abuse.

“These policies represent a knee-jerk response that is unmoored from evidence,” Leo Beletsky, an opioid policy researcher at Northeastern University, told Gizmodo via email. “For example, the best available evidence is that legitimate patient need for opioid analgesia ranges from about 4 to 17 days, so it makes no sense to limit initial prescriptions across the board. This should be done on an informed case-to-case basis.”

 Beletsky was not one of the signatories of the letter, meant to be exclusively issued by health care providers in the field, but he said he has seen the letter and agrees with the points it makes.

For one, the writers argue that while the changes would certainly steer more people away from opioids, they would do so in a destructive way. In the wake of less strict prescribing guidelines already issued by agencies like the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the letter notes, there have been anecdotes of stable patients spiraling out of control after losing or having their prescriptions lowered, including those who seemingly fulfilled the exception criteria. In response, and without proper follow-up care, some patients have even turned to illicit drugs.

“There is little reason to believe these policies will drive down overdose risk—they have never been tested with that metric in mind,” Beletsky said. “There are, however, highly foreseeable collateral risks from these policies, including continuing the process of forcing patients to the black market.”

 Even with the appeal process laid out by the CMS, the letter argues that it’s likely many patients will be left suffering needlessly, thanks to delays in getting through to doctors for their approval, which could require coordination between doctors’ offices, pharmacies, insurers, and prior authorization managers. The CMS’s proposal would allow for a 7-day supply to be prescribed to certain patients going through the exception process, but only once.

“The CMS plan risks accelerating a chaotic pattern of churn, abandonment and medical harm to patients who receive opioids as physicians flee an increasingly risk-laden and cumbersome decision matrix that may not advance patient safety,” says the letter.

More than that, the doctors say the CMS plan mischaracterizes previous guidelines. In recommending a hard drop to 90 MME, the agency cites as support the CDC’s recommendation that patients be voluntarily steered away from that high a dosage if possible. But the CDC guidelines actively recommend against forcing patients already on a higher dose onto a specific lower dose without their consent—a fact that some of the signatories know well, given they helped draft the guidelines.

 Stefan Kertesz, a clinical researcher in addiction at the University of Alabama, spearheaded the creation of the letter, which was submitted to the CMS on Monday night. (Kertesz did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Gizmodo). Yesterday, March 5, was the deadline for public comment on the CMS proposals. Both prescription rules are expected to be finalized by April 3.

“We need to find ways of engaging and supporting patients without resorting to easy fixes that end up backfiring in very predictable ways,” said Beletsky.

My first thought on this is that CMS does not have the legal authority to implement dosing limits..  especially on a protect class under the Americans with Disability Act and Civil Rights Act. Especially since there is no clinical studies that supports these limits will help reduce opiate abuse and/or OD’s. If fact in the nearly two years since the CDC opiate dosing guidelines were released, statistics suggests legal opiates prescriptions are dropping and OD deaths are increasing dramatically.

It would appear that the CMS is dumping this into the lap of the Medicare Part D, who in return is dumping into the lap of the pharmacist filling the prescription.

Pharmacists are probably going to come down on this issue in two ways.. those pharmacists who don’t like to deal with the extra administrative tasks in filling C-II’s, will probably use this as justification to “JUST SAY NO “.  Generally, Pharmacist just love it when they are given the task of telling the pt that they now have a deductible, their copay has increased, their medication is no longer covered and other things that the insurance company may have sent to the pt in a pile of other paperwork when the new year come to be.  Most pts don’t understand that the pharmacy computer system sends the information to the insurance company/PBM what is being given to the pt and their computer system returns a $$$ owed by the pt as copay or deductible… or the medication is no longer covered.

So the Pharmacist – in this case the executor – is two parties removed from the “guilty party” – CMS… who will be sitting on their fat bureaucratic ass… thinking that they have done a good thing for our society as a whole.  Just like a lot of bureaucracies – like those bureaucratic moron in Ohio – that keep ignoring the fact that the majority of OD and in some counties 99% of OD’s contain illegal opiates in their toxicology.

 

I-TEAM: Opioid addiction versus dependency

http://www.lasvegasnow.com/news/i-team-opioid-addiction-versus-dependency/987514320

LAS VEGAS – Millions of chronic pain patients, already living in agony because of disease or injuries, now live in fear that their medicine will be taken away because they’ve been stigmatized as drug addicts.

News stories about opioid overdoses are pretty common, but few of those who overdose are pain patients.

Ninety percent of those who die of overdoses use illicit drugs.

Pain doctors says that, when it comes to opioids, there is a big difference between addiction and dependence.

“We will see an increase in drug overdoses,”

said Dr. James Marx, addiction specialist – pain management.

Pain specialist Dr. Jim Marx probably didn’t make any new friends on the Nevada Medical Board when he proclaimed during a board workshop that slapping new restrictions on opioid medications would cause more overdose deaths, not fewer.

News reports about the so-called opioid epidemic routinely claim that opioids kill more than 60,000 Americans per year, but it’s not prescription drugs.

Opioid prescriptions have dropped every year since 2011 by nearly 50 percent, but opioid deaths have gone up during the same period.

One reason is because addicts who previously, one way or another, obtained prescription meds are now taking street drugs,

if someone had a plan to drive Americans to try heroin, it worked.

“What we’ve done is we’ve created a target rich environment for the illegal drug trade,” Dr. Marx said. “They’re probably sending legislatures Christmas cards now. This is a great thing for them.”

“When we talk about opioids, do we mean prescription or illicit such as heroin? Heroin cannot be prescribed in the U.S., but it is being conflated with all the other opioids. It creates hysteria and alarm.

Steven Ziegler teaches public policy at a major university, but previously worked as a DEA agent. After decades of various wars on drugs, the streets of America are flooded with stronger, cheaper, and more powerful versions of every one of them.

Illicit fentanyl, smuggled in from China and other places, is 100 times more powerful than heroin and it is the single deadliest opioid of all — a 540 percent increase in overdoses in one year. Policy makers mistakenly lump together all opioid deaths, whether legal or illicit, and in order to “do something” about it, they have gone after the only non-moving target — chronic pain patients, who are paying a terrible price because of irresponsible actions by addicts.

“To arbitrarily deny prescription pain medicine to those folks who need it, to reduce dosage without regard for their individual function, is problematic. When people are experiencing pain, if they cannot get relief through their prescriber, what do you think is going to happen?” Ziegler said.

“We have patients that we’ve been seeing for 25 years that are on stable doses of medication who have not overdosed,” said Dr. Marx.

But in the eyes of politicians and some regulators, opioid users are addicts who must forcibly be taken off drugs. Dr. Marx says pain patients are certainly dependent on their medications, the same way a diabetic needs insulin, but that dependence is not addiction. 

“Addiction is a psycho-social where there is adverse consequences,” Dr. Marx said.

Dr. Marx says pain patients do develop a dependence on their medication, but they can take it basically forever without harm it allows them to keep their jobs, remain active, have a life. Those who’ve had their meds cut have suffered terribly, and many have committed suicide. Their need for medication is not addiction.

“Dependence is not addiction,” Ziegler said. “Withdrawal is not addiction. Addiction is a completely separate matter. As lot of people can be managed well on prescription therapy. For those who can be managed well, why are you trying to change their treatment?”

Nevada doctors have asked the state medical board to delay implementation of even stricter prescription guidelines because they are concerned about unintended consequences.  On Friday, at UNLV’s Boyd School of Law, physicians, attorneys and policy makers will spend a full day discussing and debating opioid regulation and policies.

Part 1: Kevin Shipp, CIA Officer Exposes the Shadow Government

Part 2: Kevin Shipp, CIA Officer, Exposes Shadow Government

Minnesota bill to tax opioids proposes taxation without representation

CCFHF

Group criticizes Baker’s “Penny-a-pill” bill

http://www.willmarradio.com/news/group-criticizes-baker-s-penny-a-pill-bill/article_c8c5dd30-2144-11e8-ac25-6f72b64634e2.html

(St. Paul MN-) Twila Brase, President of Citizens’ Council For Health Freedom, has criticized Representative Dave Baker’s “penny a pill” bill to fight opioid addiction. Brase says “A Minnesota bill to tax opioids proposes taxation without representation. A government bureaucracy would determine the level of taxation, not the legislature. The state Board of Pharmacy would define a taxable unit. It could be a prescription. It could be a milligram equivalent.

 

“In 2016, there were 3.5 million opioid prescriptions in Minnesota, which equals 2.7 billion morphine milligram equivalents. If the tax was $1.00 per prescription, that’s $3.5 million dollars, but if the tax was 1 cent per milligram equivalent, that’s $27 million. Time for a tea party if this bill passes and a state bureaucracy gets the power to set the tax.” Baker proposes charging companies that sell opioid pain killers in Minnesota a fee starting at a penny a pill, then use the money to fund programs to prevent and treat opioid addiction. He estimates the surcharge would generate up to 20 million dollars a year.

 

More than 80 percent of last year’s 232 overdose deaths in Butler County were linked to illegal fentanyl and its derivatives

Butler County set record for OD deaths in ’17, with 4 out of 5 caused by fentanyl and its cousins

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2018/03/06/fentanyl-blamed-butler-county-od-deaths-rise-21-perdentified-culprit-butler-county-overdose-deaths-2/398464002/

The hugely potent synthetic opiate fentanyl and its cousins caused a 21 percent jump in fatal overdoses in Butler County for 2017.

More than 80 percent of last year’s 232 overdose deaths in Butler County were linked to illegal fentanyl and its derivatives. The killer drugs, opioids themselves, are generally manufactured sloppily in “bucket” factories overseas and can be 10 percent to 50 percent more potent than heroin.

Fatal overdoses accounted for 4 out of 5 accidental deaths in the county, which were down 7 percent from 2016.

Fatal overdoses have been rising in Butler County since 2012, said Dr. Lisa Mannix, the Butler County coroner, who announced the 2017 count for her county Tuesday.

What’s happening in Butler County mirrors a national shift in overdoses linked to the prescription painkiller and heroin epidemic. 

The coroner also noted a fourfold increase in overdose deaths that tested positive for methamphetamine, although fentanyl was noted in these deaths, as well, Mannix said. Meth was linked to 46 deaths – or 1 out of every 5 fatal overdoses in the county.

“The proliferation of fentanyl analogs and increase in methamphetamine have turned an already bad situation into something far worse,” Mannix said.

 Meth use has been rising in region as a whole, with Northern Kentucky experiencing a significant surge last year.

“More than half the cases we are working are meth trafficking,” Chris Conners, director of the Northern Kentucky Drug Strike Force, said in December.

See Enquirer story: Meth cases surge

Like public officials in other communities, Mannix expressed hope that a multiagency, communitywide approach to ending the opioid epidemic continues.

The coroner’s office, health department and addiction services groups in Butler County urged the continued use of the opioid-overdose antidote naloxone and steering people into addiction treatment that includes medication.

 

It would appear that Gov Kasich and the Ohio Board of Pharmacy seems to believe that legal opiates are driving addiction and OD’s. Maybe Gov Kasich, the members of the Ohio Board of Pharmacy and the other bureaucrats/politicans needs to look somewhere else for the cause of these deaths other where they seem to be looking now ? 

 

Class action filed against drug firms for opioid-addicted newborns

https://wvrecord.com/stories/511356818-class-action-lawsuit-filed-against-purdue-pharma-for-babies-born-addicted-to-opioids

CHARLESTON – A class action lawsuit has been filed against Purdue Pharma for babies who were born with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome, a condition suffered by babies of mothers addicted to opioids.

Purdue Pharma L.P.; Purdue Pharma Inc.; the Purdue Frederick Company Inc.; McKesson Corporation; Cardinal Health Inc.; AmerisourceBergen Corporation; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.; Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.; Cephalon Inc.; Johnson & Johnson; Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Janssen Pharmaceutica Inc.; Endo Health Solutions Inc.; Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Allergan PLC; Watson Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Watson Laboratories Inc.; Actavis LLC; and Actavis Pharma Inc. were all named as defendants in the suit.

Walter Salmons and Virginia Salmons filed the lawsuit on behalf of W.D., a minor child, and all others similarly situated, according to the suit, which was filed March 2 in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

“Like thousands of children born every year, minor W.D. was born addicted to opioids,” the complaint states. “Prenatal exposure to opioids causing severe withdrawal symptoms and lasting developmental impacts.”

The plaintiffs claim W.D. was born four months ago and the first days of his life were spent in excruciating pain as doctors weaned the infant from opioid addiction.

W.D. will require years of treatment and counseling to deal with the effects of prenatal exposure, according to the suit.

“Minor W.D. and his mother are victims of the opioid crisis that has ravaged West Virginia, causing immense suffering to those born addicted to opioids and great expense to those forced to deal with the aftermath,” the complaint states.

The plaintiffs claim at birth, W.D. was diagnosed with Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome and was forced to endure a painful start to his life; crying excessively, arching his back, refusing to feed and shaking.

NAS is a clinical diagnosis, and “a consequence of the abrupt discontinuation of chronic fetal exposure to substances that were used or abused by the mother during pregnancy.”

“Minor W.D.’s mother began her addiction before 2016, before minor W.D.’s gestation, she had had a prescription for the opioid medication and she also obtained opioids via the diversionary market,” the complaint states.

W.D.’s mother consumed opioids manufactured and/or distributed by the defendants, according to the suit.

“Minor W.D.’s experience is part of an opioid epidemic sweeping through the United States, including West Virginia that has caused thousands of infants great suffering and continuing developmental issues,” the complaint states. “This epidemic is the largest health care crisis in U.S. history.”

The plaintiffs claim they are bringing the class action to eliminate the hazard to public health and safety caused by the opioid epidemic and to abate the nuisance caused by the defendants’ false, negligent and unfair marketing and/or unlawful diversion of prescription opioids.

“Plaintiffs further seek the equitable relief of medical monitoring to provide this class of infants the monitoring of developmental issues that will almost inevitably appear as they grow older and equitable relief in the form of funding for services and treatment,” the complaint states.

The incidence of NAS in newborns born to opioid-dependent women is between 70 and 95 percent, according to the suit.

The plaintiffs claim the NAS epidemic and its consequences could have been, and should have been, prevented by the defendants who control the U.S. drug distribution industry and the defendants who manufacture the prescription opioids.

“These Defendants have profited greatly by allowing West Virginia to become flooded with prescription opioids,” the complaint states. “The drug distribution industry is supposed to serve as a ‘check’ in the drug delivery system, by securing and monitoring opioids at every step of the stream of commerce, protecting them from theft and misuse, and refusing to fulfill suspicious or unusual orders by downstream pharmacies, doctors, clinics or patients.”

The defendants woefully failed in this duty, instead consciously ignoring known or knowable problems and data in their supply chains, according to the suit.

The plaintiffs claim the defendants intentionally and negligently created conditions in which vast amounts of opioids have flowed freely from drug manufacturers to innocent patients who became addicted, to opioid abusers and even to illicit drug dealers—with distributors regularly fulfilling suspicious orders from pharmacies and clinics, who were economically incentivized to ignore “red flags” at the point of sale and before dispensing the pills.

“Defendants’ wrongful conduct has allowed billions of opioid pills to be diverted from legitimate channels of distribution into the illicit black market in quantities that have fueled the opioid epidemic in West Virginia,” the complaint states. “This is characterized as ‘opioid diversion.’”

The plaintiffs claim acting against their common law and statutory duties, the defendants have created an environment in which opioid diversion is rampant.

As a result, unknowing patients and unauthorized opioid users have ready access to illicit sources of diverted opioids, according to the suit.

The plaintiffs are seeking compensatory and punitive damages, as well as medical monitoring and a fund that would be released to the children when they turned 18. The plaintiffs are represented by Kevin W. Thompson and David R. Barney Jr. of Thompson Barney.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia case number: 2:18-cv-00385

According to Wikipedia  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neonatal_withdrawal

neonatal abstinence syndrome  can result from the Mother use/abusing a whole list of different substances

Methadone

Heroin

Amphetamine

Alcohol withdrawal

Marijuana

Lysergic acid (LSD)

Caffeine and nicotine

Was the Mother immediately sent to rehab or arrested for being a “drug abuser”.. some states considers having an illegal substance in your blood… “possession of an illegal substance”. Did she admit that she was addicted/abusing opiates and which opiate she was abusing..

Was she a regular smoker, or drank caffeinated beverages (Coffee, Tea, Soda) or consumed one of the many forms of ALCOHOL ?  If so, why isn’t the class action including all the various manufacturers and distributors of those legal products ?

It is stated in the article that she was abusing Heroin… why isn’t her “dealer(s)” being sued for facilitating her addiction ?

Another class action case that goes after the “deep pockets” of corporate America to line the pockets of the ambulance chasing attorneys ?

 

Sessions to DEA: Evaluate opioid production quota

Sessions to DEA: Evaluate opioid production quota

Sessions to DEA: Evaluate opioid production quota

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/376335-sessions-to-dea-evaluate-opioid-production-quota

Attorney General Jeff Sessions is asking the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to evaluate whether changes are needed to the amount of opioids drug makers are allowed to produce.

If needed, potential alterations could be made through an interim final rule, which allows an agency to issue a new regulation effective immediately without first going through the notice and comment period.

In Sessions’s memo to the DEA, he noted that studies have indicated the U.S. is an outlier compared to other countries in how many opioid prescriptions are given out each year.

Every year, the DEA sets the production and manufacturing quotas for Schedule I and II controlled substances.

“Given the urgency of this crisis, with an estimated 175 Americans dying per day, we need the DEA to act quickly to determine if changes are needed in the quotas,” Sessions wrote in the memo.

In July, 15 Democratic senators and Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine) sent a letter to then-acting DEA administrator Chuck Rosenberg, asking him to reduce the opioid quotas for 2018. They noted that between 1993 and 2015, the DEA approved a 39-fold increase of oxycodone, 12-fold increase of hydrocodone and a 25-fold increase of fentanyl.

They praised the DEA’s decision to decrease nearly all opioid production quotas by 25 percent or more for 2017, but wrote that “however, the 2017 production quota levels for numerous Schedule II opioids remain dramatically higher than they were a decade ago.”

In December, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R) filed a lawsuit against the DEA challenging the production quotas for 2018 and seeking more transparency and input in the process.

The filing deadline for initial submissions had been extended twice, and was set for March 1. In light of Sessions’s announcement, Morrisey put the lawsuit on hold while the DEA evaluates the quotas.

“I heartily applaud Attorney General Sessions for the major step he is taking and for his continued collaboration with our office to protect West Virginians from this deadly scourge of opioid excess,” Morrisey — who is running for the Senate — said at a press conference. He didn’t make his lawsuit public at the time, discussing it for the first time publicly on Thursday.

The opioid epidemic has hit both urban and rural areas all across the country and shows no sign of abating.

Opioid overdose deaths increased nearly 28 percent from 2015 to 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Opiate Rxs are at a 10 yr low… OD’s up 50% over 10 yrs…  Does this suggest that AG Session needs to find out a way to curtail ILLEGAL OPIATES FLOODING INTO THE COUNTY ?

 

Idaho: Politicians elected by the PEOPLE… doesn’t want to represent the PEOPLE ?

Senate Panel Kills Bill Allowing Use of Marijuana Derivative

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/idaho/articles/2018-03-05/senate-panel-kills-bill-allowing-use-of-marijuana-derivative

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — A proposal to legalize oil extracted from cannabis plants is likely dead for the year after a group of lawmakers on Monday broke out in turmoil during a last-minute attempt to advance the bill.

Republican Sen. Tony Potts asked the Senate Health and Welfare Committee to give HB 577 a hearing after supporters of the bill said they were being blocked by legislative leaders.

“I think we have to remember that we represent people, people who vote for us, people who are our friends,” Potts said, who was appointed to the Idaho Falls’ legislative seat in October. “If you’re constituents are anything like mine, there is a large amount of individuals who desire the health benefits of this (CBD oil).”

Cannabidiol, otherwise known as CBD oil, comes from cannabis but contain little or no THC. Supporters tout CBDs as a supplement that can help alleviate pain, reduce stress and improve skin health, although there’s little data on whether they work or what kind of side effects they might have.

 Under HB 577, Idahoans seeking to use the oil for medical purposes for themselves or their minor children would have to apply to the Idaho Board of Pharmacy for a cannabidiol registration card.

While Potts defended his motion — which focused on his recent child’s seizures and why his family would want to use the product — he was quickly gaveled down by Chairman Lee Heider.

“If anyone on this committee wants to talk about this, they can do so in my office,” Heider said.

The majority of the panel then headed toward Heider’s office to discuss Potts’ motion.

Heider denied a request by The Associated Press, who followed lawmakers into the office, to sit in on the meeting.

 Yells could be heard from multiple members inside Heider’s office.

“The governor’s office doesn’t want this bill, the prosecutors don’t want this bill, the office on drug policy doesn’t want this bill,”

Heider said, who could be heard shouting to his members by the AP on the other side of the door.

Idaho lawmakers passed legislation in 2015 that would have allowed children with severe forms of epilepsy to use CBD oil. That bill was vetoed by Republican Gov. C.L. “Butch” Otter, who received pressure from law enforcement groups that feared it would lead to further loosening of the state’s drug laws. Otter has since said his position has not changed in the past three years.

Heider also warned Potts that his motion was unusual and should not have been made. Other lawmakers could be heard defending the legislative process, while others argued to allow Potts’ motion to be debated.

The committee only broke up after being warned by a reporter that their actions were breaking the state’s Open Meeting Law.

According to Senate rules, “all meetings of any standing, select, or special committee shall be open to the public at all times.”

Once broken up, members returned to the public committee room and a separate motion was made to hold HB 577 in committee — a legislative procedure essentially halting the bill from moving forward.

“The concern with the motion that I have, it doesn’t get it where we need to be,” Potts said, before voting against the action.

Potts’ concerns were overruled by other members on the committee via a voice vote and HB 577 will likely not advance this legislative session.

The measure had already cleared the House with a veto-proof majority.

Currently, 18 states allow use of “low THC, high cannabidiol (CBD)” products for medical reasons in limited situations or as a legal defense.

Opioid Addiction Medications Should Not Be Withheld From Patients Taking Benzodiazepines or CNS Depressants Opioid addiction medications

Opioid Addiction Medications Should Not Be Withheld From Patients Taking Benzodiazepines or CNS Depressants Opioid addiction medications – buprenorphine and methadone – should not be withheld from patients taking benzodiazepines or other drugs that depress the central nervous system (CNS), advises FDA. The combined use of these drugs increases the risk of serious side effects; however, the harm caused by untreated opioid addiction usually outweighs these risks. Careful medication management by health care providers can reduce these risks, notes a safety alert. FDA is requiring this information to be added to the buprenorphine and methadone drug labels along with detailed recommendations for minimizing the use of medication-assisted treatmentdrugs and benzodiazepines together. Health care providers should take several actions and precautions and should develop a treatment plan when buprenorphine or methadone is used in combination with benzodiazepines or other CNS depressants. Additional information may be found in an FDA Drug Safety
Communication announcement at   www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/ucm575307.htm.

More FDA edicts that are intended to “protect the addicts” ?

Sen. Manchin: re-election campaign didn’t get enough pharma money ?

Joe Manchin aims to restore DEA power in opioid bill

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/joe-manchin-aims-to-restore-dea-power-in-opioid-bill/article/2650695

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., introduced legislation to restore enforcement power to the Drug Enforcement Administration to target suspicious drug distributors.

The powers were stripped in a 2016 bill after heavy influence from the pharmaceutical industry, according to a report in the Washington Post. The scandal surrounding the bill, which passed Congress nearly unanimously and was signed into law by former President Barack Obama, caused Rep. Tom Marino, R-Pa., who led the legislation, to withdraw his nomination to serve as President Trump’s drug czar.

 Manchin’s bill, introduced Monday, would restore the DEA’s authority to go after suspicious drug distributors that divert powerful painkillers to corrupt doctors who distribute them. The authority was softened in the 2016 bill.

“This bill will make sure that the DEA regains the legal authority that was wrongly stripped from the agency in 2016 to ensure that they can go after companies taking advantage of the system, including those companies that send millions of opioid pills to tiny towns in West Virginia,” Manchin said.

Both the House and the Senate are pursuing legislation to target opioid abuse. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is considering eight bills that address the tide of the powerful synthetic opioid fentanyl and would expand treatment options.

But committee Chairman Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., recently told reporters that a bill to restore powers to the DEA isn’t in the works. He said the committee is awaiting guidance from the agency on the best way to proceed.