Prescription-only cold and allergy medicines are a bad idea.
No Missouri politician can afford to appear soft on drug use. But what if the drug use includes people seeking relief from colds and allergies?
Last week, Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster vowed to support a misguided proposal that would make cold and allergy medicines such as Sudafed available only with a doctor’s prescription.
It’s a bad idea that has been gathering steam among civic and law enforcement leaders in rural communities hard hit by methamphetamine abuse.
Most cold and allergy medications contain a drug called pseudoephedrine, which dries up runny noses. By all accounts, that’s exactly why most people use them. But a small number of people use them to make meth. That’s why some politicians and law enforcement officials want to make them available only by prescription.
If doing so would eliminate — or even greatly reduce — the toll of meth use, if might be worth considering. But it won’t. It won’t even come close.
Instead, it would create hardships for millions of law-abiding citizens and further strain an overstressed health care system.
At least 740,000 Missourians are uninsured. They don’t have doctors to write prescriptions when they get a cold.
Thousands more are covered by health insurance plans that require out-of-pocket payments when they visit a doctor. Requiring a prescription every time they suffer from allergies or a cold would create needless financial hardship.
Even well-insured patients — and employers that provide their coverage — would feel the pinch. All of the extra doctor visits would mean higher health insurance premiums.
Then there’s the health care system itself, which is bracing for an expected outbreak of swine flu this fall. Emergency rooms, clinics and doctors’ offices are making plans to accommodate what they fear could be waves of patients. The last thing they want are a slew of people with relatively minor complaints flooding their waiting rooms to be exposed to serious illnesses like flu.
Last year, law enforcement officers in Missouri seized 954 meth labs. That’s far fewer than just a few years earlier, before tough new laws on sales of pseudoephedrine were approved. But Missouri still ranks among the nation’s leaders in meth lab busts.
In July, Washington became the first Missouri city to require prescriptions for cold and allergy pills. That law was modeled on a 2006 law in Oregon. It drastically reduced the number of meth lab seizures in that state — but not the supply of methamphetamine. The number of meth possession arrests in Oregon has remained steady.
That’s counterintuitive to many supporters of the new law, but it is the reality. The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration recently noted that the meth availability in Oregon “remains high.” What’s more, the DEA said, “seizures point to a switch to a more addictive and potent form of meth known as ‘ice’ or ‘crystal.’”
How can that be?
“State officials believe that methamphetamine labs outside the United States (particularly in Mexico) have taken the place of local labs,” Oregon University’s Methamphetamine Abuse Research Center reports.
That should come as no surprise. None of the cocaine or heroin seized in Oregon — or in Missouri, for that matter — is processed in local labs. For every ounce of meth seized in Missouri last year, police seized 18.3 ounces of cocaine. The absence of cocaine labs in this state obviously has not kept cocaine off the street.
Missouri’s problem isn’t meth labs; it’s meth use. Yet there’s still not enough money available to treat everyone who wants help.
Before politicians enact a new prescription law, they must examine what they hope to accomplish and whom they will punish. Going to war against cold and allergy sufferers won’t solve Missouri’s meth problem.
I don’t believe it, I agree with the PD. Maybe next we can get rid of the useless database check.
“Washington became the first Missouri city to require prescriptions for cold and allergy pills.”
That’s just stupid. People can just drive to another town for Zertec. Woops, just lost some sales tax revenue Washington MO.
Make the purchase laws stricter, the sale of homes laws stricter, the punishment for making and using meth to include restitution for lost homes and land value. I am for it all. I know I will be blasted in this forum, however, until you are a victim of a meth user or manufaturer, you should be careful of what you wish for. I wish this experience on no one, not even the one who violated my home.
It’s easier to break the coke habit than the meth habit. And most of the druggies can’t make their own coke, but they CAN make their own meth with stuff you can buy in any small town, much less a city. EXCEPT, they can’t make meth without pseudoephedrine. As you noted “Most cold and allergy medications contain a drug called pseudoephedrine, which dries up runny noses.” - which implies that SOME cold and allergy medications do NOT contain pseudoephedrine. I’m just guessing that if the drug companies wanted to, they could develop a substitute ingredient that couldn’t be used to make meth.
Could just start rounding up and shooting all of the meth addicts. That is about as sensible as punishing the innocent who use the product as directed.
Perhaps the Post needs to so some homework before they publish bad facts. It scares me what they publish - as they can print anything they want for example, “Most cold and allergy medications contain a drug called pseudoephedrine, which dries up runny noses” That is NOT TRUE. Most cold medicines and allergy medicines contain the active ingrediant PE - check the labels of the boxes at the store or in your medicine cabinet. About 3 years ago, most products switched to PE from pseudoepherine because PE is far more effective and with less side effects. Once again, the Post disappoints as it has turned into less unbias reporting and more about their own political affiliations.
Banning pseudoephedrine, as with most such bans, will accomplish nothing. The methheads (who on their face are not concerned with whether something is legal or not), will continue to do what they want. Everyone else, however, will suffer both physically and financially. You can’t ban stupid.
P.S. Y’know those medicines previously mentioned that don’t have the drug? They. Don’t. Work.
The last thing a spring / fall allergy sufferer needs is another roadblock to relief when they go out at 10pm to get something to keep them from clawing their eyeballs out when the pollen and mold counts are off the charts.
> PE is far more effective and with less side effects.
On the contrary, my wife and I both find the PE products totally useless. As the old Coke ad said, “Ain’t nothin’ like the real thing, baby.”
The Post is 100% right here. So please, do another editorial on health care so I can get back to blasting you.
The post failed to mention one of the biggest impacts of this new law - THE REDUCTION OF TOXIC TRASH FROM METH LABS. Do you realize that stopping the mom and pops meth labs will drastically improve the safety and well being of those that adopt highways and kindly pick up trash. Recently in Eureka on John MCkeever road, the Larbarque Watershed Group picked up 40 bags of trash during their roadside cleanup. HALF OF THOSE BAGS were full of meth making toxic trash. Do you want your boy scouts and church groups out there handling the very dangerous materials that result from these homegrown labs? Whiel this law will not stop meth use from Mexican imports - it WILL stop the mom and pop labs that contaminate homes, waterways and roadsides.
By the way - most people do not realize that they no longer have cold medicines with psuedoepherine anymore. Its an old drug with many saide effects (dizziness, restlessness). Most companies have switched to the newer, ore effective drugs that will not be impacted by this law.
As a health care provider, pseudoephedrine is one over the counter product that I frequently recommend for cold symptoms, as it is extremely effective in the relief of symptoms and preventing additional complications. Requiring a prescription for this product is only going to contribute to our already over burdened health system. Additionally, if nationalized health care passes (I pray not), I would prefer the money NOT be spent on people coming in for a prescription for Sudafed. This monster just keeps growing.