America’s Current Guidelines For Fixing The Opioid Crisis Will Increase Suffering And Death, Not Reduce It.

America’s Current Guidelines For Fixing The Opioid Crisis Will Increase Suffering And Death, Not Reduce It.

www.medium.com/@TheMeerkat/americas-current-guidelines-for-fixing-the-opioid-crisis-will-increase-suffering-and-death-not-8b4a21048430

Yesterday afternoon, President Trump declared America’s opioid crisis a public health emergency, and for good reason: the American Society of Addiction Medicine estimates that there’s nearly 2.6 million Americans with an opioid addiction, and the communities affected include some of our poorest and most vulnerable. The problem is becoming critical, and solving it goes beyond politics to become one of basic human compassion.

The only problem: current guidelines by the FDA and CDC are ineffective, based on a factually‐faulty premise unsupported by evidence, and will almost certainly increase suffering and death without significantly improving the numbers for opioid addiction.

Let’s focus on “ineffective” first.

Current Guidelines

FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb has put out a statement affirming that they “have an important role to play in addressing the crisis, particularly when it comes to reducing the number of new cases of addiction”:

Patients must be prescribed opioids only for durations of treatment that closely match their clinical circumstances and that don’t expose them unnecessarily to prolonged use, which increases the risk of opioid addiction. Moreover, as FDA does in other contexts in our regulatory portfolio, we need to consider the broader public health implications of opioid use. We need to consider both the individual and the societal consequences.

(For this, and all future quotes, all bolding is my own emphasis.)

The CDC goes further with its current guidelines, including a clinical “reminder” that “opioids are not first-line or routine therapy for chronic pain”. It recommends to use as low of a dose as possible for as short of a time as possible, frequently reconsider its upkeep, and to only start them as a last result.

Almost any statement made by public officials relating to the crisis is based on the same two premises: reducing the number of patients receiving long‐term opioid prescriptions is the most effective way to curtail the opioid epidemic, and most opioid addictions start as a result of use that began as legitimate.

Unfortunately, nearly all the evidence we currently have contradicts these foundations. If you’re interested in a detailed, academic look at the topic, there’s a fantastic article written by three doctors — including an Associate Professor at the University of Massachusetts Medical School — appropriately titled “Neat, Plausible, And Generally Wrong”:

Recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) for chronic opioid use, however, move away from evidence, describing widespread hazards that are not supported by current literature. This description, and its accompanying public commentary, are being used to create guidelines and state-wide policies.

These recommendations are in conflict with other independent appraisals of the evidence — or lack thereof — and conflate public health goals with individual medical care. The CDC frames the recommendations as being for primary care clinicians and their individual patients. Yet the threat of addiction largely comes from diverted prescription opioids, not from long-term use with a skilled prescriber in a longitudinal clinical relationship. By not acknowledging the role of diversion — and instead focusing on individuals who report functional and pain benefit for their severe chronic pain — the CDC misses the target.

We need to break some statistics down. According to the 2014 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 74.9% of nonmedical opioid use happens as a result of people taking medication they were not prescribed, such as those obtained or stolen from a friend or drug dealer. A further 3.1% fraudulently obtained prescriptions from multiple doctors, a practice called “doctor‐hopping”. That’s a total of 78% of sources other than a relationship with a single doctor. That leaves 22% of those who were addicted who do receive their pills from a doctor, but we need to put that number into perspective.

A Cochrane review of opioid use in chronic non‐cancer pain found that fewer than one percent of people who were responsibly prescribed opioids developed an addiction.

The findings of this systematic review suggest that proper management of a type of strong painkiller (opioids) in well-selected patients with no history of substance addiction or abuse can lead to long-term pain relief for some patients with a very small (though not zero) risk of developing addiction, abuse, or other serious side effects.

Signs of opioid addiction were reported in 0.27% of participants in the studies that reported that outcome.

A scant 0.27% of patients prescribed long‐term opioids for chronic pain showed signs of becoming addicted. The doctors above found similarly‐low rates of addiction with other sources of data.

 
Image sourced from “Neat, Plausible, And Generally Wrong”, reproduced under fair use.

Part of responsible prescribing involves screening patients for their addiction risk. Though physicians tend to report a low confidence in this field, a pilot study in the Journal of Pain and Symptom Management found that it’s far easier than one would expect to find which patients are genuine, and the results have been repeated since.

Responses of addicted patients significantly differed from those of nonaddicted patients on multiple screening items, with the two groups easily differentiated by total questionnaire score. Further, three key screening indicators were identified as excellent predictors for the presence of addictive disease in this sample of chronic pain patients.

It’s important to recognize that scripts written properly aren’t the cause of the epidemic, because — beyond being ineffective — this mindset can actually lead to reduced access to treatment for those with addictions.

Buprenorphine is an opioid that’s used as maintenance therapy, as it has a far lower risk of causing respiratory depression, the primary killer in opioid overdose. Its use as a maintenance therapy is associated with a significantly lower chance of death than leaving addiction untreated; inexplicably, however, the use of buprenorphine was stifled by a 2000 law stating that only 30 patients could be treated at any one time per physician to begin with, and only after jumping through numerous bureaucratic hoops that made it more difficult to prescribe treatment for opioid addiction than the opioids themselves.

[As of June 2017,] only 35,894 providers are currently eligible to prescribe buprenorphine for addiction. Of those 35,894 only about 1/3 actively prescribe the treatment; and these few are further limited by the patient caps.

 
Photo from freestocks.orgCC0

Prescriptions, given to patients adequately screened by and in possession of a good relationship with the physician, and used by the patient for which they were prescribed, simply are not the cause of the majority of opioid use disorders — diverted prescriptions and irresponsible mass scripts from so‐called “pill mills” are. You may have heard the small West Virginian town of Kermit mentioned in the news recently due to one of their drugstores: “In just two years, drug wholesalers shipped 9 million opioid pills to a pharmacy in Kermit, WV, a town of just 400 people.

Researchers logged nearly 1,000 cases of doctors being either charged or administratively reviewed for the inappropriate prescription of opioid drugs over an eight year period, and specific high‐profile cases have been the subject of numerous documentaries. Pill mills prey on those susceptible to addiction, and prescribe indiscriminately:

Like the other pain clinics in Portsmouth where Volkman had worked, the clinic only accepted cash — no insurance, no Medicaid. In exchange for $150, patients could expect to receive high doses of pain medications, anti-anxiety agents, and muscle relaxers. In September 2005, according to a search warrant, one Portsmouth Police informant stopped in to see Volkman and received prescriptions for 180 oxycodone pills, 180 Lorcet (a hydrocodone-based painkiller) pills, 120 Soma (a muscle relaxer) pills, and 90 Xanax. Two days later, another informant received a prescription for 270 oxycodone pills, 270 Percocet, 120 Somas, and 60 Xanax. Volkman’s clinics brought in thousands of dollars in cash and pumped out thousands of pills in a region that was already being described in the Portsmouth Daily Times as “The OxyContin Capital of the World.”

Pill mills have become as much an epidemic as the problem they have, in large part, caused, and their existence is supported by the for‐profit pharmaceutical companies that manufacture the opioids; in 2016, the pharmaceutical industry spent over $246M dollars lobbying lawmakers to, among other things, enfeeble the DEA’s ability to go after improper drug distributors, and it’s not slowing down. At the time of this article’s publication, over $208M has been spent by the industry thus far in 2017.

It’s an operation driven by profit from the top down, and it’s easy to see how backing the CDC’s position of cracking down on opioids entirely becomes tempting, but there are ways to curtail excessive prescriptions without creating a devastating case of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

According to the American Pain Society, there are over 25 million Americans who experience daily chronic pain — pain that affects quality of life every single day. Conditions like lupus, fibromyalgia, Ehlers‐Danlos syndrome, various forms of arthritis, and many more cause pain that is not only severe, but unending. That’s an important number, because it’s just about ten times the number of patients with an opioid addiction.

I’ve made two separate claims: increased suffering, and increased deaths. I’ll start with suffering.

 
Photo by Dominik Wycislo | Unsplash License

“But Have You Tried Yoga?”

Invariably, you’ll find guidelines instructing doctors to tell patients to pursue “alternative” painkilling strategies first, as if there are myriad wells of untapped relief that chronic pain patients simply ignore.

There aren’t.

We can save time and start with the easy ones: acupuncture doesn’t work. There’s some evidence for massage being somewhat effective for some conditions, but the fact that it’s rarely covered by insurance and the need for ongoing treatment renders the cost/benefit ratio bad. Marijuana is still federally illegal, unavailable in many states, and its presence on a drug test still precludes many employment opportunities for pain sufferers who are able to work. Chiropractic is ineffective pseudoscience that hurts more than it helps. Supplements can cause harm, interact with real medicine, and extraordinarily few have any high‐quality evidence for any condition, including almost none for chronic pain.

That leaves the big one: exercise. “Exercise helps reduce chronic pain!” is repeated often and adamantly, as if it is long‐accepted fact that has a long, positive background in research. Does it?

As recently as April of this year, Cochrane looked over twenty‐one of their reviews of studies regarding exercise for chronic pain, and found that the evidence was generally insufficient:

The quality of the evidence examining physical activity and exercise for chronic pain is low. This is largely due to small sample sizes and potentially underpowered studies. A number of studies had adequately long interventions, but planned follow-up was limited to less than one year in all but six reviews.

There were some favourable effects in reduction in pain severity and improved physical function, though these were mostly of small-to-moderate effect, and were not consistent across the reviews. There were variable effects for psychological function and quality of life.

[…]

Additionally, participants had predominantly mild-to-moderate pain, not moderate-to-severe pain.

Beyond that, the correlation between chronic pain and chronic fatigue is massive, with everything from lupus and fibromyalgia to EDS, rheumatoid arthitis, and Raynaud syndrome causing heavy fatigue, and that in no way comprises a complete list. Despite what the CDC incorrectly insisted for years past being proven inaccurate, exercise invariably makes chronic fatigue, such as found in CFS, worse.

So strike all the chronic pain patients suffering from chronic fatigue. Of the remainder, what about the ones with a strong medical reason not to exercise? Chronic pain caused by physical damage, Ehlers‐Danlos patients unable to exercise or maintain yoga‐esque positions due to frequent joint dislocations, inflammatory conditions that forbid normal ranges of movement, those with heart conditions exacerbated by activity…

We’re left with a small slice of the pie chart for which exercise gets the chance to be effectively used at all, and I would posit that even if there was evidence for it, calling it a replacement for pain management and not something to do alongside it is an act of cruelty. This was stated earlier, but it necessitates repeating: chronic pain is daily. Chronic pain causes real suffering every day, and frequently every hour.

There are no “good days” where you don’t have pain, just days that are “somewhat better than usual”. Imagine this: every day, anywhere from “many parts” to “every part” of your body hurt; unrelenting, bone‐deep aching, nerves that light themselves on fire, jabbing pain coursing through your muscles upon the slightest activity.

If your pain levels average out to 7/10 on a daily basis, would you intentionally up the pain to 9/10 numerous days a week just to — after weeks and months of agony — potentially bring that daily average down to 6/10? Would you feel like you got good value on that proposition? Would you consider it worth it? Would you have the will to keep it up every week until your death, forever? It doesn’t matter if we assume the unsubstantiated claims of notable improvement are true; would you not want pain relief for the days in which your suffering was greatly increased?

Pain needs to be managed, and there are, unfortunately, limited ways to effectively do so. The single most efficacious non-pharmaceutical treatments involve mental mechanisms, such as mindfulness meditation and CBT, which do nothing to reduce the pain itself — merely one’s perception of it. They help, but they can take months to see improvement, and will always leave you with a certain baseline of pain that needs to be treated through some other avenue.

 
Photo by Jay MantriCC0

The End Of The Road

Depression affects up to half of all chronic pain patients. According to studies, risk of suicide is at least double that of controls, with up to 14% of CPP attempting suicide and around 20% of them experiencing suicidal ideation. Causes and levels of chronic pain can be disabling and prevent patients from maintaining gainful employment, or from participating in the hobbies and activities that were once important to them.

Chinese water torture is a process in which water is slowly dripped onto a person’s forehead, allegedly making the restrained victim insane.

The comparison might seem trite, but it’s apropos: the worst part of chronic pain is not the “pain” — it’s the “chronic”. Relentless pain dominates your life in a way few healthy people appreciate. It demands schedules to be built around it; it demands plans to be canceled en masse when it unexpectedly flares; it holds you as a hostage in your own body and taunts you with its permanency. Make no mistake that even with opioids, it makes it more manageable, not absent; completely eliminating pervasive pain is nearly impossible.

If relief is taken away from chronic pain sufferers indiscriminately and under faulty pretenses, the question is not whether it will result in increased disability and suicide — the question is only by how much.

The opioid crisis needs solutions, and quickly, but it also needs those solutions to be factual, effective, and compassionate, and our current theories for how opioid addiction starts and how it needs to end are none of the above.

Pain Dr: no one who walks into their clinic walks out with opioids that day

Christensen

Pain doctor testifies at Christensen trial

http://ravallirepublic.com/news/local/article_7f3b1088-f8f7-5f52-8da9-6950748122c7.html

An expert in treating chronic pain testified for most of Thursday in the trial of former Florence physician Chris Christensen, describing the various options for patients and the many steps needed before prescribing opioids.

In his opening statements, Deputy County Attorney Thorin Geist portrayed Christensen as a doctor who asked few questions and wrote plenty of opioid prescriptions, with some patients receiving the powerful drug within hours of entering his clinic, and others being given a list of opioids from which to choose. Christensen is charged with two counts of negligent homicide, nine counts of criminal endangerment, and 11 counts of distribution of dangerous drugs.

Dr. Patrick Danaher with the Advanced Pain and Spine Institute in Missoula testified that no one who walks into their clinic walks out with opioids that day. He said that after an exam and diagnosis, if opioids are part of the treatment plan the patient needs to see a psychologist, visit https://www.riverfronttimes.com/stlouis/erase-my-back-pain-reviews-2021-whats-new/Content?oid=34768096 if you are looking for a natural and harmless chronic back pain treatment.

“They take the patient through a battery of tests and do a pretty thorough interview. It takes two or three hours,” Danaher said, adding that they look for red flags, such as a history of substance abuse. Patients also can undergo the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory test so doctors can form a conclusion on whether the patients are goods risk for chronic opioid therapy.

Christensen’s attorney, Josh Van de Wetering, asked how expensive those tests are, having previously noted that Christensen didn’t accept insurance for his patients because of the plethora of paperwork. Danaher said he wasn’t sure, but in cases with low-income patients without insurance, his clinic will either set up a payment plan or forgo payments altogether.

“If they can’t pay we have a program where we can assist them or forgive the debt on a needs basis,” Danaher said. “We don’t advertise it, but we offer it.”

Danaher noted that opioids are quite dangerous, and can cause “respiratory depression” that gradually slows and ultimately stops a person’s breathing, which leads to death.

So instead, his clinic tries to treat chronic pain patients with other drugs that seek to address the cause of the pain, like anti-inflammatories, anticonvulsants, anti-depressants, muscle relaxants, usually most pain conditions are linked to overweight, check these meticore reviews.

“Opioid treatment is just one of the tools,” Danaher said. “There’s so many other things we have to offer.”

His testimony came on the same day that President Donald Trump declared the opioid crisis across the nation a public health emergency. (See related story.)

Danaher said he suspects that 30 years ago, doctors were under treating pain patients. With the creation of sustained-release opioids like OxyContin in the 1990s, the pendulum swung to over-prescribing, leading to an opioid epidemic.

“I think that is making its way back to what will be the middle,” Danaher said.

The trial continues today.

Doctor has no idea what the cost to the pt on a mandatory psychological testing that takes 2-3 hrs. No reference as to how many pt or per-cent of pts taking the test show a tendency of having a mental health disease of addictive personality… could that be because a very low per-cent fall into that category and it would suggest that the making the test mandatory is wasting a lot of money and expense for pts.  Most Psychologists charge a minimum of $100 – $125/hr.  There is a much more simplistic test SOAPP-R https://www.opioidrisk.com/node/1209 and takes 10 -15 minutes.

Dr Christensen was originally OVER-CHARGED with 400 charges… and were reduced to 22 for the trial two counts of negligent homicide, nine counts of criminal endangerment, and 11 counts of distribution of dangerous drugs.

Does this suggest that the prosecuting attorney just pulled the rest of those 378 charges out is his ass when the charges were just made ?

The pain specialist stated that:  opiates can cause “respiratory depression” that gradually slows and ultimately stops a person’s breathing, which leads to death.

Just about anything CAN CAUSE under desirable outcomes.. like drinking too much WATER can cause DEATH, but don’t hear about anyone suggesting that we should suggest limiting access to water.

C.D.C. Panel Recommends a New Shingles Vaccine

C.D.C. Panel Recommends a New Shingles Vaccine

https://www.doximity.com/doc_news/v2/entries/9847908

WASHINGTON — In an unusually close vote, an advisory panel to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Wednesday recommended the use of a new vaccine to prevent shingles over an older one that was considered less effective.

The decision was made just days after the Food and Drug Administration announced approval of the new vaccine, called Shingrix and manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline, for adults aged 50 and older. The panel’s recommendation gives preference to the new vaccine over Merck’s Zostavax, which has been the only shingles vaccine on the market for over a decade and was recommended for people aged 60 and older.

The panel also recommended that adults who have received the older vaccine get the new one.

According to the C.D.C., almost 1 of every 3 people in the United States will contract shingles,

a viral infection that can result in a painful rash and lasting nerve damage.

The disease, also known as herpes zoster, can range in severity from barely noticeable to debilitating. It is caused by the varicella-zoster virus, which also triggers chickenpox.

Patient and Advocate Yanekah, Masters in Critical Disabiities, shares an intimate journal moment in a busy, pained Mommy day.

An inspiring, intimate journal sharing of what it is to be a CHRONIC PAIN mommie.

 

“Opioids: The Next Tobacco?”

Don’t let opportunistic trial lawyers get rich off opioid crisis

http://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/357610-dont-let-opportunistic-trial-lawyers-get-rich-off-opioid-crisis

President Trump has now declared the nation’s opioid crisis a “public health emergency.” This important step follows the recommendation by a White House commission, led by New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, to “act boldly,” to stem the crisis.  

As this epidemic of drug abuse becomes a growing problem for many states across the country, details of a White House strategy remain unclear. But as a recent Wall Street Journal editorial noted, the “horrors of opioid addiction come from many dysfunctions, including too many prescriptions, a decline in work, heroin and fentanyl, easy access from Medicaid, and others.”

Understandably then, as reported by a joint task force of the National Association of Counties and the National League of Cities, many communities are already cooperatively bringing together health care professionals, drug makers and distributors, regulators, law enforcement officials and social service providers “to break the cycles of addiction, overdose, and death” as they work through “partnerships across … local, state and federal levels.”

But having let themselves be convinced that communities can somehow sue their way out of complex opioid abuse problems, some state and local prosecutors have taken a more adversarial approach. Not coincidentally, those doing the convincing are many of the same private-sector personal injury lawyers who got rich beyond their wildest dreams with contingency fees two decades ago when they convinced state attorneys general to let them run lawsuits against cigarette makers.

So no one should be surprised that the personal injury lawyers’ national trade group here in Washington hosted in September a “Rapid Response: Opioid Litigation Seminar” to teach attendees how they too might cash in on such litigation. One of the breakout sessions was even titled, “Opioids: The Next Tobacco?”

Never mind that prescription opioid pain-relievers are not like cigarettes. They were developed to address a legitimate medical need. They require Food and Drug Administration approval and stark warning labels about the potential for addiction, and their lawful distribution is closely regulated by the Drug Enforcement Administration. Of course, as we’ve all learned in recent years, what may begin with doctors’ thoughtful prescriptions of lawful medicines for patients’ terrible pain can in some cases end in the streets with overdoses on illegal and deadly drugs such as heroin and fentanyl.     

Not to be deterred by facts or nuance, much less the public interest, though, self-interested personal injury lawyers have talked a coalition of 41 state attorneys general into issuing subpoenas for five drug manufacturers that seek information about how prescription opioids were marketed and sold. Several state AGs have already gone further, filing multi-count lawsuits against drug makers and distributors, with dozens of county and city prosecutors following suit. And most of these prosecutors have hired private-sector lawyers to consult or run their lawsuits.  

The prosecutors assert that hiring outside counsel on a contingency-fee basis saves taxpayers money since counsel only gets paid if litigation is successful. This simple rationale, however, overlooks the conflicts of interest and corruption to which such arrangements have often led. A litany of these types of abuses has been chronicled for more than a decade by the Wall Street Journal’s editorial board and a Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times series.

This reporting has revealed that politically influential plaintiffs’ lawyers frequently shop their ideas for potentially lucrative lawsuits against corporate defendants to friendly state prosecutors who then hire the lawyers, expecting generous pay-to-play campaign contributions later.

Thus the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) urges all policymakers to insist that the public interest in health and safety is never compromised by private interests. This principle has animated ATRA’s efforts for more than a decade to push commonsense reform statutes — successfully in 18 states so far — that promote accountability and transparency when public authorities choose to hire outside counsel on a contingency-fee basis.

Too many Americans are suffering serious drug abuse problems, and our leaders must work together to find good-faith solutions. They ought to be relying for guidance on caring and knowledgeable experts inside and outside of government. Because to rely on trial lawyers instead is to invite other problems that neither policymakers nor their constituents need.

Tiger Joyce is president of the American Tort Reform Association in Washington, D.C.

NACDS letter offers Administration, Congress 4 policy solutions to curb opioid abuse

NACDS letter offers Administration, Congress 4 policy solutions to curb opioid abuse

http://www.drugstorenews.com/article/nacds-letter-offers-administration-congress–policy-solutions-curb-opioid-abuse

ARLINGTON, Va. — With President Donald Trump set to declare a national opioid emergency this week, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores has suggested four public policy initiatives to the Administration and members of Congress. The suggestions, outlined in a letter sent Tuesday, are aimed at building on current collaborative efforts to stem opioid abuse while maintaining high-quality patient care, NACDS said.

“These four integrated public policy strategies would further reduce the volume of unneeded and unused opioid medications entering the public domain, and reduce the chances that they fall into the wrong hands – while taking into account the needs of those most severely affected by chronic pain as a result of cancer and other serious illnesses,” NACDS president and CEO Steve Anderson said. “The fact that these public policy proposals are gaining traction among those in the healthcare and enforcement communities reflects that much-needed consensus may be starting to build for additional and sound approaches to this epidemic.”

Among the suggestions is a seven-day supply limit for initial opioid prescriptions issued for acute pain — a limit that is in-line with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Guideline for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain. The letter notes that 20 states have already taken action on this issue, calling for federal legislation to ensure consistent care.

NACDS’ letter also calls for federal legislation mandating electronic prescribing for controlled substances — something that currently only happens for 14% of controlled substance prescriptions. Earlier this year, NACDS voiced its support for the Every Prescription Conveyed Securely Act, which was introduced in August.

The e-prescribing mandate would be one way to enhance security while curbing fraud, waste and abuse. It also would provide a foundation for improving security through a national prescription drug monitoring program that would harmonize varying state requirements for reporting and accessing PDMP data, creating a single system. A national PDMP would use e-prescribing to offer providers and dispensers real-time guidance for patients, NACDS said.

The organization also suggested the use of manufacturer-funded envelopes that patients could use to mail back unused opioids. The envelopes would be available at pharmacies upon request, and their use could be reinforced by a state-legislated mail-back program, NACDS said.

The letter also notes the need to regulate synthetic opioids, the importance of advancing prescriber education tools through the Food and Drug Administration’s Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies for opioids and the need for enhanced treatment for patients with opioid abuse disorders, among other approaches.

“As public health authorities have indicated, face-to-face interactions between pharmacists and patients have made pharmacists keenly aware of the extreme challenges and complexities associated with this epidemic,” Anderson wrote in the letter. “Based on this first-hand experience and our commitment to the patients and communities we serve, NACDS remains steadfast in our efforts to partner with law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and others to work on viable strategies to prevent prescription drug diversion and abuse, including prescription opioids. Chain pharmacies engage daily in activities with the goal of preventing drug diversion and abuse.”

It would appear that the National Association of Chain Drug Stores is ON BOARD with all the various alphabet soup of federal agencies’ agenda on the opiate crisis.  Not one word in this letter about the “needs” of the chronic pain pts !

So what many pts who patronize chain drug stores have experienced in the past about not being able to get their controlled substance prescriptions filled and given a multitude of reasons/excuses why they can’t have their controlled substance prescription filled.

from the NACDS letter Chain pharmacies engage daily in activities with the goal of preventing drug diversion and abuse.”

So the fewer controlled prescriptions they fill …they will be reducing the potential of drug diversion and abuse… but.. that only applies to legal opiates… will not touch – maybe increase – the reported 100 million that the drug cartels sell “on the street” of ILLEGAL OPIATES.

Of course, the denial of a chronic pain pt’s legal prescriptions could force those pts to commit suicide or in desperation … turn to trying to get some relief and buying street drugs and risking an unintentional OD and if they survive, then they will be labeled as having a “opiate use disorder”.

There are options to the CHAIN DRUG STORE… there are some 21,000 – 22,000 independent pharmacies in this country and generally your copays will be the same as from the chains.  Unlike the chain employed Pharmacists, the Pharmacist of the owners is not guaranteed a paycheck every pay period regardless if they fill your legit/on time/medically necessary prescription(s) or not.

Many independents provide delivery home at no charge and must less likely to treat you like a addict/criminal and most are much better staffed… so the wait time to get a prescription filled is generally much shorter.

I had my own independent pharmacy for 20+ yrs… so I am very familiar with the concept and mindset of the Pharmacist/owner.

Generally independents can order medication Monday – Thursday and get it the next day… some may take a extra day. The drug wholesalers are rationing controls to all pharmacies … so that may come into play when they can get controls back into inventory.

If the independent is a little bit longer drive, talk to the pharmacist into “syncing your meds” …where they set it up that you get all your meds every month on the SAME DAY…  How many trips/month are you now making to get all your meds ? Take all your prescriptions to the independent… if the chain that you have been patronizing is only interested in filling your non-control prescriptions and not your controls… do they deserve to have any of your business ?

http://www.ncpanet.org/home/find-your-local-pharmacy    here is website link where you can find independent pharmacies by ZIP CODE.

 

ACLU: can find resources to defend ONE ILLEGAL ALIEN… chronic pain pts being denied care – NOT SO MUCH ?

Today, after a successful ACLU court case and persistent grassroots action, we helped achieve justice for Jane Doe, a 17-year-old-woman who came to the U.S. without her parents and is in a government-funded shelter. The Trump Administration did everything imaginable to force her to stay pregnant against her will.

This morning Jane was able to end her pregnancy safely and legally. It’s her decision – that’s still the law in this country.

We still have much work to do to overturn the outrageous policies at the heart of this issue and secure justice for ALL Janes. We know there are many more Janes out there: young women being held in federal custody who are being denied the ability to get abortion care and coerced and shamed for their decisions.

But, today, the most powerful words I can share with you are those of Jane herself. Here’s an excerpt from a statement she released earlier today through her guardian:

“No one should be shamed for making the right decision for themselves. I would not tell any other girl in my situation what they should do. That decision is hers and hers alone.

I’ve been waiting for more than a month since I made my decision. It has been very difficult to wait in the shelter for news that the judges in Washington, D.C. have given me permission to proceed with my decision. I am grateful for this, and I ask that the government accept it. Please stop delaying my decision any longer.

My lawyers have told me that people around the country have been calling and writing to show support for me. I am touched by this show of love from people I may never know and from a country I am just beginning to know – to all of you, thank you.

This is my life, my decision. I want a better future. I want justice.”

Thanks to everyone, especially the entire ACLU family and activists like you, who fought to give Jane the justice she deserves.

Keep fighting!

Brigitte Amiri
ACLU attorney, fighting for reproductive rights

P.S. There’s still time to add your name to our petition, which we’re delivering to the Health and Human Services Department tomorrow, calling on the Trump Administration to stop denying women their basic human rights. Click here to add your name to the petition.

DEA Blasted for Stonewalling Probe On Opioid Pill Dumping

DEA Blasted for Stonewalling Probe On Opioid Pill Dumping

As Trump declares a public health emergency, a congressional committee can’t squeeze answers out of the federal agency.

Even as President Donald Trump was preparing to declare the opioid crisis a public health emergency, a Republican congressman was criticizing the federal Drug Enforcement Agency for stonewalling an investigation to help solve the problem.

Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) criticized the DEA for failure to cooperate with a congressional investigation into alleged opioid pill dumping by major drug companies in West Virginia. About 9 million hydrocodone pills were shipped over two years to a single pharmacy in a rural town of fewer than 400 people. The DEA has not yet released the identities of the companies suspected of supplying the pills.

“To me, this is a pretty basic question. Who are the suppliers?” Walden said.

Walden, who heads the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which is conducting the probe, threatened to issue a subpoena for the information “because we are done waiting.”

“I’m going to be very blunt: My patience is wearing thin. Our requests for data from the DEA are met with delay, excuses and, frankly, inadequate response,” Walden said as he opened a committee hearing Wednesday. “People are dying. Lives and families are ruined. It is time for DEA to get this committee the information we need, and to do it quickly. No more dodges. No more delays.”

He pointed out that opioid overdoses last year alone killed “more Americans than the entire Vietnam War.” In his state of Oregon, overdoses kill more people than car accidents. An estimated 91 lives are lost in the nation each day due to opioid overdoses.

Walden said the committee was still missing information requested from DEA back in May. DEA officials said they were “unaware” of some information, such as data concerning delayed or blocked enforcement action against drug companies, according to Walden. Yet the committee managed to obtain the information from an anonymous source. “Enough is enough,” said the irritated congressman.

 “Sir, we appreciate your concern and, absolutely, we are treating it with the utmost importance, as it should be treated,” DEA Deputy Assistant Administrator Neil Doherty told Walden at the hearing. “There is no reason for the extended delay of the questions. … We will make every effort to expedite every request that is outstanding.”

An investigation earlier this month by The Washington Post and “60 Minutes” revealed that Congress — pressed by pharmaceutical company lobbyists and wooed with campaign contributions — stripped the DEA last year of key crackdown tactics against companies whose drugs end up on the streets.

Trump had nominated Rep. Tom Marino (R-Pa.), a pivotal supporter of the DEA limits, to head the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy. But Marino withdrew his name from consideration after the Post report.

West Virginia counties have filed suit against drug companies and pharmacies, and other states are now taking similar action.

Many of the regions that backed Trump in last year’s election are being hit particularly hard by the opioid epidemic. On Thursday, the president stopped short of declaring the problem a national  emergency, which could have freed billions of dollars for the fight. His declaration of a public health emergency did not specifically release funds or name an amount to address the problem, but he is expected to ask for extra money to battle the crisis, The New York Times reported.

the value of a life… when damaged by MEDICAL ERRORS — NOT MUCH ??

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/5h0qm0/picture180955361/alternates/LANDSCAPE_1140/GettyImages-200526677

Doctors said it was just a migraine – then a friend had to save my

life. Here’s why suing is pointless

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article180955366.html

It was midnight and I paced around my bedroom holding ice packs on my head. I realized, this is not normal.

I went to Sutter Medical Center emergency room in Sacramento. With tears running down my face, I told the doctor I had the worst headache of my life. I was given pain medication and sent home, diagnosed with a migraine. But I was actually in the early stages of an impending stroke.

I was only 45. I’ve worked in politics for over 20 years and at the time was the senior strategist for the California Democratic Party.

Fourteen hours later, I didn’t know my son’s name. A friend saved my life by taking me to the emergency room again. I don’t remember much for seven days. Family and friends came to my bedside. Doctors talked about making nursing home arrangements for me.

When doctors wanted to release me 10 days after I was admitted, I told them something wasn’t right. I had severe back pain for six days, and was coughing up blood. They said I should still leave. I accepted their diagnosis. Again.

  In less than two days, I was back in the emergency room. The pain was unbearable and I had lost vision on my left side. Turns out I had a previously undiagnosed pulmonary embolism, a large leg blood clot and now a brain hemorrhage. I had been right. Something was wrong. Again, they didn’t listen to me.

My story, later described in a suit, isn’t unique. A friend told her doctor that for two weeks, she had experienced the worst headache of her life, and asked if it could be a stroke. She was prescribed opioids. She had a major stroke that landed her, a 31-year-old dance teacher, in a walker, dependent on the pain meds. She eventually had to pay out of pocket for the treatment necessary to end her dependence.

A recent Johns Hopkins study showed medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the U.S., surpassed only by heart disease and cancer.

My friend and I face lifetime consequences from our strokes. But a 1975 California law supported by many of the lawmakers I have looked up to all but prevents us from suing for medical malpractice.

Under the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act, damages for pain and suffering in a medical malpractice suit are capped at $250,000, and the maximum cap is typically only awarded in cases resulting in death.

So if a child is killed by a preventable medical error, his or her life is worth $250,000. Same goes for the elderly, or a stay-at-home mom or anyone else not making a salary that can be figured into the raw, unemotional math of “economic damages” in malpractice cases.

To put this in perspective, that $250,000 cap hasn’t changed one cent since 1975. In 1975, home prices averaged under $50,000, and the minimum wage was about $2 an hour.

If the malpractice law were adjusted for inflation, the law today would cap pain and suffering damages in personal injury cases at $1.3 million dollars. But the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act doesn’t include a cost-of-living increase. So while court and expert witness costs rise each year, the award doesn’t.

Doctors say they fear that if the cap is raised their malpractice premiums will increase. I feel the same about my car insurance, but I pay it.

Because of my profession and my privilege, I was able to find a lawyer to take my case, though I dropped the suit when I realized that the aggravation of a drawn out court fight would hamper my healing. I also knew that any award would be much less than the $250,000 cap. And if I agreed to accept a settlement, I likely would have had to sign away my right to speak out. I believe it’s important to tell my story not only for myself, but for others.

I have advantages that come with an education and friendships with people in power. If I had been a farmworker, a minimum wage worker juggling two jobs, my access to justice would have been limited.

I am one of the lucky ones. I can read, write, walk and earn a living. But I carry with me anger that’s hard to let go. Medical errors are a difficult political and social issue to discuss. We all want to believe our doctor would never make a mistake that could alter our lives.

But doctors aren’t gods, even yours. They are human. And part of that humanity is making things right.

Medical errors devastate families, especially those that have few resources and don’t have a political voice in the halls of the Capitol. People working minimum wage, people of color, and women are the primary victims of this draconian law.

Our Legislature can choose to fix the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act at any time by passing a bill and sending it to the governor to raise or remove the cap or just let juries decide.

This change would allow doctors to practice, knowing if an error happens, they have a path to make things right. And they can start to rebuild the trust of the patients who have been harmed.

Kolodny: 81 billion dollars/yr is not enough to fight the failed war on drugs

No new funding in Trump’s emergency opioid declaration

http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20171026/NEWS/171029906

Expectations the White House would make strides toward fighting the opioid epidemic fell short in the eyes of many when President Donald Trump on Thursday formally declared a public health emergency without calling for new funding to support treatment efforts.

Trump announced plans to direct Acting HHS Secretary Eric Hargan to declare the opioid crisis a national emergency under section 319 of the Public Health Service Act. Trump said the scale of the epidemic requires the aid of every federal agency and the resolve of every American.

“I want the American people to know that the federal government is aggressively fighting the opioid epidemic on all fronts,”Trump said.

As a first step, the administration planned to rescind a current Medicaid rule that limits how long patients can receive mental health or substance use disorder treatment in residential facilities with more than 16 beds. Currently the program covers the costs for up to 15 days.

“A number of states have reached out to us asking for relief and you should expect to see approvals that will unlock treatment for people in need and those approvals will come very, very fast,” Trump said.

But eliminating the rule would take an act of Congress while the CMS has provided state waivers for some years.

Overall the declaration was seen helping raise public awareness.

“We strongly support President Trump’s decision to officially label the opioid epidemic a public health emergency,” said Rep. David McKinley (R-WV) in an emailed statement. “As ground zero for this public health emergency, it is time West Virginia received the resources it deserves, and today’s action is a big step towards accomplishing that.”

“Really, he’s going to be asking the entire government to get behind this effort,” said Tom Coderre, senior adviser at the Altarum Institute and a former chief of staff and senior adviser to the Assistant Secretary at SAMHSA during the Obama administration. “That’s the bigger message of today, but certainly the devil is always in the details.”

The president of the American College of Physicians Dr. Jack Ende released a statement saying he was encouraged by Trump’s annoucement but pointed out the need for adequate funding. He said the Public Health Emergency Fund currently had only $57,000 as a result of Congress failing to replenish it for several years.

“Efforts need to be made to make substance use disorder treatment more accessible to those in under-served areas,” Ende said. ” We hope that today’s declaration will be used in a way that achieves that goal.”

Others were more critical and saw the declaration another disappointment.

Grant Smith, deputy director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance in a written statement called the announcement “a drop in a bucket.” “We need a well thought out plan from the Trump administration that resolves the many obstacles people face trying to access medication-assisted treatment and naloxone to save lives.”

Baltimore City Health Commissioner Dr. Leana Wen questioned why a broader national emergency, under the Stafford Act, was not declared. That would have made billions in emergency funding available through FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund.

“I looked to the president to commit a specific dollar amount from new funding rather than re-purposed dollars that take away from other key health priorities,” Wen said.

Under a public health emergency, HHS will allow states and counties greater flexibility in how federal funds are used. The agency will also seek to waive current rules that prohibit patients from receiving medication-assisted treatment through telemedicine in order expand access.

“That does have a potential to help reach patients who live in more rural areas,” said Cynthia Reilly, director of the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Initiative. “It [the declaration] could certainly help with that aspect of the problem.”

The order also makes the Department of Labor’s Dislocated Worker Grants—usually given to help those out of work due to natural disaster—available to help people who are unemployed because of addiction. At a meeting of Trump’s opioid commission held last week, Labor Secretary Alex Acosta testified that this was the “number one issue” in joblessness.

Trump’s declaration allows HHS to hire temporary personnel. The agency can also direct states upon its governor’s request to temporarily reassign state and local public health department personnel who receive federal funding to work on addressing opioid abuse during the emergency period.

Despite such changes, some addiction treatment experts feel the administration’s decision not to call for new funding within the emergency declaration confirms that the White House lacks direction on dealing with the crisis.

“They don’t have a plan,” said Dr. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of policy research at Brandeis University. “They rattled off a few items, but there’s no real plan.”