Should pseudoephedrine be by prescription only in Oklahoma?

[Hoss]

Does anyone remember that Claritin D was prescription-only until 2003?

Nathan makes a valid point.  To expand on that: the FDA could motivate the hell out of drug manufacturers by giving them a deadline to develop the next generation of decongestants without pseudoephedrine.


Which part do you vehemently disagree with?

-You don't think drug companies could better spend money on research to find a better decongestant rather than spending it lobbying to defend an obviously abused product?

-You think it's too much to ask to go to the doctor once a year for a metered, full year supply of Claritin?  That's how I used to do it.

-Do you realize that most people with prescription plans would pay less for generic versions of decongestants than they do without a prescription?

http://pediatrics.about.com/cs/weeklyquestion/a/120902_ask.htm

OK, point by point...

1.  Yes, I do think they could likely find a drug that MAY work better than PE for allergy sufferers.  Problem is, not ALL allergy sufferers react to different drugs the same.  I know that certain 'antihistamines' I used didn't work as well as others.  The only one that consistently did for me is Drixoral (yes, it has PE).

2.  That's not the point Conan.  People shouldn't have to make that choice after a drug is made available for OTC use.  See my baby/bathwater comment.

3.  But they'd still have to pay for a doctor visit.  I know you say 'they need to go to the doctor once a year anyway', but the fact of the matter is, not everyone can afford that.  So whatever cost you'd save in getting a generic form of the drug is immediately neutered with the office visit cost.

[Conan71]

If the states are going to cave, I'm curious if the FDA can pull it's head out and force big pharma to find better alternatives?

Believe it or not, even ibuprofen can give moderate swelling relief in the sinuses and nasal passages. 

Enjoy your PE and i'll continue to piss and moan about exploding meth labs, thieving tweakers who continue to rip off the company I work for, and the known and unknown dangers of ingesting PE in the first place.

[Hoss]

If the states are going to cave, I'm curious if the FDA can pull it's head out and force big pharma to find better alternatives?

You're asking if the government can make pharma do something?  Not likely...

Oh, wait, I see what you did there....

[LocalGirl]

Why not just sell the geltab form? It can't be used for meth making, right?

[Conan71]

Why not just sell the geltab form? It can't be used for meth making, right?

Too simple a solution.  We have to make everything difficult in Oklahoma.

[Townsend]

Why not just sell the geltab form? It can't be used for meth making, right?

Bein' from Oklahoma we get the gel all over our hands.

[Red Arrow]

-Do you realize that most people with prescription plans would pay less for generic versions of decongestants than they do without a prescription?

I won't disagree with "most" but my prescriptions cost less for generics at WalMart paying cash, specifically excluding the insurance company which requires all maintenance drugs to go through Aetna RX mail order after the first month to have insurance pay anything.  The $10/ 3month supply from Walmart costs anywhere between $13 and $18 for the same quantity going through Aetna RX prescription mail order.  Both places are for generics.

[nathanm]

-Do you realize that most people with prescription plans would pay less for generic versions of decongestants than they do without a prescription?

It costs about $3 for the largest box of Wal-Phed they can legally sell. It would cost a lot more than that to go to the doctor, not to mention the follow-on effects of driving up the cost and wait times for everybody else who needs to see that doctor and all the other doctors who will be wasting time writing prescriptions for pseudoephedrine.

[Conan71]

It costs about $3 for the largest box of Wal-Phed they can legally sell. It would cost a lot more than that to go to the doctor, not to mention the follow-on effects of driving up the cost and wait times for everybody else who needs to see that doctor and all the other doctors who will be wasting time writing prescriptions for pseudoephedrine.

So your convenience and need for cheap allergy meds, when there are viable alternatives, trumps the societal costs to everyone else?

[dbacks fan]

Bein' from Oklahoma we get the gel all over our hands.

Well quit using Donnie's Rejuve and you won't have that problem.

[Breadburner]

Well quit using Donnie's Rejuve and you won't have that problem.

That boy runs through the saran wrap....!

[nathanm]

So your convenience and need for cheap allergy meds, when there are viable alternatives, trumps the societal costs to everyone else?

So what you're saying is that we should all stop driving cars? They're incredibly convenient, but the externalized costs are ridiculously high. Lot more folks killed and maimed by cars than any (or all) drug(s). Not to mention the billions of dollars every year in property damage.

Even if you discount my hyperbole, you haven't really even thought about the costs inherent in making pseudoephedrine prescription-only.

[Townsend]

Well quit using Donnie's Rejuve and you won't have that problem.

Oklahomans.  We've got gel on our hands.

[AquaMan]

Ok. No TANF or Food Stamps or drivers license for a year if you test positive for sudafed or pseudoephedrine without a prescription. However, you can have a third party buy the sudafed for you and of course if your kids need the sudafed they can have it administered by the third party. Cars are dangerous and will henceforth be gradually eliminated through attrition while being replaced with electric trolleys.

To even attempt the use of cars as comparison with drug laws is worthy of Oklahoma legislature awards.

We make decisions every day about which dangerous things we will allow, which ones we will regulate and what we will outlaw. In this case you have medical professionals who abhor yet another complication of their business on one side, and a group of law enforcement and judicial types on the other side who see these changes as a tool to protect the public.

Everyone who is against the change should be allowed to visit families and their loved ones who have been affected by drug abuse. Everyone who is in favor of the changes should have to spend the day with allergy sufferers in a doctors waiting room.

How's that for legislative thinking?

[Conan71]

So what you're saying is that we should all stop driving cars? They're incredibly convenient, but the externalized costs are ridiculously high. Lot more folks killed and maimed by cars than any (or all) drug(s). Not to mention the billions of dollars every year in property damage.

Even if you discount my hyperbole, you haven't really even thought about the costs inherent in making pseudoephedrine prescription-only.

Of course I have.  I'm simply not buying that it's a major hardship.  What do you do when you need antibiotics?  You cannot get those without a doctor's visit.  Is it unfair you can't get those OTC?

There are countless other meds you cannot get without regular visits to the doctor.  Is that a horrible inconvenience that needs to be mitigated as well?

To a certain extent, I agree that doctor's visits are nothing but a money-grubbing PITA for them, however, there are cases where it really is necessary to check things like BP and liver function prior to or during medication.

Aqua, our legislature is totally screwed.  All this bunch cares to do is make statement legislation like pushing back how long someone has to wait (by 24 hours) to have their first legal drink or making Oklahoma officially a pro-life state.  When they get approached by a big lobby like pharma or liquor, they buckle like a teen girl getting felt up for the first time.