3 ms·

"That also includes physicians." That is exactly my point. Doctors shouldn't have to make patients jump through hoops in order to prescribe medicine. Maybe I sh

"That also includes physicians." That is exactly my point. Doctors shouldn't have to make patients jump through hoops in order to prescribe medicine. Maybe I should have stated it clearer, the remedy I want is for doctors to be able to prescribe as they see fit without the DEA raiding their office and throwing them in jail. As for over prescribing, that should be no more dangerous than any other medicine. If my doctor gives me 800mg ibuprofen and I take 10 of them in the morning, he isn't responsible. As it should be for pain killers. As for addiction sucking, I also already agreed it is a problem, but when I weigh it against innocent people, who didn't make a conscious decision to do something wrong, I find it the lesser of evils to let people make that very bad choice. Do I really need to say I don't have a problem with doctors monitoring patients for addiction? But extreme measures are being taken, not out of an over abundance of caution for patients but because the DEA is throwing doctors in jail.

digler999 11y ago
I misunderstood, sorry, I thought you meant the pt should have the "agency" to decide how to take their painkillers. I don't have the data to back this up, but I don't think the DEA is the primary impetus for drug testing patients. What I surmise is that most likely, a double-blind academic study was done, just like how they establish every other standard treatment protocol. Likely, they determined that drug-testing patients significantly reduces the incidence of OD and abuse, i.e. reduces morbidity and mortality. Being scientists, they adopt the technique that works. There is a big difference between treating a one-time injury and writing a prescription for 20 pills, versus someone with a pinched spinal cord that's never going to get better, that gets a permanent supply. For the latter, you go to a pain specialist. IIRC GP's dont even get involved with that. > that should be no more dangerous than any other medicine an NSAID "should be no more dangerous" than an opiate ? Please tell me you are aware that unrelated molecules will have dramatically different pharmacological effects on a human body. If a doctor gives you access to a deadly product, one that could kill you if you go over by merely a single pill, and doesn't do everything they possibly can, then a jury, medical board, or (in rare cases) the cops might have a case for malpractice or patient endangerment. Anyway, I dont have any more fuel to back this argument up, but I wish your friend the best, pain-free life!
- merpnderp 11y ago
  I upvoted your comment because I agree with your points, I just think doctors should be able to do what they think is right without fear of prosecution. And at my friend's pain management doctor's office, there was a big sign in the front room enumerating the steps he felt he needed to take him to protect himself from DEA prosecution. My sister's a lawyer who I asked about the sign and she said he was probably being extremely conservative, but that doctors don't even want to show up on the DEA's radar. Doctors are human like anyone else, and having a DEA agent ask to see your records would scare them silly, just like anyone else. And patients suffer. A lot.

digler999 11y ago

I misunderstood, sorry, I thought you meant the pt should have the "agency" to decide how to take their painkillers. I don't have the data to back this up, but I don't think the DEA is the primary impetus for drug testing patients. What I surmise is that most likely, a double-blind academic study was done, just like how they establish every other standard treatment protocol. Likely, they determined that drug-testing patients significantly reduces the incidence of OD and abuse, i.e. reduces morbidity and mortality. Being scientists, they adopt the technique that works. There is a big difference between treating a one-time injury and writing a prescription for 20 pills, versus someone with a pinched spinal cord that's never going to get better, that gets a permanent supply. For the latter, you go to a pain specialist. IIRC GP's dont even get involved with that. > that should be no more dangerous than any other medicine an NSAID "should be no more dangerous" than an opiate ? Please tell me you are aware that unrelated molecules will have dramatically different pharmacological effects on a human body. If a doctor gives you access to a deadly product, one that could kill you if you go over by merely a single pill, and doesn't do everything they possibly can, then a jury, medical board, or (in rare cases) the cops might have a case for malpractice or patient endangerment. Anyway, I dont have any more fuel to back this argument up, but I wish your friend the best, pain-free life!

merpnderp 11y ago
I upvoted your comment because I agree with your points, I just think doctors should be able to do what they think is right without fear of prosecution. And at my friend's pain management doctor's office, there was a big sign in the front room enumerating the steps he felt he needed to take him to protect himself from DEA prosecution. My sister's a lawyer who I asked about the sign and she said he was probably being extremely conservative, but that doctors don't even want to show up on the DEA's radar. Doctors are human like anyone else, and having a DEA agent ask to see your records would scare them silly, just like anyone else. And patients suffer. A lot.