• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Holy Opiods

Well the graph you show is MED which is morphine equivalent dose, meaning that the graph is showing that per a patient the average morphing equivalent dose, or strength of the opioids has remain the same per a patient. This however says nothing about the amount of opioids being prescribed per number of patients or what those opioids are, as not all are created equal as far as dose strength, number needed for MED effect. Anyways what's the number one new recommendation, dont prescribe. So what's would support that.


a19386addafda61e3c5883997ab15f41.png


Ooooooopppppppppppsssssss
 
You can't just make charts bigger or with more finer calibration to make the effect look more dramatic. It went down 20%. So if we go from 50,000 overdoses to 40,000 overdoses its #problemsolved?
 
I'm just posting a chart from the same source as the one you claimed showed no change at all. The trend is down with the new rules which I stated before. It's only going to keep trending down and the reason why chronic pain management people hate the new guidelines.
 
We tend to fall off the damn horse one side or the other in this as in most things. People suffer needlessly due to fears of prescribing opioids or we too carelessly hand them out. Certainly with the rising incidence of abuse it seems right to work towards better control of opioids. Unintended consequences may be that some folks suffer from fears of and enhanced obstacles to prescribing appropriate medicine and a shift among abusers, short term at least, to altogether illegal and more dangerous opioids (like heroin, etc.).
 
Last edited:
perhaps a partial solution is harm reduction education and needle exchanges? understanding drug interactions, widespread availability of naxalone (narcan), differences in routes of administration, and bio-availability of a drug for that ROA are all incredibly important factors.

eliminate one source and another does indeed spring up, or the more barriers to an individuals preferred route of administration for their preferred drug frequently just makes that ROA more dangerous. For example, OCs vs. OPs--you can still break down an OP for IV use, but the additional expenses are intrinsically bad due to opportunity costs of time spent getting a fix, and the extra steps introduce additional harmful variables with each step needed in the purification/isolation process.

Also the war on drugs created the idea of cutting heroin with the much cheaper (and much more sedating) fentanyl. in a regulated industry this would not be possible. a deadly side effect of government policy, not an effect of opiods themselves. Humans have gotten along fine since the beginning with poppies. Synthetic drugs and hypodermic needles changed the game, now policy must adapt to the reality, like it or not.

Moreover, people need to differentiate between weekend warriors/chippers and regular users. Unless crossed with other downers (esp alcohol) the dose needed to get high for an occasional user is nowhere near what's needed to cause respiratory failure. many people would pass out before they could smoke or ingest a fatal amount, and when swallowed would be vomited back up anyway. High dose users, OTOH, are already much closer to what would be a fatal overdose if they misjudge their tolerance or the purity or change the ROA.

Yet another thing is all people who use or associate with users should be made aware naloxone is available over the counter immediately, no questions asked at most any pharmacy. this will reverse the effects of an overdose, and it takes awhile for your breathing to trail off. No reason everyone shouldn't have some in their trunk or in their medicine cabinet if affordable, even if they use prescribed amounts orally in pill form.

Lastly, consider that many of these accidental ODs are not accidents. It's by far the easiest way out if you have access and are trapped in a broken body or a life not worth living. the entire epidemic, and all substance abuse, is nearly always rooted in more fundamental problems for a person. Fix the basics and self medicating will largely stop. These deaths are indicative of more fundamental problems with our society, and these fundamental problems are gonna be getting worse for the foreseeable future.

Education and needle exchanges where u can get 0.02 micron wheel filters and antibiotics will stop many common problems with opioids used in IV form. In all cases education is the best way to prevent people from unknowingly putting themselves in danger, but at the end of the day there isn't gonna be much that can directly be done to curtail this trend except education.
 
Last edited:
Just push the workday back to like 10-11AM and let people do all the drugs they want. Problem solved. #MAGA
 
I would like to hear from more M.D.s. Thanks for your post 61.

I had similar experiences. We had a session in ~1999 when we were taught by a visiting lecturer that pain should be the 5th vital sign (in addition to temp, heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood pressure). The lecture was sponsored by a pharmaceutical company, and the general idea was to identify all pain and treat it with opioids.

In 2002 we were encouraged to use fentanyl lollipops (no, that's not a joke) to treat pain.
 
Pendulum started swinging in late '80s-early '90s towards more liberal use of opioids. Promoted by makers of opioids and well-meaning medical professionals (road to hell, good intentions and all that). Problems include that "safety" data in one context (acutely ill hospitalized patients, advanced cancer patients, end-of-life care, etc.) doesn't translate so well to other contexts (chronic non-cancer pain, etc.). So now the pendulum is swinging back towards heightened caution. It's always about balancing risks/benefits, just like with all other medications. But you have to have/use good data/education in order to do this well.

There has been quite the industry of people tricking unwitting (maybe careless) physicians over the last decades into providing prescriptions that were diverted instantly into the recreational use or substance abuse market. And, of course, a few corrupt physicians have taken advantage of the demand for illicit gain. But for sure I think most providers try to do the right thing.

Quote (from: Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Can Physicians Prescribe Opioids to Treat Pain Adequately While Avoiding Legal Sanction?)
----------
Opioids play a unique role in society. They are widely feared compounds, which are associated with abuse, addiction and the dire consequences of diversion; they are also essential medications, the most effective drugs for the relief of pain and suffering.
----------
 
I had similar experiences. We had a session in ~1999 when we were taught by a visiting lecturer that pain should be the 5th vital sign (in addition to temp, heart rate, respiratory rate, and blood pressure). The lecture was sponsored by a pharmaceutical company, and the general idea was to identify all pain and treat it with opioids.

In 2002 we were encouraged to use fentanyl lollipops (no, that's not a joke) to treat pain.

off-label marketing for a drug that was only approved for breakthrough cancer pain

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-revisits-cephalons-off-label-madness-actiq-is-an-er-on-a-stick/

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pain-is-pain-cephalons-marketing-comes-under-doj-control/
 
In the 80s/90s, when crack was exploding across the US, we imposed horrific, mandatory sentences for possession of amounts as small as five grams. Where are the calls for such punishment for opiods?

My bad, crack was primarily, inner-city, poor and black versus lots of suburban whites on opiods.
 
You can't just make charts bigger or with more finer calibration to make the effect look more dramatic. It went down 20%. So if we go from 50,000 overdoses to 40,000 overdoses its #problemsolved?

Charts that don't start at 0 are extremely misleading most of the time. As a stats major, irks me to no end.
 
We can't have Quaaludes for banging but we can have Oxycontin. Got it.
 
So one of the top guys (deputy chief of staff) at the Office of National Drug Control Policy (the White House office responsible for coordinating the federal government’s multibillion dollar anti-drug initiatives and supporting President Trump’s efforts to curb the opioid epidemic) is a 24 year old campaign volunteer who's never held a real job let alone one that gives him the experience needed for this role. Sounds like he moved up into the role after significant turnover.

On top of all that he lied on his resume and no-showed a former employer.


Trump’s 24-year-old drug policy appointee was let go at law firm after he ‘just didn’t show’

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...62019393_story.html?__twitter_impression=true

Investigations
Meet the 24-year-old Trump campaign worker appointed to help lead the government’s drug policy office

https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...1ac729add94_story.html?utm_term=.1ad4c1568c13
 
Back
Top