Soon to need a prescription for Nurofen/Solphadine/etc?

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 12:59pm

JayEnnis wrote: »

Just to recap, I didn't say you should only be taking painkillers for major operations, I myself admitted to taking them when I get migraines. But some people see them as the be all and end all. I never mentioned the addictive qualities of these drugs I just stated that people who get into the habit of taking them for every little ailment won't be able to cope with pain when they really need to. And of course none of this was directed specifically at you. You chose to take it that way. And for people not being able to handle menstrual pains (I have no idea what they feel like but from what I've read are the same as stomach cramps?) Think before you reach for the magic pills, wait 10 minutes, have a rest and a glass of water and you'll see that you might not actually need them.

Okay that was actually in response to Nash Nutritious Traitor's last post. And I wasn't directly singling you out before either, you weren't the only one with the blasé throwaway comment of "man up". So perhaps we're both guilty of taking things up the wrong way.

You cannot really give advice on how to deal with menstrual cramps either, you're not qualified to, sorry, you are neither woman nor doctor. I don't take painkillers for my cramps either so it's a bit of a moot point.

Basically if someone wants to take a painkiller for their pain I say let them have at it. Who are we to lecture? It's their bodies they're supposedly polluting. People need to take responsibility for their own choices and actions. If someone believes they can't cope with whatever pain they're experiencing, they're going to reach for their painkillers regardless of what you or anyone else tries to convince them of otherwise.

BloodRedRose · 27-08-2010 1:07pm

I'm still undecided on the whole thing...

I suppose it's good for those who are addicted to the stuff, I think i know someone who is, but i went to the chemist to get some solphadine for my pounding headache, it's the only thing that works for me and they wouldn't sell it to me!!! I was shocked! She gave me the lecture about there dangers and so on so forth. I had to explain to her that it was my time of the month and that i needed something that would help my headache. She suggested some other ones, in a way that said "it's these or nothing" so i got them and they did absolutely nothing for me and i was left with a thumping headache for the next two days. Surely that's not right...:(

27-08-2010 1:15pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

I'm not saying that taking painkillers for every little ache and pain is by any means advisable. Not at all. I'm saying it's all relative and it depends on the individual. A person might be able to handle three days a month of menstrual pain without once reaching for the nurofen plus, solpadeine or feminax. Someone else might not be able to cope at all. When pain is hindering your regular day to day performance and renders you unable to work or function as normal then I don't see the problem with taking two painkillers.

But the whole point is, a lot of people take painkillers when they're really not in that much pain. I've seen it over and over, working in offices, Oh I have a bit of a twinge, let's reach for the Nurofen.

As I've said before I suffer from migraines. Some bouts are worse than others. When I find I can't get out of bed, can't go outside into the light or am in so much pain I am physically nauseous or constantly tearing, then I take painkillers. I find it insulting that someone I do not know or hasn't experienced what I have should tell me to "man up" or that I shouldn't be taking codeine or ibuprofen based painkillers unless I've had a serious operation.

No-one is saying that. Painkillers are for migraines. They're not for a bit of a headache or a hangover. IMO. I do agree with the poster who said a lot of people just reach for painkillers way too easily rather than seeing them as a last resort. I have a lot of aches and pains from long term health issues, if I took a painkiller for every twinge, I'd be strung out 24/7. I find that most of the time, a glass of water, a short nap, a walk, makes me feel significantly better, then when I really need painkillers, they actually work.

It's not the "lecture" that I may receive when purchasing a box of nurofen plus from the chemists that's bothering me, it's the attitudes of some people who automatically assume that people who take painkillers are popping them left right and center and don't have the wherewithal to control their own consumption. I'm not saying they're not highly addictive, because I know they are, I'm just saying that not everyone is going to turn into a junkie because they've purchased a box of 24 painkillers to eradicate a headache.

But people taking painkillers like sweets is a massive problem. That's why these guidelines have come in. They don't benefit the pharmacies in any way. They make more money by selling more drugs. You might not abuse painkillers but a hell of a lot of people do, and most of them are in total denial about it.

Valmont · 27-08-2010 1:31pm

I love how, all of a sudden, people buying Nurofen+ are probably addicts and need serious professional advice just in case. What a load of crap. If you pharmacists are such an important pillar of societal health care, where was all of your concern before the government forced you to start questioning people? You didn't give two ****s if someone bought it last week but now it's a crucially important issue underlying the very safety of the community- talk about brutal hypocrisy. If I get some patronising back chat from a pharmacist next time I'm buying Nurofen+, I'll inform them that they have lost my business and that I'm going down the road to Boots. I understand that they "have" to follow the new procedures and I respect that, as employees, they have to follow the regs but anything patronising beyond this is nanny state hypocrisy and I won't take any of it. If anyone is wondering why the Nanny state is alive and well just look at all of the positive comments supporting the regulations and the talk about "protecting" people from addictions. Where, oh where, has the idea of personal responsibility gone?

drkpower · 27-08-2010 1:36pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Basically if someone wants to take a painkiller for their pain I say let them have at it. Who are we to lecture? It's their bodies they're supposedly polluting. People need to take responsibility for their own choices and actions. If someone believes they can't cope with whatever pain they're experiencing, they're going to reach for their painkillers regardless of what you or anyone else tries to convince them of otherwise.

This is the type of attitude which these regulations are intended to combat. The problem is that many many people are not aware of the addictive potential of these medications. Or more accurately, they are aware of them, but do not truly understand what they mean. There are far far more people who are addicted to codeine (or benzodiazepines) than actually realise they are.

If we are to put such dangerous substances on the market, there is an obligation to ensure that they are properly regulated and that mechanisms are in place to combat the risks. To simply put these products on the market with no restrictions/regulations would be irresponsible. Making certain drugs prescription-only is one such mechanism. Making a drug a 'controlled' drug is another. In the case of codeine, we have this 'pharmacist consultation' process. It is a very very small inconvenience. If you consider it a significant inconvenience, you are probably one of the people the process is intended to weed out.

drkpower · 27-08-2010 1:38pm

Valmont wrote: »

Where, oh where, has the idea of personal responsibility gone?

Should medicine or the supply of medicines be regulated at all? Or should every healthcare decision be left to personal responsibility?

Sanjuro · 27-08-2010 1:38pm

penguin88 wrote: »

The pharmacist should ask you a few questions to check if nurofen plus is suitable for your situation. If it is, they will explain the risks associated with using such a product such as side effects and warn that they are for short-term use and should not be used for more than 3 days.

Well, that's pretty much the way they've been dishing out the Nurofen in my local pharmacist over the last year. So no major change there then.

27-08-2010 1:43pm

Valmont wrote: »

I love how, all of a sudden, people buying Nurofen+ are probably addicts and need serious professional advice just in case. What a load of crap. If you pharmacists are such an important pillar of societal health care, where was all of your concern before the government forced you to start questioning people? You didn't give two ****s if someone bought it last week but now it's a crucially important issue underlying the very safety of the community- talk about brutal hypocrisy. If I get some patronising back chat from a pharmacist next time I'm buying Nurofen+, I'll inform them that they have lost my business and that I'm going down the road to Boots. I understand that they "have" to follow the new procedures and I respect that, as employees, they have to follow the regs but anything patronising beyond this is nanny state hypocrisy and I won't take any of it. If anyone is wondering why the Nanny state is alive and well just look at all of the positive comments supporting the regulations and the talk about "protecting" people from addictions. Where, oh where, has the idea of personal responsibility gone?

I've had 'warnings' from pharmacists for years now about drug interactions and dosage, if I buy Canestan products, I'm asked if I've seen a GP and that I'm sure the problem is what I think it is. The fact is, a lot of people are bloody thick. A lot of people don't think about the consequences of what they're putting into their bodies.

I fail to see how this is only the patient's business. So those with banjaxed livers and addictions aren't going to be taking up HSE resources?

Stark · 27-08-2010 1:50pm

Valmont wrote: »

I love how, all of a sudden, people buying Nurofen+ are probably addicts and need serious professional advice just in case. What a load of crap. If you pharmacists are such an important pillar of societal health care, where was all of your concern before the government forced you to start questioning people? You didn't give two ****s if someone bought it last week but now it's a crucially important issue underlying the very safety of the community- talk about brutal hypocrisy. If I get some patronising back chat from a pharmacist next time I'm buying Nurofen+, I'll inform them that they have lost my business and that I'm going down the road to Boots. I understand that they "have" to follow the new procedures and I respect that, as employees, they have to follow the regs but anything patronising beyond this is nanny state hypocrisy and I won't take any of it. If anyone is wondering why the Nanny state is alive and well just look at all of the positive comments supporting the regulations and the talk about "protecting" people from addictions. Where, oh where, has the idea of personal responsibility gone?

I've noticed it for a years that once Nurofen+ came on the market, cupboards of people I knew were suddenly full of the stuff. Solpadine already had a reputation as the painkiller that idiot college students got themselves addicted to so most people I know would have stayed clear of that. But the quantities of Nurofen+ people were scoffing was quite alarming, especially the trips up North to get it "on the cheap".

I'm not a pharmacist btw. Though I do know a few people who are pharmacists and their opinion on the codeine content was that it was insufficient to have a painkilling effect that was more effective than a placebo but sufficient to cause addiction.

I reckon I keep myself reasonably well informed but I've still had to be informed in the past by pharmacists on basic things like not taking paracetamol after a night out, to go for a aspirin or ibuprofen instead as the paracetamol would cause liver bleeding when combined with the remnants of alcohol in my system. I appreciated being told that, I didn't need to throw a hissy fit over it.

bleg · 27-08-2010 2:10pm

Valmont wrote: »

I love how, all of a sudden, people buying Nurofen+ are probably addicts and need serious professional advice just in case. What a load of crap. If you pharmacists are such an important pillar of societal health care, where was all of your concern before the government forced you to start questioning people?

It wasn't the government, it was the PSI, that act as the pharmacy regulator on behalf of the public.

I don't see people taking codeine as addicts and I would be highly surprised if ANY of my colleagues did. Before the regulations came in of course we were concerned about patients' health. We were also aware that there were, and still are, legitimate uses for codeine products e.g. period pain and that people are probably able to decide what OTC painkiller is for them. This has not changed. What has changed is that the regulator, acting in the interest of the public i.e. on your behalf, has issued a guideline that we must question you on what you are going to use it for, have you used it before, have you had any side effects, tried other non codeine products, tell you that they're not for longer than 3 days use and can cause addiction. That is all that has changed. We have no choice but to follow these guidelines whether we want to or not.

You didn't give two ****s if someone bought it last week but now it's a crucially important issue underlying the very safety of the community- talk about brutal hypocrisy. If I get some patronising back chat from a pharmacist next time I'm buying Nurofen+, I'll inform them that they have lost my business and that I'm going down the road to Boots.

This is laughable. Boots is also a pharmacy and is bound by the same guidelines as every other pharmacy in the country. You would be quite foolish if you think you could avoid the questioning by going to a different pharmacy.

If you have a problem with the regulations you can always contact the PSI.

lucylu · 27-08-2010 2:16pm

I was in a Chemist today and asked for 24 neurofen plus for bad cramps. After the Assisant asking me what I need them for she asked the Chemist for "Clearance" and the Chemist said "oh give her 12"
The assistant said don't take them for longer than 3 days as they may cause constipation ...
Well that won't be an issue since there is only 12 in the bloody packet.

I won't going back

HavingCrack · 27-08-2010 2:25pm

Stark wrote: »

How is it a money making racket for GPs? You don't need a prescription so GPs are in no way involved. All that's required is for pharmacists to give you a "please use these only for painkilling purposes and not as sweets" disclaimer before handing them over to you.

The title of the thread is 'soon to need a prescription for Nurofen' so I presume it meant Nurofen would only be available on prescription. I presume this isn't the case and the OP was wrong but I just wasn't bothered reading through 40 pages

policeman · 27-08-2010 2:27pm

Human physiology + opiates = soothing pleasure = desire for more.

Soothing pleasure is a rare commodity for most people in their lives.

So, contrary to what come on this forum say or believe, people aren't actually "f**king idiots" because they find themselves chomping down a few of these tabs everyday.

With even a little bit of intelligence, you would understand that it is precisely this brainless judgement approach that keeps us going backwards.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe"
Albert Einstein

drkpower · 27-08-2010 2:27pm

lucylu wrote: »

I won't going back

Great; one addict cured. These regulations are great.

i like pie · 27-08-2010 2:34pm

Valmont wrote: »

If I get some patronising back chat from a pharmacist next time I'm buying Nurofen+, I'll inform them that they have lost my business and that I'm going down the road to Boots.

boots also has pharmacists who will ask these questions

lucylu · 27-08-2010 2:37pm

drkpower wrote: »

Great; one addict cured. These regulations are great.

ah you get bad period pains too.. killer aren't they

JayEnnis · 27-08-2010 2:41pm

Why are people putting the blame on the pharmacists? They have no control over this.

bleg · 27-08-2010 2:57pm

JayEnnis wrote: »

Why are people putting the blame on the pharmacists? They have no control over this.

Most people don't know that the PSI even exists. Look at the amount of people who think it's the government implementing this. Even when it's pointed out to them that it is nothing to do with policy they say "Mary Harney must have given a little push."

policeman · 27-08-2010 3:20pm

Actually you'll find this all dates back a few years. There was government intervention. 3 years later the PSI decides to act.

From PSI guidlines:

"This guidance sets out the criteria to be adhered to by pharmacists, with a view to ensuring the safe supply of non-prescription medicinal products containing codeine (hereafter called ‘codeine medicines’) to patients. It is intended to assist pharmacists in meeting their professional and legal responsibilities in the supply of these medicines, and to assist superintendent and supervising pharmacists in securing compliance with relevant legislative and professional obligations under the Pharmacy Act 2007, including the Regulation of Retail Pharmacy Businesses Regulations 2008 (S.I. No. 488 of 2008). The overall purpose of this guidance is to improve patient safety in the use of these medicines"

drkpower · 27-08-2010 3:27pm

policeman wrote: »

Actually you'll find this all dates back a few years. There was government intervention. 3 years later the PSI decides to act.

From PSI guidlines:

You are probably referring to this bit in the Regulations you quoted; in fairness to he PSI, and pharmacists generally, this is simply a restatement of what is the commonly understood role of pharmacicists; and always has been. So the PSI (who were only established in 2008) are only putting in detailed guideline form something pharmacists should have always have been doing. Unfortunately, many many pharmacists have neglected their role in this regard over many years.
Counselling in the supply of medicinal products other than on foot of a

prescription

10. A person carrying on a retail pharmacy business, the superintendent pharmacist
and the supervising pharmacist shall ensure that, in the course of the sale
or supply of a medicinal product other than on foot of a prescription and prior
to such sale or supply, a registered pharmacist is satisfied that the purchaser or
other such person is aware of what the appropriate use of the medicinal product
is and that it is being sought for that purpose and, in so far as the registered
pharmacist is aware, the product is not intended for abuse and/or misuse.

Calibos · 27-08-2010 3:38pm

What has changed is that the regulator, acting in the interest of the public i.e. on your behalf, has issued a guideline that we must question what you on what you are going to use it for, have you used it before, have you had any side effects, tried other non codeine products, tell you that they're not for longer than 3 days use and can cause addiction.

Many of use here have said, while it can be irritating to listen to this every single time we buy a packet, we will learn to live with it. In fact some of us have been living with it for a few years. Now that I think of it, I don't remember a time when I wasn't asked if I had used it before, whether I was aware of the side affects, to eat something before taking it and not to take it more than 3 days straight. Then I would get my 24. The difference now is that at the end of pretty much the same lecture I always got, I now get looked up and down with a raised eye and only sold 12 if I am lucky.

I daren't tell them that I am not in pain at the moment but am just stocking up cause thats a true sign of an addict in their minds now it seems. I definately get the raised eyebrow then. Eh, No. Just like I don't want to head out to the supermarket for the days dinner just after I start to feel hungry.....every day of the week, but instead do a weeks shopping in one go. Likewise I don't want to head off in the car and try and find a chemist open when I already have a splitting pulsing headache or neck muscle spasm that came on at 8pm. I want to have them in the house if I need them.

Stark · 27-08-2010 3:43pm

Calibos wrote: »

I daren't tell them that I am not in pain at the moment but am just stocking up cause thats a true sign of an addict in their minds now it seems. I definately get the raised eyebrow then. Eh, No. Just like I don't want to head out to the supermarket for the days dinner just after I start to feel hungry.....every day of the week, but instead do a weeks shopping in one go. Likewise I don't want to head off in the car and try and find a chemist open when I already have a splitting pulsing headache or neck muscle spasm that came on at 8pm. I want to have them in the house if I need them.

No ****. Try going to a doctor and asking him for a prescription of antibiotics because you're just "stocking up". Surely a standard anti-inflammatory will help ease your neck spams? Why do you need codeine for a muscle spasm?

27-08-2010 4:00pm

Calibos wrote: »

Many of use here have said, while it can be irritating to listen to this every single time we buy a packet, we will learn to live with it. In fact some of us have been living with it for a few years. Now that I think of it, I don't remember a time when I wasn't asked if I had used it before, whether I was aware of the side affects, to eat something before taking it and not to take it more than 3 days straight. Then I would get my 24. The difference now is that at the end of pretty much the same lecture I always got, I now get looked up and down with a raised eye and only sold 12 if I am lucky.

I daren't tell them that I am not in pain at the moment but am just stocking up cause thats a true sign of an addict in their minds now it seems. I definately get the raised eyebrow then. Eh, No. Just like I don't want to head out to the supermarket for the days dinner just after I start to feel hungry.....every day of the week, but instead do a weeks shopping in one go. Likewise I don't want to head off in the car and try and find a chemist open when I already have a splitting pulsing headache or neck muscle spasm that came on at 8pm. I want to have them in the house if I need them.

Serious question: How often do you take codeine based products?

Owwmykneecap · 27-08-2010 4:43pm

Somehow I don't feel that had this not been passed, Ireland would have imploded.

I think the national alcohol addict might be a teeny bit more pressing. (don't ban it though!!)

Stark · 27-08-2010 4:45pm

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

Somehow I don't feel that had this not been passed, Ireland would have imploded.

No, but a lot of people would have suffered needlessly.

At least alcohol addiction is a recognised problem and support services are available.

policeman · 27-08-2010 4:45pm

Shock/horror/"OMG you are addicted" reactions to people who regularly take codeine amuse me. We all live in a body that constantly says to us "I want endorphins/dopamine dammit!-I don't care how you do it!"

So, some people masturbate, or have sex all the time.Others do strenuous exercise.

The rest like the plink plink fizz approach:D

Stark · 27-08-2010 4:48pm

Having an orgasm or going for a run doesn't thrash your kidneys and intestines. You also don't get the tolerance and withdrawal effects that come from flooding your brain's endorphin system with unnatural doses. People have a right to know if the chronic headaches they experience that can "only be cured by codeine" are down to withdrawal and not be kept in ignorance like they have been up to now.

Owwmykneecap · 27-08-2010 4:50pm

Stark wrote: »

No, but a lot of people would have suffered needlessly.

At least alcohol addiction is a recognised problem and support services are available.

O rly? Where are these legions of codine addicts? As for alcohol addicts, the only ones we're concerned about are the ones who no longer function, the rest of the country still relies on getting pissed at the weekend to get through the week.

Stark · 27-08-2010 4:53pm

Owwmykneecap wrote: »

O rly? Where are these legions of codine addicts?

Half of them are posting in this thread. Box of 24 just not doing enough for you? "But I'm a special case, my pains are really bad compared to normal people's pains".

policeman · 27-08-2010 4:53pm

Stark wrote: »

Having an orgasm or going for a run doesn't thrash your kidneys and intestines

Of course,but the paracetamol and ibuprofen does most of the damage

Owwmykneecap · 27-08-2010 4:58pm

I've got the MC1R gene, I don't feel pain.

Now where are my nurofen.

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 5:05pm

Nash Nutritious Traitor wrote: »

But the whole point is, a lot of people take painkillers when they're really not in that much pain. I've seen it over and over, working in offices, Oh I have a bit of a twinge, let's reach for the Nurofen.

Oh I've seen it myself. And in answer to repeat myself again, it is their prerogative. You're not qualified to judge whether or not their "twinge" warrants a painkiller. Only the individual or the individual's physician is.

Nash Nutritious Traitor wrote: »

No-one is saying that. Painkillers are for migraines. They're not for a bit of a headache or a hangover. IMO. I do agree with the poster who said a lot of people just reach for painkillers way too easily rather than seeing them as a last resort. I have a lot of aches and pains from long term health issues, if I took a painkiller for every twinge, I'd be strung out 24/7. I find that most of the time, a glass of water, a short nap, a walk, makes me feel significantly better, then when I really need painkillers, they actually work.

But again it all depends on the individual. A walk/hot water bottle/cup of something soothing like tea might work for me for my menstrual cramps, but it might not necessarily work for someone else. The information is out there, there are warnings and if the warnings aren't heeded then they have nobody to blame but themselves. Education is key here, not blanket bans. In the regulated, advised dosage these medications do no longterm harm.

Nash Nutritious Traitor wrote: »

But people taking painkillers like sweets is a massive problem. That's why these guidelines have come in. They don't benefit the pharmacies in any way. They make more money by selling more drugs. You might not abuse painkillers but a hell of a lot of people do, and most of them are in total denial about it.

Like I've said before I have no problems with the guidelines, warnings or getting a third degree from my pharmacist. That wasn't what prompted me to post in this thread initially, it was the attitudes and the automatic assumption that someone could be branded an "addict" so easily and without justifiable cause.

drkpower wrote: »

This is the type of attitude which these regulations are intended to combat. The problem is that many many people are not aware of the addictive potential of these medications. Or more accurately, they are aware of them, but do not truly understand what they mean. There are far far more people who are addicted to codeine (or benzodiazepines) than actually realise they are.

If we are to put such dangerous substances on the market, there is an obligation to ensure that they are properly regulated and that mechanisms are in place to combat the risks. To simply put these products on the market with no restrictions/regulations would be irresponsible. Making certain drugs prescription-only is one such mechanism. Making a drug a 'controlled' drug is another. In the case of codeine, we have this 'pharmacist consultation' process. It is a very very small inconvenience. If you consider it a significant inconvenience, you are probably one of the people the process is intended to weed out.

Never said I was inconvenienced by it. In actual fact I've said in a previous post to this one, and above that this "pharmacist consultation" process wasn't an issue for me. Might be an idea to hop down off your soap box for a minute and actually read my posts before you jump in with your assumptions.

If we were to take your attitude toward every addictive substance on the market drkpower, then we'd need permission to consume pretty much everything the majority of the population consumes in this country today. People can become addicted to anything through prolonged usage. McDonalds, smoking, alcohol, sugars. I even know someone addicted to spearmint polo mints. Nurofen and solpadeine have been readily available for a long time. Was that irresponsible? I'd be more inclined to argue that it is irresponsible of the user to overuse such medications.

Control the use of the drug to an extent, sure. But making it available only by prescription is extreme in my opinion. I, for one, am capable of making my own decisions about what I put into my body. I don't judge people who smoke or drink, or people who take a couple of nurofen to combat a headache. I'd expect the same in return.

policeman · 27-08-2010 5:07pm

Stark wrote: »

Half of them are posting in this thread. Box of 24 just not doing enough for you?.

How's the view up there? It must be great being so superior and strong willed. I wish we could all be like that:eek:

Timistry · 27-08-2010 5:15pm

Soon you will need a perscription to take a dump

bleg · 27-08-2010 5:20pm

Timistry wrote: »

Soon you will need a perscription to take a dump

Wrong wrong wrong wrong.

You will be simply warned that you shouldn't take more than 5 dumps a day.

Kurtosis · 27-08-2010 5:23pm

policeman wrote: »

We all live in a body that constantly says to us "I want endorphins/dopamine dammit!-I don't care how you do it!"

So, some people masturbate, or have sex all the time.Others do strenuous exercise.

The rest like the plink plink fizz approach:D

policeman wrote: »

Of course,but the paracetamol and ibuprofen does most of the damage

All part of the package I'm afraid. If people want to abuse medicines to stimulate their pleasure centres, then they have to accept all the consequences. Same way those who run for their endorphin rush might get sore knees or stub their toe while they're out.

drkpower · 27-08-2010 5:25pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

If we were to take your attitude toward every addictive substance on the market drkpower, then we'd need permission to consume pretty much everything the majority of the population consumes in this country today. People can become addicted to anything through prolonged usage. McDonalds, smoking, alcohol, sugars. I even know someone addicted to spearmint polo mints. Nurofen and solpadeine have been readily available for a long time. Was that irresponsible? I'd be more inclined to argue that it is irresponsible of the user to overuse such medications..

I dont think you understand the nature of addiction.

But, you do realise that the food market is already regulated; and more is on the way. We regulate markets in different ways; just because someone in Tesco doesnt quiz you before you buy a curly-wurly doesnt mean that the food market is regulated and controlled.

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Control the use of the drug to an extent, sure. But making it available only by prescription is extreme in my opinion. I, for one, am capable of making my own decisions about what I put into my body. I don't judge people who smoke or drink, or people who take a couple of nurofen to combat a headache. I'd expect the same in return.

Control it but let me make my own decisions. You seem confused.

It isnt about judging. It is about protecting. If we put dangerous substances, or treatments, on the market, we have an obligation to ensure they are not abuised to the detriment of the user. The relative inconvenience to the consumer of a 'pharmacist consultation' is far outweighed by the protective benefits.

HorsesNHarleys · 27-08-2010 5:25pm

I can't even remember when you could even get a drug with codeine in it without a prescription here in the US, had to have been decades ago, but I can tell you it's absolute hell if you're suffering in pain and need something stronger than ibuprofen or aspirin. When you go to a doctor and tell them your in terrible pain, if you haven't been seeing that doctor for a long, long time, they think your a drug addict looking for drugs. If you have a chronic pain condition that requires the regular use of pain medication just to have some resemblance of "normal" life where you can function without being doubled over in pain, you're treated like a criminal. All of your medications are tracked in a database and monitored by the Federal Government's Drug Enforcement Agency.

I've read where many folks here talk about the addictiveness of pain medications and how it's reckless to sell these medications without controlling them, it's the same in the U.S. But, both alcohol and cigarettes are addicting and can be fatal, however is a prescription from your doctor needed for either of those items. Listened to a guy in a bar lecturing his buddy about how unhealthy taking pain medication for his back problems was and how it was addicting for him and telling him he should try to tough it out, all the while he was gulping down his drinks and sucking on his cigarettes, what a hypocrite!!!:rolleyes:

Furthermore, it should be recognized and understood that anytime you restrict access to a product (i.e. alcohol or drug) it tends to create a black market for that item and thereby subsequently creates more crime as a result. Prime example was during prohibition in the U.S. Prohibition may have successfully reduced the amount of liquor consumed but it tended to destroy society by other means, as it stimulated the proliferation of rampant underground, organized, and widespread criminal activity.

Is there a huge problem in Ireland with people abusing these particular drugs? Or is this something that they just decided maybe we should start regulating? There's always going to be folks who misuse or abuse something, but you shouldn't make laws or policies based on those people and punish the majority of law abiding people in the process.

A glass of water for menstrual cramps, ARE YOU SERIOUS???

:rolleyes:

THIS IS A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT:

For your own safety, DO NOT stand within arms reach of a woman suffering serious menstrual cramps and offer her a glass of water as a cure or thinking it will help in any way, you will end up either very wet or seriously injured!!:D:D:D:D

drkpower · 27-08-2010 5:30pm

HorsesNHarleys wrote: »

Furthermore, it should be recognized and understood that anytime you restrict access to a product (i.e. alcohol or drug) it tends to create a black market for that item and thereby subsequently creates more crime as a result. Prime example was during prohibition in the U.S. Prohibition may have successfully reduced the amount of liquor consumed but it tended to destroy society by other means, as it stimulated the proliferation of rampant underground, organized, and widespread criminal activity.

Is there much of a black market for antibiotics, or prescription anti-inflammatories?

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 5:35pm

drkpower wrote: »

I dont think you understand the nature of addiction.

But, you do realise that the food market is already regulated; and more is on the way. We regulate markets in different ways; just because someone in Tesco doesnt quiz you before you buy a curly-wurly doesnt mean that the food market is regulated and controlled.

Oh I do understand the nature of addiction.

The food market is nowhere near as stringently regulated as any other. I can still eat myself to death with Big Macs and KFC if I so choose. And rightly so.

drkpower wrote: »

Control it but let me make my own decisions. You seem confused.

It isnt about judging. It is about protecting. If we put dangerous substances, or treatments, on the market, we have an obligation to ensure they are not abuised to the detriment of the user. The relative inconvenience to the consumer of a 'pharmacist consultation' is far outweighed by the protective benefits.

No, I am by no means confused.

As I've previously stated the process of purchasing these medications over the counter and the questioning that might ensue isn't a problem as far as I'm concerned. To that extent, it's an element of controlling the substance. The decision of whether or not to take them is still my own.

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 5:36pm

HorsesNHarleys wrote: »

Is there a huge problem in Ireland with people abusing these particular drugs? Or is this something that they just decided maybe we should start regulating? There's always going to be folks who misuse or abuse something, but you shouldn't make laws or policies based on those people and punish the majority of law abiding people in the process.

Couldn't agree more. It's just another symptom of the nanny state malarkey we have going on at the moment.

policeman · 27-08-2010 5:43pm

Timistry wrote: »

Soon you will need a perscription to take a dump

Well in males it stimulates the prostate, which theoretically is linked to sexual pleasure which in turn is linked to opiate receptors, so yes
we may cautioned about taking far too many dumps and over stimulating said receptors/production of.:D

Kurtosis · 27-08-2010 5:43pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Education is key here, not blanket bans.

...

But making it available only by prescription is extreme in my opinion. I, for one, am capable of making my own decisions about what I put into my body.

Sorry JaxxY, I've taken two sentences from your post out of context, but there has neither been a blanket ban nor a movement of these medicines to prescription only. Very little has actually changed and many of the points of the guidance have the norm in some pharmacies for quite a time, so this move is more to try to standardise such practices across all pharmacies.

drkpower · 27-08-2010 5:44pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Oh I do understand the nature of addiction.

The food market is nowhere near as stringently regulated as any other. I can still eat myself to death with Big Macs and KFC if I so choose. And rightly so..

Im not sure if you do;).
Yes, you are correct; it isnt as stringently regulated; that is because it isnt as dangerous; just like the way codeine isnt as stringently regulated as morphine; that is because it isnt as dangerous.

See how it works? Increased dangers to personal & public health; increased regulation. Very straightforward.

drkpower · 27-08-2010 5:49pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Couldn't agree more. It's just another symptom of the nanny state malarkey we have going on at the moment.

Nonsense.

Regulation of dangerous products is a good and proper exercise of state power. In other news today, you may hear that a certain type of hip replacement has been recalled. If there was no 'nanny state', no regulation of medicinal products and devices, that product could continue to be used for years and decades more posing serious risks to individuals. And I suspect that you would be towards the front of the queue asking how was this let happen.

Kurtosis · 27-08-2010 5:57pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

The decision of whether or not to take them is still my own.

Of course it's your decision. Same way it's up to the pharmacist to use their professional judgement in deciding if it is appropriate to supply them to you or not. Just because it's a non-prescription medicine does not make it a free for all.

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 6:03pm

penguin88 wrote: »

Sorry JaxxY, I've taken two sentences from your post out of context, but there has neither been a blanket ban nor a movement of these medicines to prescription only. Very little has actually changed and many of the points of the guidance have the norm in some pharmacies for quite a time, so this move is more to try to standardise such practices across all pharmacies.

Oh I know, I was just arguing against certain methods being instigated. Other posters have been saying that making these drugs available on prescription only is a possible step in "protecting" the possibly uninformed masses. I was merely commenting that I think it would be extreme and a little education might be more of a palatable solution for everyone.

drkpower wrote: »

Im not sure if you do;).
Yes, you are correct; it isnt as stringently regulated; that is because it isnt as dangerous; just like the way codeine isnt as stringently regulated as morphine; that is because it isnt as dangerous.

See how it works? Increased dangers to personal & public health; increased regulation. Very straightforward.

I'm sure I do

.

Anything consumed in large amounts has the potential to be dangerous, bad for your health or life threatening. Morphine is available on prescription, codeine is available without. By your own admission codeine is nowhere near as dangerous as morphine, and yet by your own logic increased regulation for this substance is necessary. Very straightforward indeed.

drkpower wrote: »

Nonsense.

No, my opinion.

drkpower wrote: »

Regulation of dangerous products is a good and proper exercise of state power. In other news today, you may hear that a certain type of hip replacement has been recalled. If there was no 'nanny state', no regulation of medicinal products and devices, that product could continue to be used for years and decades more posing serious risks to individuals. And I suspect that you would be towards the front of the queue asking how was this let happen.

And you can continue to make assumptions about me until the cows come home, it's not going to change anything, it doesn't make you any more right or me any more wrong. But carry on by all means, suppliment your argument with thinly veiled insults, assumptions and patronization all you want.

Jaxxy · 27-08-2010 6:06pm

penguin88 wrote: »

Of course it's your decision. Same way it's up to the pharmacist to use their professional judgement in deciding if it is appropriate to supply them to you or not. Just because it's a non-prescription medicine does not make it a free for all.

You make a good point, one similar to a point I made a few pages back. I have no issue with the new regulations, only certain attitudes toward those who take painkillers when they deem it necessary. I'm not going to repeat myself anymore though because this has been going around in circles for a while as far as I'm concerned.

I'm off to pollute my body with an addictive substance of another kind, have a good weekend drkpower!

policeman · 27-08-2010 6:09pm

drkpower wrote: »

Nonsense.

Regulation of dangerous products is a good and proper exercise of state power.

State power..regulation of dangerous substances..you gotta be sh*tting me..??

Why weren't cigs banned years ago? - They make too much money

People killin' themselves with drink - Too much money involved

New dangerous obesity epidemic caused by sh*t foods killing people - Too much money

drkpower · 27-08-2010 6:13pm

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

Morphine is available on prescription, codeine is available without. By your own admission codeine is nowhere near as dangerous as morphine, and yet by your own logic increased regulation for this substance is necessary. Very straightforward indeed.

Do you understand this at all? Codeine's level of regulation is not now anywhere near the same level as morphine.
Morphine requires more regulation than codeine; that is clear. Codeine requires more regulation than aspirin; that is clear. Up until now, codeine has had the same level of regulation as ibuprofen. The PSI have made the welcome decision to increase the level of regulation with regard to codeine; it was a long overdue decision.

JaxxYChicK wrote: »

No, my opinion.
And you can continue to make assumptions about me until the cows come home, it's not going to change anything, it doesn't make you any more right or me any more wrong. But carry on by all means, suppliment your argument with thinly veiled insults, assumptions and patronization all you want.

Yes; and you opinion is nonsense. Very straightforward.
Well rather than me making assumptions then, do you think it is right that the IMB are entitled to regulate and recall when necessary the hip replacement device that was recalled today? Or should it still be on the market and should the consumer be entitled to purchase that hip replacement if they want? After all, you did say it should be up to you what you put in your own body, right?

Soon to need a prescription for Nurofen/Solphadine/etc?

Comments