Nanny state

ART6

Went into Mr. Tesco the other day, and among the shopping collected were two packs of Dispirin for our medicine cabinet -- I wanted a large pack but they only had small ones, so I got two. At the checkout I was told "Sorry, we're only allowed to sell you one of those." In my innocence of the world around me, this was the first time I had heard of this, but I assume it's to prevent me from overdosing on painkillers.

So now maybe, when out elected rulers representatives have time from their busy schedules, can we look forward to:
Only one bog roll at a time to protect the environment?
Only one can of beer at a time to ensure that I don't trouble that nice Guard over there?
Only one slice of bread at a time to prevent me from overeating and getting too fat?
Only one page of a newspaper at a time to save the trees.

Doesn't it give you a warm glow of comfort to know that someone in high places is so concerned about your welfare?:D

mikemac

You never knew you couldn't buy two packs of certain painkillers? That's been around for years, most shops have a sign behind the counter.
I thought everyone knew this. Rules set by the Irish Medical Board afaik. They ban many substances, it's often mentioned in the fitness forum as some supplements are banned here but you can drive to Newry and get them

What if you take two packs, collapse and get hospitalized? Oh you bet, Lukasc from Poland who sold them will be sacked and the shop may be sued.

From working in a hotel every morning I'd have some resident roaring to get painkillers for their hangover. We didn't hand them over, we put them on the table and let the resident take them themselves. So if they collapse it's their own fault.
Yes, compo culture is the reason for this.

You can almost picture the barrister:
"And you work as a shop assistent but you think you are qualified to sell packs of painkillers and ignore guidelines"

Tesco would be ruined in a legal case if you overdosed yourself

RATM

Yeah but I think the point here is that ppl need to take responsibility for their own actions. Instead we have a legal system that seeks to apportion the blame to anyone who's not at fault whilst disregarding the person who is and then giving them a big ball of cash.

If someone wants to commit suicide with painkillers this silly rule is not going to stop them, they'll just go to the next shop and buy another packet and then another somewhere else. It's a daft rule and only serves to inconvenience the majority of the population.

mikemac

RATM wrote: »

If someone wants to commit suicide with painkillers this silly rule is not going to stop them, they'll just go to the next shop and buy another packet and then another somewhere else.

It protects the shop from litigation and places the responsibility on the person buying the drugs.
Shops would prefer to keep it and it's not going to change anytime soon.

I'd agree it'd be great if people took personal responsibiitly but imagine the OP overdosed and died (Sorry OP :pac:) then maybe their relations would look at the billions that Tesco earn

Cha-ching €€€

Xavi6

http://www.managerleague.com/images/uploaded/68909/lolcat-funny-picture-found-pills-ate-eat.jpg

That is all

tallaght01

Most people don't need 2 packs of painkillers for what they're intended for, which is 24-48 hours of flu, or a headache. OTC meds like this aren't intended for a long time.

People with chronic pain etc would usually be on a prescription.

Saint_Mel

micmclo wrote: »

What if you take two packs, collapse and get hospitalized? Oh you bet, Lukasc
from Poland who sold them will be sacked and the shop may be sued.

But I think the what the OP is getting at is they had intended on buying a large pack which could be the equivalent of 2 small packs.
They could have taken all the tablets from the large pack together with the same result.

Gone West

well you have two useful choices and one "atari jaguar" option.

a) Change the rules
b) Leave, go somewhere without those rules.
c) Complain uselessly about it.

Obviously you've picked (c)

whiskeyman

this happened to my Mum a couples of weeks ago in Superquinn when she wanted to buy 2 packets of Panadol.
The checkout person told her she couldn't purchase two... so she paid for one, went to the checkout beside that one... and paid for the other there.

Stupid rule to be honest...

seamus

As said, it's basically to stop idiot relatives of idiot overdosers from being able to go into the shop and say, "Didn't you know that only people who overdose by two packets of painkillers? I'm suing you!".

Lockstep

During my training with Dunnes we were given the following little talk:

Trainer: "You can only sell one box of paracetemol to a person at a time, although it's not really enforced. Just use your judgement"
Coworker:" What do you mean?"
Trainer:" Well just don't sell them any more pills if they look like they might commit suicide or suicide
Coworker: "What should we look out for?"
Trainer:" Oh, just if they look depressed or have slit wrists or something"

JC 2K3

It's a retarded law tbh, and it only applies to Paracetamol AFAIK. I don't think it's been around for very long either.

A 12 pack would be pretty bad for your liver, and could possibly kill a smaller person, a 24 pack would be quite likely to kill you.

However, one would have to be quite an idiot to try to kill themselves by overdosing on paracetamol. It's not like you take loads, pass out and wake up dead. It's more like if you don't get treatment within 24 hours or something, you die a slow painful death (unless you get a liver transplant) over 2/3 weeks.

There are much more efficient and less painful ways of killing yourself.

Sherifu

I ran into this restriction last year. A bit annoying but it makes sense.

seamus

In most places, there's little stopping you from using the self checkout and buying as many as you like. I can recall buying two packets of painkillers this way.
It would make way more sense if they just programmed the checkouts to throw an error if someone tries to scan a second packet of paracetemol. Then you don't even need to train new staff on the restriction.

However, one would have to be quite an idiot to try to kill themselves by overdosing on paracetamol. It's not like you take loads, pass out and wake up dead. It's more like if you don't get treatment within 24 hours or something, you die a slow painful death (unless you get a liver transplant) over 2/3 weeks.

Yep, unless you can manage to combine it with a tonne of other stuff such as prescription drugs and alcohol, you're more than likely just going to spend a few weeks in serious pain before you die, which would probably be a far more harrowing experience than staying alive.

Steve_o

Sherifu wrote: »

I ran into this restriction last year. A bit annoying but it makes sense.

True, very easy to fix tho, if you need more than one pack that badly, go to 2 shops.

the_syco

RATM wrote: »

Yeah but I think the point here is that ppl need to take responsibility for their own actions.

I lol'ed. People are dumb, and when they f**k up, demand compo from the people who tried to help them.

tallaght01

24 tabs may or may not kill anyone on here.

But they'd do a hell of a job on your baby's liver.

You'd be amazed at how many toddlers eat the contents of their parents' drug cabinets.

zuutroy

Have you seen a medicine ad in the US recently? Its roughly 25 seconds of warning and 5 seconds of 'buy or product'. Retarded.

MistyCheese

I know someone who wanted to commit suicide and tried to OD. They took a bunch of pills, including a load of laxatives. The person is still alive now, they were found in time and brought to the hospital, but 16 years on from it they suffer from a very weak stomach. I swear, if food is anything less than fresh or if it's undercooked at all they will be sick.

Also, many take-away pizzas make this person sick. Especially those from a very big pizza delivery company. I think it probably says a lot about the quality of their ingredients.

thefinalstage

All you have to do is buy one packet and got to the next shop for another.

LiamD

thelastangryman wrote: »

All you have to do is buy one packet and got to the next shop for another.

Or buy one packet off one server, go back and get a second off another.

biko

Not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Lockstep

biko wrote: »

why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Natural selection FTW.

Seriously, anyone who uses a carton formerly containing bleach as a beverage container is just too thick to be allowed live.

RedXIV

Tesco used to give great training vids, couldn't buy cutlery if you were under 16, couldn't buy razor blades (yet razors were fine ) unless you were 18, matches couldn't be bought by people under 16. And i can't remember for certain but i think they discontinued their line of corkscrews. although that might just have been the one i was in

ScumLord

seamus wrote: »

In most places, there's little stopping you from using the self checkout and buying as many as you like. I can recall buying two packets of painkillers this way.
It would make way more sense if they just programmed the checkouts to throw an error if someone tries to scan a second packet of paracetemol. Then you don't even need to train new staff on the restriction.

Then you have a load of toolbags standing around the till wondering why it won't go through.

ART6 wrote: »

Only one bog roll at a time to protect the environment?
Only one can of beer at a time to ensure that I don't trouble that nice Guard over there?
Only one slice of bread at a time to prevent me from overeating and getting too fat?
Only one page of a newspaper at a time to save the trees.

They're great ideas I'm voting for you in the Lisbon treaty.

JC 2K3

MistyCheese wrote: »

I know someone who wanted to commit suicide and tried to OD. They took a bunch of pills, including a load of laxatives. The person is still alive now, they were found in time and brought to the hospital, but 16 years on from it they suffer from a very weak stomach. I swear, if food is anything less than fresh or if it's undercooked at all they will be sick.

Also, many take-away pizzas make this person sick. Especially those from a very big pizza delivery company. I think it probably says a lot about the quality of their ingredients.

That's quite an assumption to make. You can't define "quality" by the liklihood that it will make said person sick.

Steve

meh, nannyism at it's worst.

I stock up on meds anytime I go to the states. You can get a jar of 500 Ibuprofin for less than $20. How much is a pack of 12 here?

ART6

FuzzyLogic wrote: »

well you have two useful choices and one "atari jaguar" option.

a) Change the rules
b) Leave, go somewhere without those rules.
c) Complain uselessly about it.

Obviously you've picked (c)

I think perhaps you missed the point I was (badly) trying to make, which was to laugh at the whole silly business. Actually I found the whole thing hilarious and typical of the sort of laws that come out of the government nowadays. I mean, I could happily buy two or three bottles of whisky at the same store and commit suicide by drinking the lot. My family could then sue Tesco for not telling me I could kill myself if I drank them. I could buy two bottles of bleach and kill myself with them, or some weedkiller from the gardening section and use that instead. However, I am protected from doing it with twelve Dispirin, and that gives me a great feeling of comfort:D

ScumLord wrote: »

They're great ideas I'm voting for you in the Lisbon treaty.

Thank you for your vote of confidence;)

The Artist

RedXIV wrote: »

couldn't buy razor blades (yet razors were fine unless you were 18)

18 for razors? really?
So my son whos 15 cant buy razors as he needs to shave?
surely the goverment know that men grow facial hair at least maybe 13 years old as its not their fault that they grow facial hair?

RedXIV

Alan Ford wrote: »

18 for razors? really?
So my son whos 15 cant buy razors as he needs to shave?
surely the goverment know that men grow facial hair at least maybe 13 years old as its not their fault that they grow facial hair?

Never saw it enforced, but yup, it's on the training vids. no razor blades to anyone without ID. but like i said, oddly enough, they can buy a razor which comes with blades anyway.

Correction: i did seen it enforced once, young lads dad came in fuming. ah tesco, the memories you gave me

ART6

RedXIV wrote: »

Never saw it enforced, but yup, it's on the training vids. no razor blades to anyone without ID. but like i said, oddly enough, they can buy a razor which comes with blades anyway.

Correction: i did seen it enforced once, young lads dad came in fuming. ah tesco, the memories you gave me

That explains a lot. I did wonder why my sone was growing a fuzzy beard at 16:)

Wertz

thelastangryman wrote: »

All you have to do is buy one packet and got to the next shop for another.

Yeah just shop around! :pac:

I buy most of my OTC meds in Newry anyhow....never been stopped from buying as much paracetamol as I like (usually just the 50 pack of 500mg)...not that I'm big into taking pills for a headache or hangover, I just like to have them there in case. They're a fiar bit cheaper too.

So fuzzylogic, how should the OP go about changing the rules; part A in your 3 options? Run for governement, write to their TD? What? For a lot of the time it's not politicians that come up with these retarded restrictions, it's a group of overpaid consultants and professional bodies that do it, for seemingly little reason apart from that they can...the Dáil just signs it into law...
Usually this sort of nannying is imported from Brussels....I think we dreamt up this particualr one on our own...

Earthhorse

biko wrote: »

Not saying there should be a capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

Why don't we take the warnings at the top of every forum on boards down and see what happens?

People are often just about smart enough to stay alive and just about dumb enough to make everyone else's life more difficult.

ART6 wrote: »

Actually I found the whole thing hilarious and typical of the sort of laws that come out of the government nowadays.

Except it's on the advice of the Irish Medicines Board and has been around for years.

xOxSinéadxOx

I Want To Work In Tesco! :d

The Artist

xOxSinéadxOx wrote: »

I Want To Work In Tesco! :d

id vote no!

randylonghorn

tallaght01 wrote: »

24 tabs may or may not kill anyone on here.

But they'd do a hell of a job on your baby's liver.

You'd be amazed at how many toddlers eat the contents of their parents' drug cabinets.

True enough ... but then wouldn't it be more useful to promote the (should be self-evident, I know) idea of keeping medicines out of reach of children.

Not sure a store restriction which allows the sale of 1 x 24 pack paracetamol but forbids the sale of 2 x 12 pack of same will really do much for this problem ... or any other possible problem caused by the misuse of paracetamol, tbh.

The old truism that civil servants seldom write good law could have a corollary added: QUANGOs do so even less often!

orestes

tallaght01 wrote: »

You'd be amazed at how many toddlers eat the contents of their parents' drug cabinets.

Damned junkie babies causing trouble for the rest of us again :mad:

tallaght01

randylonghorn wrote: »

True enough ... but then wouldn't it be more useful to promote the (should be self-evident, I know) idea of keeping medicines out of reach of children.

Not sure a store restriction which allows the sale of 1 x 24 pack paracetamol but forbids the sale of 2 x 12 pack of same will really do much for this problem ... or any other possible problem caused by the misuse of paracetamol, tbh.

The old truism that civil servants seldom write good law could have a corollary added: QUANGOs do so even less often!

Health promotion should be used in conjunction with restrictions.

For eg, we promote the avoidance of hard drugs, while at the same time outlaw their use withouth prescription.

Similarly, people have been trying to get parents to be more sensible with their drug cabinets for donkeys years. But every single solitary week I admit kids to hospital with overdoses of medication that they've got their hands on with really no bother.

I'm not big into telling people what they should or should not so with their lives, but I've no major problem with this law. On one hand, it's not made a massive difference, but on the other hand very few people need lots of aspirin/paracetamol lying around their house.

randylonghorn

tallaght01 wrote: »

Health promotion should be used in conjunction with restrictions.

Agreed.

tallaght01 wrote: »

For eg, we promote the avoidance of hard drugs, while at the same time outlaw their use withouth prescription.

Again, agreed.

tallaght01 wrote: »

Similarly, people have been trying to get parents to be more sensible with their drug cabinets for donkeys years. But every single solitary week I admit kids to hospital with overdoses of medication that they've got their hands on with really no bother.

I'm not big into telling people what they should or should not so with their lives, but I've no major problem with this law. On one hand, it's not made a massive difference, but on the other hand very few people need lots of aspirin/paracetamol lying around their house.

I have a problem with it ... it's not fit for purpose. It doesn't work. It hasn't been thought through, and there obviously hasn't been any input from anyone who deals with the day to day reality.

As I mentioned, the "one pack" rule is a logical and mathematical farce i.e. the sale of 1 x 24 pack paracetamol is fine but the sale of 2 x 12 pack is prohibited. Indeed, I was in a supermarket recently which had tubs of 40 generic paracetamol for sale, no problem. Someone attempting to purchase 24 Disprin in 2 packs would have been refused, however.

Again, nothing stopping someone from picking up numerous packs at different stores, or as someone mentioned at different check-outs.

As others have mentioned, there are a lot of more dangerous things sold in supermarkets without restriction, although I would be inclined to argue that that is probably a seperate issue.

My main argument with this regulation is that in practice it tends to be counter-productive and have exactly the opposite effect than is intended. When I was growing up, there was a medicine cabinet high up on the bathroom wall well out of reach of small fry. My mother kept basic emergency stocks in it, including paracetamol. When she ran low, she would purchase a replacement box (think they came in 60's at the time) from the pharmacy. Wasn't an every day event, and like all medicines in our house it was treated with care, and carefully put away out of reach when she came home.

Now, as far as I can see, many people automatically throw a pack in with their shopping every time they go to the supermarket ... and they tend to be pulled out with the groceries and left around kitchen counters, and treated with far less respect.

Similarly, while supermarkets do in fairness tend to place them on the higher shelves, they are still in reach of older children, and especially kids in those seats in shopping trollies.

I honestly don't think we have improved anything; quite the opposite, in fact.

I don't claim to have any miracle cures (:D) but I would throw the following suggestions out for discussion, at least:

1) I wouldn't forbid the sale of paracetamol etc. in supermarkets, but I would insist that they were kept behind the counter, like cigarettes. That would prevent kids from grabbing at them, and would also help to re-inforce the message that they aren't "ordinary" groceries, and need to be treated with more care.

2) Any restrictions should be by number / strength, not on the basis of "one packet".

3) All such products should be sold in strong plastic tubs with "childproof" lids (yes, I know they're not absolutely childproof, but they are far better than blister packs).

4) Packs should carry large "Keep out of reach of children!" warnings, and they should be displayed on shelves as well. Yes, I know people should know that already, and some people will never learn, but constant reinforcement of learning does eventually have an effect, if only at a sub-conscious level.


Anyone else like to chip in?

tallaght01

It's been a long time since I worked in healthcare in Ireland. Spent the last few years in the UK and the antipodes.

BUT, in the UK the regulations have nothing to do with the number of packets. It has to do with the number of tablets a person can buy. ie you can buy 16 paracetamols in a supermarket and 32 in a pharmacy.

It reduced paracetamol overdoses by 45% in scotland where I worked, but the effect was reduced over the last few years for whatever reason.

I'll look intot he irish rules, but I'd be surprised if it were based on number of packets.

ART6

While this thread is getting more serious than I had originally intended -- I was just having a laugh at how silly this particular law seemed to be to me-- I agree entirely with Randylonghorn's excellent response, and with other posters who have noted that it is ridiculously easy to bypass. There is of course nothing to stop anyone buying a pack of Paracetemol at every shop in the high street and going home with a bag full of them. Therefore all the law does is cause a minor and irritating inconvenience without actually addressing the problem (if there is one). Also, I accept that there is a danger to children if such medications are not kept out of their reach, but in the average house there are many other products that are at least as dangerous. Should we place restrictions on the sale of all of them because some parents are too stupid to take the obvious precautions? That it was enshrined in law by some public health body or other doesn't impress me, since they seem to want to ban or restrict everything that could be harmful if abused by one idiot out of every ten thousand people.

The fact remains that my post was about the bizarre regulation that I can buy a single pack of 24 Dispirin but not two packs of 12. To me that is just another example of the endless meddling that seems to be a factor of modern government. Oh, and this is not a rant. Personally I'm not big into Dispirin in any case:D

tallaght01

So, I've done a bit of rooting around, and it seems that in Ireland restriction of purchase is indeed based on not being able to buy "multiple packets", as opposed to a set number of pills (which is what they've done in any country I've ever worked in).

The Irish Medicines Board asked the govt to restrict pill numbers, rather than pack numbers, but they wouldn't listen

The mind boggles.

Earthhorse

I guess that it's easier to count packets rather than pills. Oh well.

Phototoxin

my chem lecturer need them for an expeirmetn and had to make 2 trips to sainsburys to get them on 2 different days.. .bit of a pain really... like surely if you have a doctorate in medicine or chemistry there's an exception ?

seamus

Because Doctors are less likely to kill themselves.....?

randylonghorn

tallaght01 wrote: »

The mind boggles.

NOW you're on the same page!

seamus wrote: »

Because Doctors are less likely to kill themselves.....?

Actually, I think the rates for medical doctors are high relatively speaking ... not sure about academic scientists though.



(Oh, and yes, Seamus, I did detect the sarcasm! )