SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the Antidiarrheal-overdose?-Oh,-crap! dept.
NPR is reporting on the latest drug scare, involving an over-the-counter antidiarrheal drug that is being used for its opioid-like effects by addicts:
Some people addicted to oxycodone and other opioids are now turning to widely available diarrhea medications to manage their withdrawal symptoms or get high. The results can be dangerous to the heart — and sometimes fatal — warn toxicologists in a study [open, DOI: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2016.03.047] recently published online in the Annals of Emergency Medicine.
The researchers describe two case studies where people who were addicted to opioids tried to ease their withdrawal symptoms by taking many times the recommended dose of loperamide, a drug commonly used treat diarrhea. Both patients died.
"Because of its low cost, ease of accessibility and legal status, it's a drug that is very, very ripe for abuse," says lead author William Eggleston, a doctor of pharmacy and fellow in clinical toxicology at the Upstate New York Poison Center, which is affiliated with SUNY Upstate Medical University.
Related:
Kroger Supermarkets to Carry Naloxone Without a Prescription
4/20: Half-Baked Headline
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday May 04 2016, @04:36PM
Addicts overdose, and die. I would say that is a solution to a problem.
Now, just wait a second before you get all outraged, and holier than thou on me. Yes, of course I know people who are addicts. I'm even close to a couple of them. Maybe more than just a couple, there's drugs EVERYWHERE FFS. But, even so, the world might be a better place if the addicts were to leave. Nothing but trouble and worry. Without the addicts in our lives, my tired old wife wouldn't LOOK so damned tired.
I'm sorry, people, but I don't see the point in fighting to save people from themselves. No matter how hard you fight that fight - those people are still going to BE those people. What's that old adage? No matter where you go, there you are. Well - no matter what you do with an addict, he'll still be an addict, and causing you grief.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ikanreed on Wednesday May 04 2016, @04:47PM
Because people are flawed creatures and the nature of extreme addiction is one that, by its very nature, overrides our rational intelligence and self-control.
Sufficiently debilitating addictions don't just hurt the individual, but those who depend on them.
"Sorry little girl, your mother became addicted to opiates after a back injury required pain medication. Rather than treat her addiction and maybe return a degree of normalcy to your life, an internet commenter has pointed out the sage wisdom of making you suffer. This is very important because any other outcome might conflict with this stranger's ideology of 'personal responsibility'"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by jdavidb on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:50PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday May 05 2016, @03:03AM
But you cannot save somebody from themselves, not and have any concept of rights or free will. I always remember the analogy given by William F Buckley which went something like this
"If I place a bottle on this table with a skull and crossbones and say 'this is poison, it will kill you but not before destroying your health, your life, your job, everything.' and you shove past me and down the bottle? Then explain to me why I should spend billions of money which can be used to help people that want help to build cages to keep you in from grabbing the bottle and give the government ever more power to try to limit the amount of bottles you can get your hands on?"
We have had 40+ years of education, everyone knows exactly what these drugs to your body and health...and yet they destroy themselves anyway. If we took the billions that we spent trying to lock these people up and instead spent it on people that can actually helped, how much better would our country be?
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Rosco P. Coltrane on Wednesday May 04 2016, @04:50PM
Addicts overdose, and die. I would say that is a solution to a problem.
You are technically correct, and humanely repugnant.
(Score: 2) by GungnirSniper on Wednesday May 04 2016, @08:43PM
It is also quite possible for someone not addicted to take too large a dose and die, or for a new batch of street drugs to be many times more potent than the norm.
Tips for better submissions to help our site grow. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Dunbal on Wednesday May 04 2016, @04:57PM
Addicts overdose, and die. I would say that is a solution to a problem.
And people with coronary artery disease die too, and that's just because they were fat, lazy or smoked. Or better yet had a crappy combination of genes and so they were weak anyway and deserved to die. And don't get me started on those people with cancer.
Seriously it's fine to go around not giving a shit about other people who have problems. But then don't expect anyone to give a shit about you when you have problems.
I'm sorry, people, but I don't see the point in fighting to save people from themselves.
Then let's just give up on any form of society. I mean we don't need doctors, teachers, firemen, or anyone who helps anyone else in your world.
Your view is disgusting and I'm glad not everyone shares it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:00PM
"deserved to die"
I did NOT use those words, nor did I have any intention of implying them. I only said that the world would be a better place without addicts. There are only a small percentage of people who I would say "deserve to die". Many of those people are on death row, and/or sitting in maximum security prisons already.
It's not a question of "deserving", it's a matter of wasting resources - financial, emotional, time, and more - on people who won't benefit from the expenditures.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Dunbal on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:13PM
it's a matter of wasting resources
Resources that could be better allocated to the deserving. With YOU getting to decide who gets them and who doesn't. You can't hide behind your ethical gaffe. It's plain for all to see no matter where you want to go with the argument. You can use different words but it all comes to the same thing. YOU think something, therefore fuck everyone else. Unfortunately we have to share this planet with others, and at some point it means giving at least a minimal damn about them.
(Score: 3, Informative) by jdavidb on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:54PM
YOU think something, therefore fuck everyone else.
That's true of the other side, too, though. "I think people can and should be saved by putting imodium behind the counter, so fuck everyone else."
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:16PM
While that is debatable, this isn't about imodium any more. runaway has expanded the question from the very narrow question of controlling access to imodium to providing aid to people with addictions in general as the world would be better off without them because 'resources.'
(Score: 4, Insightful) by jdavidb on Wednesday May 04 2016, @07:51PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2016, @04:53AM
Your freedom has already been compromised, and its why addicts can't get help, even if they want it. Prohibition harms everyone.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:29PM
"I think people can and should be saved by putting imodium behind the counter, so fuck everyone else."
I agree. In fact I'm highly suspect of this claim and I think it's no coincidence that the DEA has been "cracking down" on prescription medications in the past few years and are just creating jobs for themselves, working down the list of medications and classifying anything that could potentially cause a bit of dizzyness as having potential for "abuse". Hey they need to justify an ever expanding budget, right?
Funnily enough drug prohibition (including opioid prohibition) has never managed to curb the number of drug abusers, which always seems to be around 3% whether drugs are legal or not. But when you make it harder for people to obtain these products for legitimate use, you are punishing people who actually need the product while doing nothing to curb its illicit use.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @07:00PM
In fact I'm highly suspect of this claim and I think it's no coincidence that the DEA has been "cracking down" on prescription medications in the past few years and are just creating jobs for themselves
I think you're spot on. BTW, did you know that the DEA is the largest enforcement agency in the world with presence (and jurisdiction) in almost every country in the world.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:31AM
Especially since immodium doubtless halts far more suffering than it causes. Most of you probably don't remember when there was nothing that would reliably stop the screaming shits from intestinal flu -- and that can be critical in children and old people.
It's also commonly used to treat viral diarrhea in puppies, which in weanlings can be the difference between life and death.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:52PM
It's not a question of "deserving", it's a matter of wasting resources - financial, emotional, time, and more - on people who won't benefit from the expenditures.
Why should my (or your) freedom be sacrificed for a plan I (or you) am not persuaded is going to work?
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:07PM
am not persuaded is going to work
Unfortunately the situation is even more horrifying in that its widely understood that AA / NA and most other treatment programs basically don't work, like 90%+ failure rate.
So what we have is extremely expensive and profitable faith healing as an industry sector that exists primarily to funnel money to providers knowing that the treatment will have little to no effect other than making some people richer. It really is a horrible racket, profiting off suffering. I'm sure that type laughs all the way to the bank.
Doctors and the medical profession don't understand stubbornness. They understand that you have a tumor in there and the surgeon slices it out and its not in there anymore and the patients stubbornness doesn't matter much one way or the other. But WRT mental health ranging from slight obesity to lack of exercise to some mental health issues docs just don't understand all that matters is the patients desire, its the only thing that matters.
There is a class of diseases, where drug addiction is one, where the victims are incredibly stubborn and nothing in the outside world will have any effect... they'll get the outcome, good or bad, that they want and the external world doesn't much matter.
If it were not for that pesky biochemical link between body and mind, there would be a good argument for completely disconnecting mental health issues from the doctors. Docs just don't know how to think about mental health because physical health is too deeply ingrained. Nice people, just not trained for that kind of work on a deep philosophical level. Like making me a computer programmer and a plumber, I'm just not seeing the synergy and naturals at one are unlikely to be good at the other.
The two useful things incredibly expensive treatment programs provide, are medical monitoring for the detox and a low-ish stress environment so they can chill and not worry as much about daily life. Some kind of all inclusive resort could provide the same for a tenth the cost / profit of course.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:02PM
> Now, just wait a second before you get all outraged, and holier than thou on me.
Hey, you are the one who claims to be a christian.
But holy shit man do you ever fail to walk the walk.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:12PM
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he can eat for the rest of his life.
What do you do? Give a fish, or give lessons?
The concept applies here, as well. I'd rather teach people that if they insist on suicidal acts, we aren't going to waste resources on them. Has it ever occurred to you that maybe - just maybe - God's plans don't coincide with your plans to rescue everyone? Hey, if God wants that addict to come home, I'm certainly not going to interfere.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:44PM
Except your God is very likely, according to your beliefs, to send this guy off to endless torture in flames, especially if he happens not to be a Christian.
Runaway, for someone who claims to be about personal liberty and self-determination, you have an incredibly fascist set of religious beliefs. I've never been able to understand how a supposed paleocon and/or libertarian reconciles their political beliefs with what amounts to a religious form of fascism. Yahweh's Heaven would be a North-Korean-style nightmare where Kim Jong Un really COULD read your thoughts, to say nothing of his Hell, which is essentially an infinite concentration camp for his political prisoners.
I guess fascism is fine when it's the right dictator in charge, eh? ;)
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:55PM
> Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he can eat for the rest of his life.
Did you just equate callous disregard for someone in need with "teaching?"
It is fitting that you couldn't find a proverb in the bible to rationalize being so unchristian.
> maybe God's plans don't coincide with your plans to rescue everyone?
What a load of self-justifying bullshit. As if you can presume to know God's will.
You sound exactly like a fundie hindu praising the caste system - they wouldn't be made to suffer if it weren't karmic justice.
You really haven't learned one damn thing in church. The entire bible is just the same lesson repeated over and over with different words - be good to one another. Pretending that god wants someone to suffer so you can ignore their suffering is blasphemy.
Start with these:
Galatians 6:2 Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.
Psalm 82:4 Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked.
1 John 4:7-8 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.
1 John 3:17-18 But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him? Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth.
1 Thessalonians 5:14 And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.
Romans 12:15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 05 2016, @12:29AM
" As if you can presume to know God's will."
Yeah, well, I have that same problem with all the self-proclaimed men of God running about, attempting to legislate morality. Who was it that imposed the prohibitions on us? Yeah, the so-called "Moral Majority". Instead of allowing some dopehead to find his own highway to hell, the dopehead has to be imprisoned for decades.
There is no shortage of people who presume to know God's will - and you sound like yet another.
"Pretending that god wants someone to suffer so you can ignore their suffering is blasphemy."
That's cute. Typical maternal attitude. I'm a father though, and I'm perfectly aware that suffering can make a person into a BETTER person. Mothers in general abhor any kind of suffering, while good fathers know that a little pain, sweat, and discomfort tend to build character. Who am I, who are you, to deny someone's self-imposed suffering?
Might I remind you that God imposes LIFE on all of us? Life is but a temporary testing ground, after all. What you see is not what God judges, after all. If you believe in God, anyway.
But He knows the way I take; When He has tried me, I shall come forth as gold. Job 23:10
"When He has tried me". What does that mean? "Tried me". Think about it.
Do you presume to interfere in other people being "tried"?
Theology, philosophy, and ethics are deeper subjects than most people have ever even tried to fathom. Maybe life isn't so simple as you thought?
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:45PM
Hey, you are the one who claims to be a christian.
But holy shit man do you ever fail to walk the walk.
You don't have to know many Christians to know that this is a pretty common characteristic.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Wednesday May 04 2016, @05:24PM
I, too, have never experienced any events that caused me to feel regret, nor has my personality changed ever in my life. Every ounce of my moral fiber is resolute and immutable and has never shifted and anyone incapable of doing the same doesn't deserve to live.
Joking aside though, I do not think that the bad decisions one makes should follow them for the rest of their lives, where possible. (this does not mean I condone a life entirely free from consequence either, you can have a middle ground) You might not believe it, but people CAN change. I'll give you that not very many of them WILL, but the why of that could probably be explored to limitless depth. I mean, I generally consider you a pretty reasonable guy overall from your posts, but I feel like maybe you're making this comment with too much of a personal edge to it.
Out of curiosity, do you feel the same way about the suicidal? A lot of failed attempts do result in repeats, but there are also many who get counseling and treatment and actually change their behavior. That's also something that you can argue is a situation of trying to "save somebody from themselves", and so I'm interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter as how they contrast (or not) to your feelings about addicts.
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:01PM
The majority of people who have failed suicide attempts are still alive 10 years later. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it is something like 80% are still alive (and that includes those who died from other causes in the interim too).
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:15PM
I can't imagine a better example of survivorship bias than AC's post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:21PM
You aren't very bright, are you?
What talking about helping people who have survived suicide to prevent further suicide attempts of course survival rates are pertinent.
Its like you hit on a keyword and turned off your brain.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @07:39PM
The people who did not fail to commit suicide on their first attempt are more likely to have taken the whole thing more seriously. There are several reasons they could fail in ways that cause selection bias, survival instinct at the 11th hour and they now realize they can not go through with it or staging it as a cry for attention for example.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2016, @04:57AM
What do you mean "help"? Save them from themselves? Self-sovereignty means you can do anything with your own life, including end it. Suicide is a fundamental human right.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Wednesday May 04 2016, @09:02PM
What about the ones who have not failed? How many of those are still alive 10 years later?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday May 05 2016, @12:44AM
That's a good serious question, dyingtolive. Suicide.
First, suicide should NOT be a crime. I find the arrogance of a government in passing such laws to be overwhelming. For good reasons or bad reasons, an attempt at suicide should never be punished.
Second, I'll go further. A person has, or should have, the RIGHT to decide to end his life. The terminally ill, first and foremost, should have the RIGHT to decide that they'll take the easy way out, rather than lie around for months or years, wasting away in pain. Did I say "pain"? Change that to "agony". I've watched people wasting away, and sometimes, a day of mere "pain" is blessed relief for them.
Personally - I've almost always attempted to talk people out of suicide. That is, I've reasoned with them, and tried to make them believe there is reason to live. On the other hand - I've turned my back on an injured drunk driver, so that I could help the people he hurt in his own attempt at suicide. Strict observance of the rules of triage would have had me assisting that drunk, instead of the old women that I did help. I ben of broke the rules, because my judgement said that the drunk was MORE DESERVING of dying, than the old women.
Suicide isn't something that I condone in most cases. People should be counseled. But, I'm not going to superhuman efforts to save a suicide from himself, either. Not even when some young fool is attempting suicide for the silliest of reasons, like BF/GF is leaving them.
Most suicides are simply a huge waste - but other suicides should be approved, and maybe even assisted. It all depends on the people, and the circumstances.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2016, @03:41PM
First, suicide should NOT be a crime.
People who successfully commit suicide should get capital punishment.
(Score: 2) by dyingtolive on Friday May 06 2016, @12:13AM
I gotta say, that's a pretty well thought out response.
I don't honestly think it should be "punished", at least in a conventional legal sense as a crime, though it probably, generally speaking, should carry some weight of mandatory therapy. Interestingly enough, per Wikipedia (yes, yes, I know) it looks like it's generally decriminalized most everywhere at this point. I do tend to agree that people deserve the right to die, but I think they also need some period of time and conversation with someone to make sure it's the right choice. As far as helping those people, I suppose a superhuman effort is, kinda by definition, outside of the level of expectation that should be required to stop, but at what point is that level of effort? Tying back in to the original topic, is it as great or as little as what an addict deserves at a chance of recovery?
Also, how'd the woman do? She pull through?
Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 06 2016, @02:57AM
There were three elderly women in the vehicle. It was a close call for the driver, due to blood loss. She "died" in the ambulance, and twice again in ER, but they managed to bring her back. One of the ladies on the ambulance is a childhood friend who told me all the details about a week later.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by sjames on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:14PM
Funny thing there, it seems that the war on drugs is responsible for a lot of that, particularly for people who get addicted through medical treatment. WWI produced a great many heroine addicts. While they did not enjoy being addicts, they were able to get the drugs to feed their addiction without skulking in back alleys and looking over their shoulder for the police.. They generally lead productive lives as a result.
Selection bias also plays a role. We only identify the dysfunctional fraction of addicts. The rest keep it well hidden for legal reasons.
Addicts, especially the ones who got addicted through medical treatment do not deserve to be thrown to the wolves by doctors fearful of the DEA (who practice medicine without a license BTW). They deserve treatment to hopefully break the addiction. If that doesn't work, they need to be able to maintain it legally so they can be functional members of society.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 04 2016, @08:10PM
Yeah, this comment needs to be at +5 already. I suppose I could hop on my UID and push it in that direction.
My first thought was, "Fuck. Great. They weren't happy taking Sudafed away from me, the only fucking thing that lets me breathe when I get a bad head cold, so when I walk up to the pharmacy zonked out and unable to hear because my whole fucking head and not just my sinuses are clogged up to request some Sudafed I FUCKING LOOK LIKE A METH HEAD! (no, whatever was supposed to replace it just does not fucking work; i don't fucking care if it works for 99 out of 100 people! i'm that 1 out of 100 it doesn't fucking work for! what the fuck am i supposed to do?!) and now they want to fucking take Imodium away too?!?!?! I mean, I don't have a use for it, but still. What the FUCK ELSE do they want to take away from me just because OH MY FUCKING GOD SOMEBODY MIGHT GET HIGH?"
(Generic you from here on out, just shouting at the man at this point.)
Then I noticed the 4/20 connection in the related stories, and I was greatly confused. TFS is largely about addiction, right? I would have figured here of all places most people would be informed that cannabis flower is largely non-addictive. I mean, I need it. But do you need your caffeine in the morning? I think we should lock up you and call you an addict if you need caffeine in the morning, just because I don't need it!
Typical authoritarian garbage. "What works for me should be legal, and what works for you should get you fucking thrown in the slammer for the rest of your life!"
(Score: 1) by wendo on Thursday May 05 2016, @02:44AM
It's not 1 in 100, unless myself, and everyone I've ever met is in that 1% too
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 05 2016, @03:11AM
They did a medical study several years ago and it showed the substitute decongestant worked no better than a placebo. It literally does nothing. How in the name of medicine does such a thing happen unless it's the Federal Govt Puritans, the DEA, getting involved? The people who have a legitimate use should not be made to suffer just because someone, somewhere might be enjoying himself by using it. Who gives a rat's ass?
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday May 06 2016, @01:58AM
So much for the FDA making sure drugs actually work...
(Score: 2) by Kromagv0 on Thursday May 05 2016, @04:54PM
It probably works for 1 in 100, or at least that has been my experience and that of my friend who's a pharmacist.
T-Shirts and bumper stickers [zazzle.com] to offend someone
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:20PM
There is a similar solution to people with cancer. And to people with erectile dysfunction, for that matter, so you better watch out.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday May 04 2016, @06:44PM
Man your life sucks. If anyone needs help, it's you.