SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams has urged more Americans to carry the opioid overdose reversal treatment naloxone, known under brand names such as Narcan and Evzio. However, the drug and its delivery systems have become more expensive in recent years:
As opioid-related deaths have continued to climb, naloxone, a drug that can reverse overdoses, has become an important part of the public health response. When people overdosing struggle to breathe, naloxone can restore normal breathing and save their lives. But the drug has to be given quickly.
On Thursday, U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams issued an advisory that encouraged more people to routinely carry naloxone. "The call to action is to recognize if you're at risk," he tells Morning Edition's Rachel Martin. "And if you or a loved one are at risk, keep within reach, know how to use naloxone."
[...] The medicine is now available at retail pharmacies in most states without a prescription. Between 2013 and 2015, researchers found a tenfold increase in naloxone sold by retail pharmacies in the U.S. But prices have increased along with demand. Naloxone-filled syringes that used to cost $6 apiece now cost $30 and up. A two-pack of naloxone nasal spray can cost $135 or more. And a two-pack of automatic naloxone injectors runs more than $3,700. And while it's true that naloxone can prevent many opioid-related deaths, it doesn't solve the root cause of the problem.
Related: Kroger Supermarkets to Carry Naloxone Without a Prescription
Chicago Jail Handing Out Naloxone to Inmates Upon Release
Opioid Crisis Official; Insys Therapeutics Billionaire Founder Charged; Walgreens Stocks Narcan
(Score: 5, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 07 2018, @03:05AM (11 children)
Yes, because this PSA is brought to you by the Naloxone lobbyists.
Especially them, not every family or close friend is in Red-state denial. I know a recovered addict and during his recovery process he couldn't get enough of the synthetic wean-down drug. His father flew out to Seattle to help him: a) taper off as quickly as possible and b) score some H on the street for when the pharmacy wasn't supplying enough. With his dad's support he sort-of kicked it within 6 months, moved away from Seattle, and about 5 years later he got clean for good - and not dead, bonus.
Again, with the right kind of support the addicts would carry Naloxone, though you're right about what they'd choose for themselves.
And this is an even bigger problem for the addicts, because it's getting expensive enough that they can trade theirs for a score...
But, in our great Capitalist state, demand is up - why would the manufacturer do anything to bring the price down? Keep it high for a good long time, then ramp up supply to grab as much money from the market as they can, it's a well studied science of monopoly controlled supply/demand/price relationships.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday April 07 2018, @03:09AM (7 children)
The patent on naloxone is expired. But that doesn't help Americans.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 07 2018, @03:15AM (5 children)
That will only matter when a non-carpetbagger manufacturer enters the picture and starts to bring the prices down.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by black6host on Saturday April 07 2018, @04:06AM (4 children)
If only Martin weren't in jail...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 07 2018, @06:43AM (3 children)
Martin? Martin Luther King, Jr., arrested for parading without a permit,
Or,
Martin Shkreli, asshole extortionist extra-ordinaire? I think you are referring to the latter, but there are so many right-wing racist nut-jobs on SoylentNews, that seriously, I cannot tell.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Saturday April 07 2018, @07:19AM
A case has been made that Shkreli's motives are misunderstood:
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/everyone-hates-martin-shkreli-everyone-is-missing-the-point [newyorker.com]
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/12/martin-shkreli-pharmaceuticals-ceo-interview [vanityfair.com]
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/business/martin-shkreli-the-bad-boy-of-pharmaceuticals-hits-back.html [nytimes.com]
http://fortune.com/2017/01/24/martin-shkreli-drug-price-war/ [fortune.com]
black6host can give their own explanation unless it was just sarcasm.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by black6host on Saturday April 07 2018, @07:28AM (1 child)
Nope, not a "right-wing racist nut-jobs" type of person. In response to takyon's comment below: I'm aware that some feel his greed took him down and that others don't. However, his hubris most definitely did.
(Score: 2) by black6host on Saturday April 07 2018, @07:33AM
"Takyon's comment below." Heh. This one will probably be the first post!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hyperturtle on Saturday April 07 2018, @04:15PM
It's too late for me to go back and reply to comments about the FDA's concern about bacteria and a marketing campaign shortly afterwards, but how many days was it this time between that announcement and this next one? On March 22nd 1990 tryptophan was banned; on March 26th Prozac was promimently announced in Newsweek (it had been available since 1987 or so, but it wasn't "popular" yet, and had been struggling). I'd summarized that in my post and suggested the first shot had been fired.
Similarly, naxlone has been available for a while, but the prices have gone up and it's somewhat morbid to have such a specific antidote for what used to be a fringe problem not caused by the actual industry selling the problem itself. It 's also expensive to just stock up in case someone, anyone, should need it.
So, how long did it take for a promiment person, place or thing to make the announcement to buy something else?
It took them 2 Days. April 3rd was the announcement they were going after Triangle Pharmanaturals due to the bacteria and banning their product and seeking to shut the place down, and then on April 5th the surgeon general of the USA announced that everyone should "routinely carry naloxone." People would likely not need that, nor the present targeted uses for kratom, if perhaps they were not exploited by the drug industry to begin with.
My post about the kratom and the predictable course of action is here.
https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=18/04/04/1142227 [soylentnews.org]
I haven't come up with a good reply for my detractor, other than that I have a vested interest in the health of myself and others, and pay attention to health laws. I do not have to have been around the block in order to read the signs and know where the road is going to lead. We've seen these signs before.
Being persuaded (instructed) to take an expensive product while not offering a suitable alternative is not in most people's interests, and I imagine it is only in the interests of those that profit from the expensive product.
The entire problem would have been completely preventable if opiates were not handed out so readily to people that could have had their needs handled differently.
Also, I am not only referring to drugs with what we can call multiple uses. I am referring to actual utilitarian stuff; I had in mind the red rice yeast powder debacle; I'm irritated I didn't mention it, so here's a wikipedia article that describes what the problem was and what the FDA did. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_yeast_rice)
The Red yeast rice powders in question have a naturally occuring substance, that much to the chagrin of others, turned out to be identical to what the drug lovastin has (and lovastin cost so much to create and test as a synthetic; they were very upset to find it already existed in nature *and* was already used for the same purpose). In what may sound familiar, the FDA did the most reasonable thing we might guess they could do-- they chose to ban products containing red rice yeast, because to them it was now a drug to be controlled, despite previously it not even being on their radar.
In that case, it affected things at first, but over time, the red rice yeast powder kept popping up and the FDA now have difficulty suppressing it. This is largely because instead of being marketed for something specific, it's another case of "don't ingest these products made specifically for ingestion" on the product packaging. They now suggest that because it's just as powerful as a drug, you really should go see a doctor and get the genuine thing because we said so." At least they couldn't get people addicted to cholestorl drugs so they could try to peddle a "cure". However, you do not sell nearly as many cholesterol lowering products at the same places one might buy other "for external use only" products, and thus it escapes the wrath of some of righteous -- it can't be associated with something that is already known to be bad.
Certainly you have all read articles that 'supplements are a waste, don't take them, they don't do anything'. That conflicts with everything we're talking about. It can be said many are of questionable value, many are indeed worthless, and many have a specific use that unfortunately can't be legally stated and either never get the recognition they deserve, or get branded as bad.
Would we have people bleeding out of their eyes from buying adultered synthetic marijuana? That would not be an issue if they could get the real thing legally. No one would be adding the rat poison to their rolling papers because of a profit motive. The people that adulterated the synthetic marijuana batch did it to use less of the actual drug since the blood thinner involved helps increase the potency of the synthetic thc. I won't even get started on how there is research that shows marjiuana helps wean people off various addictions. We have naloxone and continued long-term treatment programs for that, I guess.
The four things I mentioned are in the same "supplements" category, yet the FDA has gone out of their way to eliminate or prevent due to clear competition with a more expensive "proper" product. I expect the "don't take supplements" is just propganda based on some truths, but more based on profits. Don't take red yeast rice powder because it actually works and there is this licensed other product that needs your money, etc...
(And despite what I am saying, I am not saying everything should be packaged neatly and sold to anyone that wants it. I can't quite support anyone taking too much jimson weed laced with hemlock--so yeah, not all natural products are good when taken inappropriately.)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Saturday April 07 2018, @03:22AM (2 children)
They don't want your damn support. When will you get this through your head!!?
They routinely and repeatedly refuse treatment, they know they are heading toward the grave, and all they want is to make sure they have enough drugs for the final journey.
Only 20% of heroin addicts seek treatment, (usually at the insistence of others or the legal system) and of those the relapse rate is usually over 91 percent.
https://drugabuse.com/library/heroin-relapse/ [drugabuse.com]
You are delusional if you believe they want your "support".
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Saturday April 07 2018, @03:34AM (1 child)
I know that most of them die, and most of them are not well integrated with society while they are on their way out.
In the circles I travel, I don't interact with the ones on their way down - I do know several who have made it back from the pit and 10+ years later are still clean.
For the ones who want to check out, I actually support that - give them the option for help, and the help to not conflict with the rest of the world on their way out if they choose to keep using. I was just passing through, but in the 1990s the Zurich train station park [swissinfo.ch] seemed like a place where that was happening, and I think there are many similar things that still go on in Europe. It seems like a much better approach than Miami where you have transvestite prostitutes with an average life expectancy of less than a year working Biscayne Boulevard in the evenings, and breaking into whatever they can during the day for money to score with.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 07 2018, @07:48PM
I want to know who pays for the treatment of people that couldn't afford treatment? Do we need another tax cut to get that funded?