Would going back to lower restrictions on opioids improve the fentanyl problem

[Proud90sKid]

I remember in 2010 where you couldnt go anywhere without hearing the horrors of oxycodone addiction. Those horrors were factual and so were the overdoses. That said, as a result of the US government response to this problem, we ended up with not reduced demand, but reduced supply. Also, a different supplier: the cartel and not big pharma. Both are bad, but at least big pharma is more regulated. There are significantly more people overdosing now because cartel is using fentanyl to fill demand, which is inherently much more dangerous and again was introduced simply due to a lack of legal supply with ongoing demand. We all know how capitalism operates (and black market is pure unregulated capitalism at its worst). Take away a source of competition with regulation and often the wrong people get opportunistic. The demand got filled with a more dangerous and less regulated product. Did America completely mess up when it came to this sort of regulation? I struggle to get medication filled now because my doctor is in a different city. I wonder if these increased pharm policies have actually saved a single person. Is it just a feel good measure? A consistent dose of a known opioid is actually less harmful than alcohol abuse. But we have forced these people to black market fentanyl. Did government just exponentially increase the problem? The death stats seem to suggest exactly that, but Im no public health expert.

Dont get me wrong, oxy addiction can and usually will mess up your life (or end it). Definitely not recommending anyone try to get a script unless they are in pain. But fentanyl being prevalent is objectively much worse. Has a higher probability of doing both. Not saying oxy is good-any opioid addiction is very bad and often tragic. But from a harm reduction standpoint, did we go wrong?

Problem with fentanyl: it isnt inherently bad when used medically, but as a super potent synthetic opioid, production that ensures precise dosing is not a thing when dealing with an unregulated market that cant be sued when you die. Therefore, these cartel people couldnt care less what happens to the user. The only concern they have with death is they lose a customer and maybe some small middleman goes to prison. Meanwhile, they are filling 18 wheelers with the stuff so business wont exactly suffer from the loss of a middleman. The extreme capitalism of the unregulated market ensures someone will take their place. It is that heartless.

[¯|_(ツ)_|¯]

Hey,

I think you'll get more results in Current Events & Debates, so I moved your thread.

I do agree with you. There are a lot of legitimate chromic pain patients that can't get relief from your over the counter products like Tylenol or Ibuprofen, and a lot of the time they are denied appropriate pain management because they are deemed to be drug seeking. You go to the ER with legitimate pain and it's hit or miss if you get relief. Luckily last time I went I got Dilaudid, but I was also jaundiced so they knew there was an issue going on. I was surprised I got it so easily to be honest!

I think there SHOULD be some type of check to make sure the patient still needs the pain medication, but I don't know what that would be without causing them to go off of it. There are people who take a few prescribed pills, like how it feels, and then look elsewhere. For example something like Percocet after a wisdom tooth surgery shouldn't have to be constantly refilled barring any complications from surgery. But chromic pain patients NEED opioids and I'd be afraid of them turning to other sources.

As long as doctors are afraid of getting in trouble for prescribing chronic pain patients their needed relief, we have an issue.

I rambled so I don't know if this makes sense haha.

[theantihero]

I'm not really sure what the medical benefits of opioids would be so until there's further research on it then I say keep it restricted.

[Proud90sKid]

Originally Posted by ¯|_(ツ)_|¯

Hey,

I think you'll get more results in Current Events & Debates, so I moved your thread.

I do agree with you. There are a lot of legitimate chromic pain patients that can't get relief from your over the counter products like Tylenol or Ibuprofen, and a lot of the time they are denied appropriate pain management because they are deemed to be drug seeking. You go to the ER with legitimate pain and it's hit or miss if you get relief. Luckily last time I went I got Dilaudid, but I was also jaundiced so they knew there was an issue going on. I was surprised I got it so easily to be honest!

I think there SHOULD be some type of check to make sure the patient still needs the pain medication, but I don't know what that would be without causing them to go off of it. There are people who take a few prescribed pills, like how it feels, and then look elsewhere. For example something like Percocet after a wisdom tooth surgery shouldn't have to be constantly refilled barring any complications from surgery. But chromic pain patients NEED opioids and I'd be afraid of them turning to other sources.

As long as doctors are afraid of getting in trouble for prescribing chronic pain patients their needed relief, we have an issue.

I rambled so I don't know if this makes sense haha.

Thanks for your response. Yes, there should be some more tests- maybe a test for pain impulses sent to the brain, but Im not sure. The issue is with dependency. Im on klonopin for anxiety (not an opioid, but is controlled). If I were to get forced off it, Id likely experience a real increase in anxiety depending on the rate it was done. However, that would not reflect the underlying anxiety disorder that I have- because anxiety would likely become of concern for anyone on long term benzos that is suddenly forced off, even if they werent taking them for an anxiety disorder. It isnt like adhd meds where you can just go several days without it while they evaluate you.

[Proud90sKid]

Originally Posted by theantihero

I'm not really sure what the medical benefits of opioids would be so until there's further research on it then I say keep it restricted.

They have been used to treat pain medically going back to at least 3000BC. Their addicive potential has been long known as well. 2 wars were fought over it (chinese opium wars). Chemistry has gotten better though, so some back actors are currently profiting from a bad system. Fentanyl, for example, is a modern invention. The short term prescribed use of opioids like morphine is usually well justified and fairly well established medically and therefore unlikely to ever go away completely. There is debate about their use in chronic pain patients(long term opioid scripts in people with intractable pain), but little to no debate around severe acute pain unless the patient is some known drug seeker. Some say the practice of using them for chronic produces tolerance to real patients and enables a lot of drug seekers to mascarade as patients, but others say that evidence supports long term pain killers are beneficial to some people and allow them to live a full life. The debate is then: do we deny some legit patients what could have been a full life with medicine we have known about for millenia or do we deny it to them out of mere hope that some drug seeker somewhere turns their life around and lives a full life due to less access to drugs? I think the former is more just personally. The drug seekers have simply moved to more dangerous stuff anyways.

[Arabesque- golfing girl.]

It would be nice to have thing's change for the good, but I don’t know if that will happen.