CALLING ALL CHRONIC PAIN PATIENTS

CALLING ALL CHRONIC PAIN PATIENTS – On June 20th, Dr. Lynn Webster, former President of the American Pain Foundation, author of The Painful Truth, will be in Tampa to put the finishing touches on his documentary airing this Fall. Join us for a Rally in Tampa on JUNE 20TH FROM 4-7 PM. Location to be determined. Our Voices are Finally being Heard!!! Let them see your face!!! Let’s get out there and show we’re still here. Plane, train, or automobile, get to Tampa on June 20th. (Location to be determined once we see how many people we’ll have) – Share this with all your groups. All Chronic Pain Patients Groups welcome. RSVP please.

Dr. Webster’s is an advocate for pain medication as a viable treatment for chronic pain and has plenty to say about the current state of affairs for chronic pain patients in America.

Stay tuned for more details on our Rally in Tampa. If we can get enough confirmed people, we can likely get some media coverage as well. We’re Gaining Traction!!! Don’t miss this opportunity to show them your face!!!!! PNA Lana – United we will stand! We are ‪#‎PATIENTSNOTADDICTS‬!

Treating ADDICTION… a FOR PROFIT GROWTH INDUSTRY ?

Jonathan McHugh/Ikon Images/Getty Images

Investors See Big Opportunities In Opioid Addiction Treatment

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/06/10/480663056/investors-see-big-opportunities-in-opioid-addiction-treatment

The first time Ray Tamasi got hit up by an investor, it was kind of out of the blue.

“This guy called me up,” says Tamasi, president of Gosnold on Cape Cod, an addiction treatment center with seven sites in Massachusetts.

“The guy” represented a group of investors; Tamasi declines to say whom. But they were looking to buy addiction treatment centers like Gosnold.

“He had checked around and learned that we were one of the more reputable programs. We had a good reputations in the community — nice array of services,” Tamasi recalls. “He wanted to know if we were interested in becoming part of his company.”

Tamasi was intrigued. Gosnold is a not-for-profit system. It makes money on some services, like inpatient rehabilitation, and uses that income to pay for stuff that doesn’t make money, like family support groups.

Every crisis presents an opportunity, as the saying goes. And when it comes to opioid addiction, investors and businesses are seeing a big opportunity in addiction treatment.

Places like Gosnold are being gobbled up by private equity companies and publicly-traded chains looking to do what is known in Wall Street jargon as a roll-up play. They take a fragmented industry, buy up the bits and pieces and consolidate them into big, branded companies where they hope to make a profit by streamlining and cutting costs.

One company that advises investors listed 27 transactions in which private equity firms or public companies bought or invested in addiction treatment centers and other so-called behavioral health companies in 2014 and 2015 alone.

Acadia Healthcare is one national chain that has been on a shopping spree. In 2010 it had only six facilities, but today it has 587 across the country and in the United Kingdom.

What’s driving the growth?

The opioid addiction crisis is boosting demand for treatment and two relatively recent laws are making it easier to get insurers to pay for it.

The Mental Health Parity Act of 2008 requires insurers to cover mental health care as they would cover physical health care.

“Mental health parity was the beginning. We saw a big benefit. And then the Affordable Care Act was very positive for our industry,” says Joey Jacobs, Acadia’s CEO. He spoke at an investor conference last month.

Obamacare is driving their growth in part because so many more people have health insurance, and in particular because of a provision in the law that allows people up to age 26 to stay on their parents’ insurance policies. That’s the age of many opioid and heroin abusers.

Suddenly there’s a huge stream of cash for Acadia and other companies to tap into.

Addiction treatment isn’t all that Acadia does. It has residential schools for teenagers, inpatient psychiatric facilities, and centers for people eating disorders.

But addiction is certainly a big part of the business. It has more than 100 inpatient detox and rehab centers and runs 110 opioid treatment programs, better known as methadone clinics, which it bought from private equity firm Bain Capital in 2014 for $1.18 billion.

Bain, which was founded by Mitt Romney, had purchased CRC Health, a chain of treatment centers, in 2005 for $720 million. It then bought at least 20 more rehab centers and then added a Massachusetts-based chain of methadone clinics in 2014 for $58 million, just before selling the entire package to Acadia.

In the slide show Jacobs presented at the investor conference, the company referred to the rising use of heroin as a “favorable industry tailwind” and predicted its revenue would continue to grow.

Jacobs says his company is filling a growing demand.

“We do a lot of good right here in this space, a lot of good,” he said at the conference. “And we think this market will continue to grow, and the need for our services are definitely out there.”

Acadia is not unique. American Addiction Centers is a chain of 11 residential and 19 outpatient treatment centers that went public last year. The company said at the same investor conference in May that it had acquired five treatment centers last year and has two more acquisitions in the works.

And a handful of companies still owned by private equity investors are also growing into regional powers.

Companies like Acadia fill a needed void, says Mark Parrino, president of the American Association for the Treatment of Opioid Dependence, outpatient programs that treat addiction using methadone or other medications.

“There is a need for expanded access to care. Everybody seems to understand that,” he says.

But state governments aren’t paying to build more methadone clinics and there’s little money available in the non-profit sector for them either, Parrino says.

Still, the number of programs has nearly doubled in the last 10 years, largely thanks to private investment, which he says is a positive development.

Not everyone agrees.

Linda Rosenberg, president of the National Council on Behavioral Health, which represents non-profit addiction treatment programs, worries that private investors are too focused on the profitable inpatient beds and will neglect the services that help patients re-enter society.

“After rehab, you come back to your family and your family knows very little,” Rosenberg says. “You need a job, you need health insurance, you need medication-assisted treatment for addiction, you need counseling.”

She says there’s very little private investment in all that.

“I think that’s the biggest danger,” she says.

And that’s exactly what Tamasi found.

When he met with the first group of investors, he learned they only wanted to buy Gosnold’s money-making programs — inpatient detox and rehab,

“A detox setting or a rehab program, they have a much wider stream of where revenue can come from,” Tamasi tells Shots. “They’re covered by insurance, people are willing to pay for it if they have the resources to pay for it.”

The investors didn’t want the prevention programs, the long-term care or the school-based programs. They didn’t want to invest in the recovery managers that help people get back on their feet once they get out of rehab.

But Tamasi thinks those things are important, so he didn’t sell.

“They’re almost like investments that a community-minded provider would make in order to do the things that they think the community could use,” he says

Since that first meeting two years ago, the calls have kept coming. At a conference in May, he was approached three times in a single day by people interested in buying parts of Gosnold.

When a private equity firm invited him to New York to talk about the industry, he says the meeting hosts asked him about occupancy rates, insurance reimbursement and future demand for detox and treatment.

“There weren’t a lot of questions about what do you do, what actually happens in these places — a little but not much,” he recalls.

But why do so many smaller companies and nonprofits sell?

To Tamasi it was clear that this investor had the money to build new buildings or add treatment beds, something that it would take him years of fund raising to achieve.

That’s why he took the first meeting. And that’s why he occasionally still does.

But he’s not convinced they will offer the breadth and depth of care that Gosnold on Cape Cod does today.

“That’s a classic discussion between for-profits and not-for-profits,” says Eric Coburn, managing director at Duff and Phelps, which advises private equity firms on how to value and finance acquisitions. Coburn specializes in health care mergers.

“The not-for-profits say the for-profits don’t care about care,” he added. “The truth is that if you’re providing a service that doesn’t provide good care in the health care space, that’s not a very good long-term strategy.”

Shouldn’t the FDA being advised by only those who know what the hell they are talking about ?

Nothing like a FDA advisory committee member putting in his “two cents” .. whose background has little/nothing to do with opiates/chronic pain

“It’s not any worse than other extended-release opioids on the market, but if we don’t start to re-think how we approve and regulate opiates, then we will never really change the problems we have with the opioid epidemic.” — Tobias Gerhard, PhD, of Rutgers University, at an FDA advisory committee meeting that evaluated Teva’s abuse-deterrent hydrocodone (Vantrela).

 

  Tobias Gerhard, BSPharm, PhD, FISPEAssociate Professor
Department of Pharmacy Practice and Administration and
Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research
Phone: (848) 932 8634
Email: tgerhard@ifh.rutgers.edu
PhD, Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Florida
BS, Pharmacy, Albert-Ludwigs University Freiburg, Germany 

 

Research

Dr. Gerhard’s research focuses on comparative safety and effectiveness of antipsychotic medications, pharmacological treatments of dementia, pharmacoepidemiological methods, and more generally research on use and management of therapeutics in Medicaid, Medicare, and privately insured populations.

AMA abandoning the treatment of chronic pain unless you are a nursing home pt ?

Opioids to Transgender: AMA Agenda Promises Heated Debate

http://www.medpagetoday.com/MeetingCoverage/AMA/58434?xid=nl_mpt_DHE_2016-06-11&eun=g578717d0r

CHICAGO — The American Medical Association will open its annual House of Delegates meeting here Saturday and its agenda highlights many of the same issues that have been grabbing national headlines — transgender rights, Medicare, the Zika virus, and safe treatment of pain.

Those issues come before the House in a series of reports and resolutions, all of which must be discussed, debated, and finally voted upon before they become AMA policy.

The planned “Part B experiment” by Medicare may be this year’s hottest-button issue and the oncology community continues to be way out in front leading the opposition to the plan that would change — read reduce — the way Medicare handles drug payments under Part B. This proposal has been burning up the halls of Congress and expect it to have the same effect here.

Not surprisingly the AMA has a full plate of resolutions asking it to use its political muscle to get Congress to free up funds for Zika prevention and treatment, so it is likely that the AMA will soon be instructing its lobbyists to take up that fight — but first its House of Delegates must vote to approve that instruction.

There are also a slew of resolutions aimed at guaranteeing access to medical care for lesbian, gay and transgender individuals including one that asks the AMA to support “public and private health insurance coverage for treatment of gender dysphoria as recommended by the patient’s physician.”

The use of opioids and the treatment of pain will also be a focus here as the delegates consider proposals that suggest eliminating the use of pain as “the fifth vital sign” along with resolutions asking the AMA to push the CDC to soften its position on the use of opioids for chronic pain to permit wider prescribing for nursing home patients.

The AMA is once again considering ways to adjust the size of its big tent — how to keep its often unwieldy House of Delegates to a reasonable size and still guarantee its “one doc, one vote” representational stance.

For years the AMA restricted specialty societies to a single delegate regardless of the size of the society, but at the same time states were allotted votes (delegates) based on the number of AMA members from that state.

Beginning in the 1990s the AMA initiated several rule changes with the goal of offering specialty societies votes based on a scheme in which AMA members could designate a specialty as his or her designated “specialty ballot” in the House. That plan improved specialty representation, but, according to the AMA Board of Trustees, the designated ballot system has not achieved the goal of true representation. One reason it hasn’t worked is that many physicians belong to two or more specialty organizations.

As a result, the AMA’s board is again asking the House to revamp the rules for specialty representation but this time it is using a set formula that allots one delegate per 1,000 AMA members belonging to a specialty society and then it reduces that number by 25%, a fudge factor to account for multiple memberships.

If the House adopts this latest resizing, it will boost the number of specialty delegates from 220 to 225 in 2017. Most specialties won’t experience a big difference, but the American Academy of Family Physicians, which seats 18 delegates and is the largest specialty delegation in the House, would lose five delegates. By contrast, the American College of Physicians would increase its vote clout from 13 to 17, and the American College of Surgeons would jump from six to 10.

NH AG is trying to blame one company that sells 6% of the opiates for NH’s addiction problem

walterN.H. probes whether drugmaker downplays addiction risk

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/national/2016/06/nh_probes_whether_drugmaker_downplays_addiction_risk

CONCORD, N.H. — The New Hampshire Attorney General’s office is targeting the maker of Oxycontin, a top selling prescription painkiller, with an investigation into whether it downplays the risks of addiction when marketing pain pills to doctors and other prescribers.

But Connecticut-based Purdue Pharma for now is refusing to respond to a subpoena seeking documents that show how it sells and markets drugs in New Hampshire. It also is fighting New Hampshire’s decision to hire a law firm to aid in the investigation.

The company won a court argument that delayed the turnover of documents for months, but the attorney general’s office made a new pitch for compliance last week.

State lawyers say a clear picture of how painkillers are marketed and sold is critical to curbing New Hampshire’s growing drug addiction crisis, which caused more than 430 overdose deaths in 2015.

“Given Purdue’s ongoing marketing and the rising toll — of death, overdose, addiction, and abuse in New Hampshire — there is every reason to move forward promptly,” the attorney general’s office wrote in court documents filed Friday seeking to force Purdue to comply with the subpoena.

Purdue is the largest brand-name manufacturer of drugs prescribed in New Hampshire, Attorney General Joe Foster said. He said Purdue drugs account for 20 to 30 percent of dollars spent on brand-name prescription pills. Purdue, meanwhile, points to data that show OxyContin made up 6 percent of all opioids prescribed in New Hampshire in 2014. And the company is no stranger to lawsuits: It pleaded guilty and paid a $630 million settlement in 2007 for federal charges that it misled doctors and patients about the risks of OxyContin. The OxyContin the company now produces uses a new formula that the company claims is less addictive.

The new court filings allege Purdue is continuing to “engage in the type of deceptive marketing” that resulted in the 2007 settlement.

“Purdue sales representatives continue to make sales visits to New Hampshire doctors during which they misleadingly portray or omit the risk of addiction,” the court filing says, adding that Purdue representatives made 217 sales visits in New Hampshire in 2014. The filings also cite an investigation by the Los Angeles Times into Purdue’s marketing practices.

Purdue successfully delayed turning over documents, first requested in August, by challenging the attorney general’s hiring of the law firm Cohen Milstein to aid in the investigation. Foster initially contracted with the firm on a contingency fee basis, meaning the amount of the firm’s payout would depend on the results of litigation. He did not seek legislative or executive council approval for the contract.

New Hampshire hasn’t filed any charges against Purdue, but the company said Cohen Milstein has a “special financial interest” in the results of the investigation. Cohen Milstein is representing Chicago and a county in California in lawsuits against drug companies.

A judge ruled in March that the contract needed legislative and council approval. Both recently approved Cohen Milstein’s hiring with a flat $100,000 attached, prompting the attorney general’s fresh demand for Purdue to turn over documents. But Purdue still refuses, citing pending appeals in court.

A spokesman for the company says it will turn over the documents if the attorney general’s office stops working with Cohen Milstein.

“Purdue has repeatedly made clear that it is willing to work with the attorney general’s office on its investigation,” spokesman Robert Josephson said in a statement. “However, we’ve raised a very serious issue about whether it is proper for government enforcement powers to be privatized to outside counsel with a special financial interest.”

Foster said without outside help, his office does not have enough resources to investigate Purdue. The state’s consumer protection bureau has four lawyers, and Purdue has hired multiple private firms for the case.

“What they want to do is take one arm behind our back,” Foster said.

The Life Legal Defense Foundation wants you to suffer until your last breath ?

Lawsuit claims California’s End of Life Option Act is unconstitutional

http://mainenewsonline.com/content/29095-lawsuit-claims-california-s-end-life-option-act-unconstitutional

Lately, California has come up with a law that will allow terminally ill patients to use End of Life Option Act. Under the law that went into effect on Thursday, doctors would be able to prescribe pills that will fasten deaths of terminally ill patients. But opponents of the law are making all possible efforts to overturn the law.

The Life Legal Defense Foundation, American Academy of Medical Ethics and many other physicians have filed a case in Riverside County Superior Court. They have alleged that the new act is unconstitutional.

As per the case, the new law is civil rights violation. California has joined five other states in the US by adopting the law where the practice is legal. The End of Life Option Act can be exercised by the one who has less than six months to live. He can have medicines from their doctors that would provide him with an early death.

 Those who have been supporting the law have said that it could help terminally ill patients to avoid suffering. In October, when Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill into law, he said that the law would provide a comfort if he has been facing prolonged and excruciating pain.

Stephen G. Larson, an attorney for the plaintiffs, said that it is a crime in California to help or encourage another person to commit suicide. But under the law, doctors can do so for the terminally ill patients. California law says that when someone is in danger then they should receive immediate help. But the ones under the law do not require to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.

Larson said, “This is very arbitrary, very capricious, very ambiguous — really no accountability. This is not a good law”.

“The California Medical Association was neutral on the measure, which is modeled on a law that has been in place in Oregon since 1997. But although no doctor or hospital will be required to assist in anyone’s death, many people in the medical profession remain opposed. So, too, do some people based on their religious beliefs, and some disability rights activists, who fear terminally ill people will feel pressured to end their lives for financial or other reasons,” according to a news report published by SacBee News.

California Department of Public Health must issue annual reports detailing the number of people for whom lethal drugs have been prescribed, the number of doctors who issue the prescriptions, the number of people who die on their own terms, and details about them, including their age, race, underlying illnesses and educational level. Too many people have died excruciating deaths for lack of humane alternatives. Some have decided to leave their homes and travel to Oregon to die.

According to a story published on the topic by LA Times, “The Life Legal Defense Foundation, American Academy of Medical Ethics and several physicians have filed a lawsuit in Riverside County Superior Court claiming that the state’s new aid-in-dying law is unconstitutional. The End of Life Option Act allows patients with less than six months to live to obtain medicines from their doctor that would kill them. On Thursday, California became one of five states in the U.S. where the practice is legal.”

Patients seeking lethal medications under the law must have two physicians determine that they are mentally competent and terminally ill. If a physician has questions about a patient’s mental state, the patient must be referred to a psychiatrist for an evaluation. Data from Oregon, the first state where aid in dying was legalized, show that 5% of patients who have died there using lethal medications had been referred for psychiatric evaluation.

A report published in NY Times revealed, “Oregon was the first state to pass an assisted suicide law, and was followed by Washington and Vermont. Under a Montana court ruling, doctors cannot be prosecuted for helping terminally ill patients die, as long as the patient makes a written request. With the California law, 16 percent of the country’s population has a legal option for terminally ill patients to determine the moment of their death, up from 4 percent.”

The California legislation is strict, intended to ensure that patients have thought through the decision and are making it voluntarily. Patients must make multiple requests for the medication and have a prognosis of less than six months to live. Many hospitals have not yet released policies for dealing with the law. And no doctor, health system or pharmacy will be required to comply with a patient’s request.

 

Be careful with your medication copays…

“Aetna Coventry [Medicare] Advantage plan telling us to charge a $100 copay on generic Ambien, which we could sell to the customer for $15. Also, telling us to charge $100 for generic opioid pain medicine when [the patient] could buy it in cash for $50-$70.”

“For the month of May in my pharmacy there were 277 instances of clawbacks. In the worst case the patient paid a $40 copay and $27.50 was taken back by the insurance company.”

The above quote was sent into a survey by the National Community Pharmacists Assoc (NCPA). Apparently some health insurance companies are charging pts the maximum copay for a particular tier.. even if the normal prices is less than the stated copay… and then they “claw back” the difference between the normal price and the copay from the pharmacy… sort of like a PREMIUM SURCHARGE to the pt if they use their medication benefit.

My suggestion to anyone always getting a flat dollar copay to start checking the price of their medication on a website like www.goodrx.com. I would also suggest that if you discover such SURCHARGES.. that you start filing complaints with the State Insurance Commissioner and/or or the Consumer Protection Agency.. normally part of the State’s Attorney General Office.

 

 

Naloxone’s price has risen as much as 17-fold in the past two years.

Sen. McCaskill Wants Answers From Makers Of Opiate Overdose Antidote

http://www.ozarksfirst.com/news/sen-mccaskill-wants-answers-from-makers-of-opiate-overdose-antidote

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. – U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., wants answers from five pharmaceutical companies that make the opiate overdose reversal drug known as Narcan. 
 
Prices of some versions of the drug have risen as much as 17-fold in the past two years. 
      
Naloxone, better known as Narcan, has been on the market in the U.S. since 1971, but prices are increasing at a time when deaths from opiate overdoses are hitting record numbers. 
 
Mccaskill said there may be a good reason for the price increases, but given the drug’s ability to save lives, she wants to see if they are really necessary. 
 
CoxHealth Outreach and Injury Prevention Coordinator Jason Martin has administered Narcan hundreds of times to patients in ambulances and in the emergency room. 
 
He has been using it to save lives since 1992. 
 
“If it is indeed an opiate overdose then essentially within 30 seconds to a minute you’ll see their respiratory rate increase or start again and see instant changes in their level of consciousness,” Martin said. 
 
At CoxHealth, the pharmacy department has not noticed an increase in the price of the drug yet and Martin says CoxHealth has never run out of it. 
 
But McCaskill says she has heard from other hospitals around the country that cannot keep up with the demand. 
 
“We’ve had to use it a lot more than we ever have with the prescription overdoses on the increase as well as heroin exploding in this area as far as usage so we’re starting to use it up a lot more,” Martin said. “We at Cox have not had an issue with that but I know in other areas they’ve had problems with keeping it stocked.” 
 
McCaskill wrote to five pharmaceutical companies who make Narcan. 
In two years, Kaleo Pharma’s auto-inject version of the drug went from $575 to $3,750  for a two dose package. 
 
Hospira charged $1.84 for two vials of its generic in 2005, that went up to $31.66 by 2014. 
 
“Now that it’s going to become available in some states even without a prescription, then unfortunately I think we’re going to see prices increase,” Martin said. “And that’s frustrating because it’s a drug that’s needed in our community unfortunately and it’s something that can save a life and you’d hate to see price dictate whether or not a life was saved.” 
 
McCaskill said she wants answers from the pharmaceutical companies by June 23. 

 

Someone appears to be at the end of their rope

endofropestevemailbox

 

 

 

 

 

Someone appears to be at the end of their rope

My mother is 57 years old and not computer savy. So I’m writing you to ask your option to what to do after what happened today at the walgreens pharmacy we’ve used for 3 years now. My mom is on alot of different medications inhalers for C.O.P.D medication for diabetes, synthriod for having no thyroid. But one medication she’s been on & needs for she has super high anxiety. My mom has been on xanex for over 35 years. Well today wasn’t the 1st time this pharmacist has what I believe is very unethical and not legal I believe. This walgreens has filled my mother & I all prescription for over 3years. Mom had medicade, I have caresource. Combined monthly through are insurance company pays most or all for are scripts mom & I do 1,000 a month at least with both of are monthly percriptions. This pharmacist Dr. Michael Cooper is the head pharmacist. 6 months ago my mom picked up 4 percriptions with her co pay they came to $4.80 she didn’t have her purse on her but we had a roll of quarters in the center console. With no one behind mom in the drive through she payed w all quarters the $4.80 in quarters. Left came home to just get a very rude call from the good old Dr. Michael Cooper the pharmacist at are closet walgreens. He called are home line when mom got home cause he didn’t check her out someone else did. So he heard about the paying in quarters called mom, yelled so loud! “How UNEXPECTABLE THAT WAS FOR HER TO PAY IN ALL COINS, all quarters though, he said that is not ok or alright to NEVER DO THAT AGAIN”! then hung up on my mom. So it wasnt pennies, it was quarters money is money right?? So this was 3 months ago. Since then he seems to have a personal vendetta against my mom & I. Before that he was always nice, my mom is a very sweet polite women. But… after like today! I believe he’s crossed the line. Mom I’m not sure if she’s disabled in the eye of the pharmacy board but from what my Dr says a person taking a strong does of anxiety ever day for 35 shouldn’t go with out even for a day. So with that being said, today her xanex was due for refill our Dr faxed in the refill earlier today. She called at 6pm to see if it was ready yet. This pharmacy has filled her  xanex 2 days early every month especially when there is 31 days in last month. So she called the Pharmacy at 6pm spoke to the person who assets the pharmacist not sure there specific title. But that person said no he won’t fill it today. Mom said well why he always has 2 days earlier for the past 3 years check the records. So she asked to speak to Good old Dr Michael Cooper, he put her on hold I timed it 12 mins on hold then he got on the phone He said hello, my mom said hello very kind& asked why wouldn’t he fill them very nice today, again I was right next to her, she then said especially cause there was 31 days in last month. Dr Cooper replied SCREAMED, WELL IF YOUR GOING TO HAVE THAT TONE. I WILL FILL NOTHING FOR YOU TODAY! CLICK THEN HUNG UP! When I swear on everything I love in this world her tone was so sweet and kind no rudness at all. So my mom started to have a panic attack& cry for she was not rude or argumentative just barley got those 2 sentences in b4 he screamed and hung up! So she cried she was afraid to call back. So I said mom call the other walgreens which is alittle further away but we’ve used them b4. Mom spoke to the that pharmacist who called and got the script transferred to that store and they filled them thank God. Or I’d probably be taking mom to the Er. I spoke to that pharmacist when I picked them up cause mom couldn’t drive in her state. I thanked her that pharmacist from the other walgreens & explained the situation of what happened with Dr Michael Cooper the pharmist who refused to fill it today,  2 days early as he always did b4 today. She replied yeah he wasn’t very nice, he wasn’t going to fill it for mom today period! So the nice lady at the other walgreens did & she said from now on use there pharmacy. So we don’t have to deal with pharmacist Dr Michael Cooper. So we will from here on out. But what an inconvenience for us to have to switch cause we believe Dr Cooper since the $4.80 payment in quarters we think he honestly has a vendetta for my mom since especially after today when for years he’s had no problem filling her xanex 2 days early. So the other walgreens nice pharmacist said after I told her what he did and asked if that is? She said Dr Cooper sed my mom was argumentative! Which i can assure she was not at all simple sweet, nice asked a question. Why wouldn’t u fill it told especially if there was 31 days last month. That’s all very kind I was again right next to her. Then he SCREAMED I’M NOT FILLING NOTHING NOW FOR U TODAY AFTER THAT TONE! OR SM THING VERY SIMILAR. So loud it was totally uncalled for then just hangs up?? So after speaking to the other walgreens pharmacist who did fill it told me upon picking it up Dr Cooper sed mom was argumentative! That why he wasn’t filling it, when really she wasn’t at all. So that nice pharmacist said for us to just switch to that walgreens to avoid the wrath of Dr Micheal Cooper, yelling, acting like a police officer, saying he won’t full nothing today so mean it made my mom cry. Now fearing he may do this with all are percriptions. So we are switching to the other walgreens but it’s 10 mins further away from our home. Just to avoid a man who I don’t think is allowed to treat people good people like my mom like that. Sucks ya know. So my question to u is which department should I make a claim with. I’m sure this loose cannon man has done this b4. Plus I m sure he used the mom was being argumentative to cover his ass. But she wasn’t argumentative at all. So how can he refused to refill,plus  now 2xms has yelled, screamed at my mom. How can this be ok? And or legal. So though we are switching pharmacys because of him. How can I make a complaint he lied mom wasn’t an inch argumentative and screamed she’s getting nothing now, and hangs up like he’s control freak or sm thing. So please help me not let this horrible,  bully , mean, pharmacist ever do this to anyone else again. We have to drive 10 more mins away now when Cooper s walgreens is around the corner. It not fair also thank God the other walgreens knows us and filled it for mom cause she told me Cooper wasn’t filling it for mom PERIOD! so what if they didn’t help us. I’d be at the er w her now. This Isn’t right or legal is it? Please help. We live in xxxxxxxx   that’s also where the walgreens Dr Cooper works at. So who do I call to make sure he can’t do this to anyone else. Cause my mom’s the kindest sweetest women. So if he can lie say she was argumentative ect, can’t pay in quarters. And is always just yelling at her, now denied her refills. What do I do who should my mom contact. Thank u so much. Please let me know the proper way to deal with this , cause it really hurt my mom. And pissed me right off as her eldest 33 year old daughter I help take care of her. And I know she didn’t deserve Dr cooper’s wrath like that not tonight not ever. So my point if he yelled at mom like that he must yell at alot of people like this. So please let me know who to contact so I can let them know how this man thinks he’s God. Thank u again so much.

The DEA is Trying to Get Open Access to Your Medical Records

The DEA is Trying to Get Open Access to Your Medical Records

massappeal.com/the-dea-is-trying-to-get-open-access-to-americans-medical-records/

The DEA has been fighting legal battles for years in order to get access to private medical records without requiring a warrant.

To support a case against five Oregon individuals, the DEA subpoenaed the state’s Prescription Drug Monitor Program (PDMP) to provide access to private information on what drugs these individuals had been prescribed. The DEA claimed that it has the authority to access Oregon’s database using only an “administrative subpoena.” Unlike proper search warrants, these subpoenas do not require that the DEA show probable cause to a court.

The ACLU intervened on behalf of the individuals, who include two transgender men taking prescription hormone drugs, and another individual taking prescription anti-anxiety medication for PTSD. The Oregon PDMP sued the DEA in 2012 for requesting these records, arguing that fulfilling the request would violate the state’s privacy laws.

In 2014, District Court Judge Ancer L. Haggerty ruled against the DEA, calling the warrantless searches an egregious invasion of privacy. “It is difficult to conceive of information that is… more deserving of Fourth Amendment protection,” Haggerty said. “Although there is not an absolute right to privacy in prescription information… it is more than reasonable for patients to believe that law enforcement agencies will not have unfettered access to their records.”

Currently, every U.S. state has a PDMP database, except for Missouri. In Utah, Senator Todd Weiler introduced a bill that required cops to obtain a warrant before searching the state PDMP database. In Wisconsin, however, a recent law removed a previous requirement that cops obtain a search warrant to access that state’s database. The federal government is now working to combine every states’ PDMP into one central database. So far, 32 states have shared their residents’ private information via a National Association of Boards of Pharmacy program.

“The primary purpose of PDMPs is healthcare, not law enforcement,” the American Medical Association has said, noting that the databases were not designed to be “a tool or repository for law enforcement to initiate access to gather information.”