Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Federal Law requires anyone buying Sudafed to show ID?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:07 PM
Original message
Federal Law requires anyone buying Sudafed to show ID?
My wife was at CVS last weekend buying some Musenex for her congestion (one box only), and was requested by the store clerk to show id and sign a sheet indicating that she had bought the stuff.

Is this for real?

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Beaverhausen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think you can make meth from it
anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. That's what it's made from.
I just dodn't know if there is a federal law that requires this. My wife was shocked, but needed the stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. You need a prescription in Oregon to get Sudafed now
If I remember correctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #8
37. You can still get some Sudafed over the counter.
Some of the Sudafed formulations are behind the counter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud2BlibKansan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
34. It varies state by state
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Yep. I think this is what they slipped into the Patriot Act
If I am not mistaken.

As someone who uses a lot of decongestant, I must say it is a pain. You have to get the stuff from behind the counter, sign paperwork, (I don't think I have showed ID yet). And, they are not stocking as big a selection cause it is a pain for them to keep behind the counter. I am having a hard time finding what I want.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
serryjw Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. They jumped the gun
Beginning 30 days after President Bush signs the law, expected sometime this week, purchase limits go into effect. One person would be limited to buying 300, 30-mg pills in a month or 120 such pills in a day. The measure would make an exception for "single-use" sales _ individually packaged pseudoephedrine products.

Many retailers, such as Kmart, Walgreens, Target and Wal-Mart, have already adopted guidelines to limit customer access to cold products or to limit their sales.

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/blog/2006/03/revised_pat...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. 120 pills in one day?
If I took that much, I'd probably have a heart attack. I hate taking the stuff, but it does clear up my sinuses. I take it for 4-5 days max.

Nose-spray, now that's ADDICTIVE!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bee Donating Member (894 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #17
47. youre not kidding!
my step father was hooked on that stuff like it was crack. Try & take his nose spray and see what happened to ya... :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #13
22. Not according to the pharmacy where I buy sudaphedrine.
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 03:38 PM by 1monster
Three hundred tablets a month would be fine. I'm limited to two boxes of 48 tablets a month. And it is already being enforced with a computer database that tells who and when and how many are sold and not just in one store or chain, but all over from what the pharmacist said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lib Grrrrl Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. YES, It's For Real
because the ingredients in Sudafed can be misused to manufacture crystal meth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. True, but they also require this of the gelcaps..totally useless for meth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Horse with no Name Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
3. Yep. They enter it into a computer database as well
Sucks eh..it's the war on meth.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. That's scary. One more way they are eroding
our rights to privacy, in the name of a war on "fill in the blank".

:scared:

:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Caoimhe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:24 PM
Original message
Yes, they started this crap in Oregon
a few years ago. Required pharmacists and stores to put their Sudafed (or anything with pseudaephedrine *sp*) behind the counter or in a locked display case. Other states followed as people began to see the effects of meth on their communities. A few months ago it was "federally" slipped into another bill it had nothing to do with, and the repukes cried "you can't vote no! that would think meth is okay!" it was total bullshit. I remember that Ron Wyden, my Senator, voted no, because it was tacked to a bill he didn't support (I think it was the Patriot Act like someone said above. But he had the defense that in Oregon we already have these same laws, so it wouldn't affect us either way.

I have yet to see any study showing that putting these medicines behind the counter is actually cutting down on meth creation and use. We are still told daily about the tragedy of meth (and I don't disagree it is a big problem) but where is the follow through on this stuff? If they can't get it at their usual source, you think they won't just use something else or get it another way? They can get gallon jugs of sudafedrine tablets from mexico. Criminals aren't going to stop being criminals just because you make them work harder at it. Drug addicts aren't going to stop being drug addicts just because you make them commit other illegal acts to get their drug.

I hate having to ask for someone to unlock a locked case for me to get sinus medication. They will be locking up pens, light bulbs, soda cans and spoons next. I've seen all of those be used to facilitate drug usage.

When do we hear how these new restrictions have worked? or haven't worked? There is always new laws and rules... often we are even told that it's a trial period, or better safe then sorry.. but bad laws never go away! If we find out things haven't changed for the better, do we ever get to ditch the rule? Seems not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
9. A while back........
I also heard that if you didn't have a driver's license, to bring your SS card.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
10. We've had to do this via state law for around a year. It is weird at
first but you get used to it. Big Meth problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davepc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
11. Another great success in the war on drugs. Have a cold = meth head
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
12. Sudafed...yeah..
I bought some generic sudaphendrine(cant spell it sorry)...adn the whole process was a ...effing pain in the ass. It took me roughly, half an hour to go through the process. They had to check my ID, put my informartion in their computer system, and i am assuming"background check" of some sort, cause it took a long "time" for them to approve me, getting the sudaphendrine...it sucked, btw, this was at walmarts pharm last december....and yes, sudaphendrine, is a drug they use in meth...

The law to me, seems kind of...stupid. But again, to each their own...pretty soon, we are going to have to bend over for a full body cavity search to buy aspirin, cause aspirin is used to make the "new wonder drug" out there...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. My biggest concern is what is this "database"
and who is tracking it and what are they putting in this database?

:scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #14
50. you and me both...:) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
15. yeah, it's for real
you'll probably notice, as time goes on, that the stores carry fewer and fewer products with pseudo-ephedrine in them. I can no longer find the children's Sudafed tablets in Houston at all, and now have to sign for the children's syrup, although that used to still be on the shelves, as it's supposedly useless for making meth. There are adult dosages of alternative decongestants available off-the-shelf, but no tablets for kids under 12. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #15
41. And the "alternatives" generally suck...
did some research on the pharmacology of "Sudafed PE" (pseudoephedrine free) and there's a reason that crap wasn't commonly sold until the Drug Warriors decided that regular Sudafed is Public Enemy Number One...

It's not dangerous, but its ONLY virtue is that it can't be used to make meth. The downside is, it has only one of the two modes of action that regular sudafed has.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #41
69. I took some of the fake stuff this morning.
Because my local grocery no longer has sudafed, and I don't feel like having people stare at my like I'm a drug addict anyway.

It didn't do a thing but make me woozy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
suffragette Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #41
76. I talked to a pharmacist about this
and she agreed that stuff isn't nearly as effective as the regular formula.

It's ridiculous, but entirely fits the pattern this administration has encouraged in the country. Cast the widest possible net (think Patriot Act or TSA) without regard to how much inconvenience or restrictions it imposes or even whether or not it is an effective approach. In doing this, ignore genuine responses and solutions to underlying causes that might lead to more effective strategies.
Then blame someone else when the original problem inevitably continues.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
16. Stupid Law, No Reduction In Meth Consumption
only in small labs

but better meth comes from Mexico

cheaper, better,

the law is a stoopid one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmowreader Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #16
49. I would rather the methheads BUY their meth
The real problem with meth labs isn't the drug that comes out of them. Fuck it, man, I say if they want to do meth we throw their asses in a room with 50 lbs of meth and just use meth until they explode. Doesn't bother me one bit.

Meth labs are hazmat sites. I expect that in five years or less, a meth lab is going to make the Superfund list. You can make meth using either anhydrous ammonia, or Coleman fuel and lye. Either way it's dangerous...and believe me when I tell you that methheads don't handle their hazardous chemicals with the respect and care they deserve.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
18. Watch this documentary
And it will suddenly all make sense.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. I'm not denying that meth is bad.
I'm just struck by how they gov is reacting to this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. They are probably not going far enough.
It's that bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. What would you suggest they do in addition to this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Get rid of Sudafed
Ban it if necessary. Don't commercially sell it or make it prescription based. And lots and lots of rehab programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #25
31. Is there anything effective that can replace
psuedophedrine?

Do you know someone who has had issues with meth?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #31
36. I don't know any product names
and No. I'd like to keep it that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justice1 Donating Member (483 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #31
52. I know lots of people with meth problems.
One night after I left a party, someone high on meth, burned the hosts 6-year old daughters kittens alive.

I could go on with stories, but you get the idea.

Banning pseudo ephedrine has definitely impacted the manufacturing of meth where I live.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #25
46. HELL NO, don't ban it...
meth traffickers can make meth without sudafed (or smuggle it in like cocaine and heroin), but sinus sufferers can't exactly cook up sudafed in our kitchens from play-doh and olive oil...

Believe it or not, some of us buy sudafed because it is a heck of a good decongestant, and it is THE most effective treatment I've found for my frequent headaches (2 sudafed + a BC powder).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. I'm with you on that.
I know a lot of people that the only thing that will work is sudefed. Banning it is will not solve the meth problem, only force it into the illegal substances category, and send even more people to prison.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #25
51. Sorry. Won't fly with me. I don't often use the stuff, but when I do it's
because it's the ONLY thing that will unstop my nose. And I can't take Benadryl because I get an idiosyncratic reaction to it.

Sudafed is essential to life at times for me. And I ain't no drug addict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. I have made it to 29
without Sudafed. I bet you can too. I use Nyquil sometimes. What's in that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #54
55. Good for you...
bet you've made it to 29 without Imitrex, too. Doesn't mean there aren't people who need it.

I use Nyquil sometimes. What's in that?

Sudafed, acetaminophen, and a cough suppressant. I believe Nyquil is subject to the same restrictions as sudafed tablets, at least here in NC.

Guess you haven't made it to 29 without using Sudafed, then...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #55
58. Here are the ingredients
Which one is used in Meth?

Active Ingredients (in each 15 ml tablespoon):

Acetaminophen 500mg (pain reliever/fever reducer)
Dextromethorphan HBr 15mg (cough suppressant)
Doxylamine succinate 6.25mg (antihistamine)

Inactive Ingredients:

alcohol, citric acid, D&C Yellow No. 10, FD&C Green No. 3, FD&C Yellow No. 6, flavor, high fructose corn syrup, polyethylene glycol, propylene glycol, purified water, saccharin sodium, sodium citrate

alcohol, citric acid, FD&C Blue No. 1, FD&C Red No. 40, flavor, high fructose corn syrup, polyethylene glycol, propylene glycol, purified water, saccharin sodium, sodium citrate

http://vicks.com/products/nyquil_liquid.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #58
65. Nyquil was reformulated late 2005/early 2006 to delete the decongestant
and satisfy the Drug Warriors. Prior to that, NyQuil contained 30 mg pseudoephedrine per dose as a decongestant, but Proctor & Gamble deleted the decongestant only a few months ago and replaced it with an antihistamine so they wouldn't be subject to the Sudafed bans. In other words, the "NyQuil" that has been on the market for many years has been driven completely off the market, and a new medicine is now being marketed under the same name that has no decongestant properties, just an antihistamine. May still work for you, or it may not, but it's not the Nyquil that used to be available on store shelves. Your store brand alternatives may still reflect the old Nyquil formula, but not for long, as the drug warriors will undoubtedly drive them from the shelves also.

FWIW, I have bad reactions to antihistamines and can't take most of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 09:58 AM
Response to Reply #54
56. Nyquil is for at NIGHT. I need something I can take during the day,
and I don't need SIDE EFFECTS because in my work I must be fully alert at all times.

What is with the need to control what other people put in their bodies, because of SOME OTHER PERSON'S psychological problems???? How about we make alcohol illegal because SOME folks can't handle it? How about all controlled substances? Yeah, that's a GREAT idea - let's make KETAMINE illegal (my #1 anesthesia drug in feline practice) because there are irresponsible twits who like to abuse it!!!

IMHO the control freaks don't belong in the DEMOCRATIC party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 10:29 AM
Response to Reply #57
59. So I am supposed to show sensitivity to addicts by suffering myself???
My personal choice is to NOT do meth, BTW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #59
60. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #60
66. Passing idiotic laws to be seen "doing something" about a problem
isn't supposed to be a core Democratic ideal.

Fact: Most meth used in the U.S. is manufactured WITHOUT using domestically purchased sudafed as a feedstock.

Just how does making millions of innocent people SUFFER for lack of a medication, just so politicians on both the right and the left can grandstand and say they're "doing something" about meth, fit into your conception of what the Democratic party should be?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VTMechEngr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #25
53. Forget That!
Hell hath no wrath worse than me with a really bad f-ing cold!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #25
70. You're just outsourcing the problem to Mexico.
If this actually does reduce the number of meth addicts in this country, I'll change my tune -- but from what I've read it seems that banning sudafed in places hasn't had any effect.

But it does piss me off that I'm going to to have to get a prescription drug to deal with my goddam chronic sinus problem -- and I have no prescription coverage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 06:41 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. What did we do before Sudafed.
Seriously. What are the alternatives?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
High Plains Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #25
73. That's an absurd suggestion, for a couple of reasons:
1. Sudafed is only one means of manufacturing meth. There are other methods. People will use them.
2. Millions of Americans use Sudafed and similar products to relieve medical problems. Why punish
them for the misuse of a few?
3. Doing things like restricting the sales of Sudafed has had an impact on the number of home meth
labs, which reduces the risk of fire, explosion, or contamination. But it has not had a notable
impact on reducing meth use. Instead, it has led to home-cooked meth being replaced by higher
quality, more potent meth manufactured in real laboratories, mainly in Mexico. In fact, I call
this bill "The Mexican Meth Market Share Enhancement Act."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-26-06 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #73
79. Watch this documentary
Edited on Wed Apr-26-06 11:33 AM by Bleachers7
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meth

1. It will slow down use and reduce the purity which will make it easier to treat people.
2. I don't care. Find an alternative. People survived thousands of years without sudafed.
3. It also reduces the number of people cooking the shit up here, reducing the supply. Hopefully it hurts the purity as well. Some of this meth comes from the US. Banning it here is a start. Getting other countries to ban it as well would be great. Especially Mexico. It's a chemical, so you can't just grow more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #20
38. I'm with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #20
63. Its not that bad...
There are always moral panics and outrage over all kinds of things throughout the course of history.

Yes there have always been various problems with various drugs or things, and the media always blows it out of proportion.

Yes some people have thier lives ruined by drugs but that does not mean that everyone should be forced to change just because of them.

The way you deal with drug addicts is you let them kill themselves off, or you use leathal force to defend yourself against them.

I've never had to defend myself from a drug addict, and I'm not exactly rich nor do I live in a good part of town, but if it were ever necessary I certainly would.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #18
74. Saw it.
Still doesn't make sense.

In fact that particular episode's got me questioning frontline's credibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
21. Not only do you have to show ID, but you are limited to o grams per month.
I have four family members who suffer from allergies. I'm allowed to buy ninety-six tablets per month. Even if we only take two tablets per day (as opposed to the two to four tablets a day during the worst allergy seasons, those ninety-six tablets won't take care of the whole family.

I wonder if we can get prescriptions for sudaphedrine and if those too will be in limitied amounts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
24. The meth market doesn't enrich any important people
or they probably wouldn't put this kind of draconian crap in place.

Meth is evil, I agree

You can see in the pictures on this site how it messes folks up, particularly women oddly enough
http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/photos/gallery...

I just don't know if it's evil enough to require people to show ID and sign their book to buy tablets for their head cold.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Doesn't Pfizer own the patent?
IIRC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sinti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #27
33. Probably, but they've got to invent the disease it cures
before they can really cash in, know what I mean? }(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #27
43. Pfizer has a vested interest in driving pseudoephedrine off the market
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 05:07 PM by benEzra
because THEY make the primary alternatives to it. AFAIK Pfizer strongly supports the Sudafed ban, though I believe they initially opposed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Nope, It's Pfizer
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 05:08 PM by Bleachers7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Their patent on sudafed expired a LONG time ago...
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 05:23 PM by benEzra
I know Pfizer was the original maker of sudafed, but the vast, vast majority of pseudoephedrine on the market (mostly store brands) is NOT made by Pfizer, since Pfizer's patent expired long ago. Pfizer has a much larger share of the phenylephrine ("Sudafed PE") market, as I understand it. And if they manage to invent--and patent--another medication that works as well as sudafed, but which they can patent, they'll make a killing.

The problem with "Sudafed PE" (phenylephrine) is that it is much less effective than pseudoephedrine. From Wikipedia:

Oral phenylephrine is extensively metabolised by monoamine oxidase, an enzyme which is present in the stomach and liver. Therefore, compared to orally-taken pseudoephedrine, it has a reduced bioavailability, and is less effective as a nasal decongestant. Because phenylephrine is a direct selective alpha-adrenergic receptor agonist, it does not cause the release of endogeneous noradrenaline like the pseudoephedrine does.


FWIW, I strongly suspect that it is the endogeneous noradrenaline effect that causes regular sudafed to be SO effective against headaches when used in combination with an NSAID like aspirin or ibuprofen. I suffer from serious headaches on a fairly regular basis, and BC + 2 sudafed always take care of it with no side effects.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neil Lisst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. I generally oppose all rules, regs, and laws that are intrusive.
They always have "a good reason" for encroaching on the rights of the 1000 to get the 1 guy who is buying too much Sudafed, or doing whatever.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadHound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:48 PM
Response to Original message
26. More War on Drugs stupidity.
Sudafed is a key ingredient in the manufacture of meth. And while limiting the supply of Sudafed, all these laws do is force the manufacture of meth to Mexico, at least until some garage chemist figures out how to get the neccessary ingredient straight from the source, the ephedrin plant and its relatives. Then they'll try to ban some more plants :eyes:

Quite frankly this is all foolishness. We should just go ahead and legalize meth and other drugs. Control them like we do alcohol, and if people want them, great. Mankind seems to have an innate need to alter their state of concious in one way or the other, and will do so no matter what obstacles are put in front of them. Rather than dealing with the secondary crime wave caused by illegal drugs, along with the toxic waste sites and the health problems caused by homemade drugs, just legalize the shit. After the initial "euphoria" spree of people taking drugs, the usage rate will actually go below what it is now, and we will have a large revenue source to fund education and addiction programs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsTryska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
29. I thought Mucinex was 100% Guafenisin?
or however you spell it.


in either case - i don't believe it's federal, but i think it's state by state.

right now in Georgia it's soem wierd thing where you can only by pseudoephedrine containing products at pharmacies, and you might have to show your license, or give oyur information, or sign a sheet or soemthing.


My pharmacists said that msot likely it will be turned into a prescription only thing. I don't mind really, since that will make my motnhly allergy meds a few dollars cheaper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madinmaryland Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:57 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. I don't use mucinex or sudefed, as I have
high blood pressure and should not be taking that stuff. I have taken Clariton for allergies, but have not had to sign anything for that. Must not have psuedophedrine in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MsTryska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #35
40. Nope - regular claritin has no pseudoephedrine
It's readily available as are the pseudoephedrine free Cold and Allergy formulas.

Unfortunately claritin makes me really sleepy when i take it even tho it alleges to be non-drowsy, so I have to have the D-12 formula, with real live pseudoephedrine in it to balance it all out.

I hope this ban on pseudoephedrine works at reducing meth labs, (much like making quaaludes prescription only stoped their abuse) but it definitely makes my life more complicated.

the ironic thing, is that i can still buy "truckdrivers" with pure ephedrine in them at my local gas station. They are bound with guafenisin tho, which i believe makes it more difficult for meth labs to produce crystal from.

Which surprises me even more about the Mucinex control. I know it has Guafenisin in it, because that's what breaks up mucus, the pseudoephedrine i'm not sure about.

oops - i stand corrected - Mucinex does have a pseudoephedrine containing formula, per their website:

http://www.mucinex.com/12_facts.asp

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:50 PM
Response to Original message
30. Saw a sign stating the same policy in my pharmacy this morning
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
derby378 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
32. It's the law in Oklahoma and Texas, too
First passed in OK, then the meth dealers started hitting TX pharmacies for Sudafed and Mini-Thins, so guess what? Now we've got a similar law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countryjake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
39. While I do not trust how those databases might be further used against...
innocent people, if you could see the destruction the meth problem has wreaked on common country people, you'd understand why it's being done. With the displacement, joblessness, and hopelessness of rural kids, we have a generation coming up who are building a trade around this poison, crowding and financially supporting the justice system with each bust, and ultimately destroying their lives. Pinpointing the creators of this crap and discouraging easy access to the ingredients which make production profitable for ordinary people who wouldn't normally engage in such activities might be a help in stopping the use and addiction to meth.

I'd rather see those products made very hard to obtain, rather than yet another list of potential targets in the government's growing "database". Curbing a drug problem by treating the symptoms, rather than examining a failing economy and the state of those who have reached such desperation is not actually a very wise solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-24-06 04:34 PM
Response to Original message
42. Here in NC, if my wife buys two boxes of sudafed per 2-wk paycheck,
Edited on Mon Apr-24-06 04:34 PM by benEzra
she commits a CRIME, since she "should have known" that you can only buy 3 boxes in any arbitrary 30-day period. The second offense is a FELONY, and you lose your civil rights for the rest of your life. The state tracks every sudafed purchase she makes, and if she accidentally buys more than 3 packs in any 30-day period, the database flags her as a criminal. Welcome to the land of the free and the home of the brave...

Meanwhile, IIRC the majority of meth is imported from Mexico, which is not affected by sudafed bans, and can easily be smuggled in disguised as a routine cocaine shipment. Or, the meth traffickers could just smuggle in raw pseudoephedrine, were they so inclined, or switch to a different recipe for meth.

It would seem to me that doing a better job of tracking bulk anhydrous ammonia might be a little bit smarter than busting Grandma at CVS for buying her fourth pack of sudafed, but these aren't rational times...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greybnk48 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 10:37 AM
Response to Original message
61. In WIS. I now have to sign for my Clariton-D
it's still OTC, but if you buy the stuff that includes a decongestant, you have to sign for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SPKrazy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #61
71. Yes, Claritin D, The Choice Of Meth Cooks All Over!
:sarcasm:

I've had the same thing here in Arkansas for a year.

Sign the book, show your ID, they write it all down, I end up feeling like I've done something wrong.

I liked it better when it was prescription, then I could get it cheaper with insurance, and there were no questions period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
62. Just another example of how the war on drugs...
hurts the average person and in some instances keeps effective medication out of thier hands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack_DeLeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
64. hope nobody calls the DEA on me.


:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benEzra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
67. Well, the zealots have succeeded in driving NyQuil off the market...
the old formula was phased out in 2005 or early 2006. What is now sold under the brand name NyQuil is a substantially different medicine, with an antihistamine instead of a decongestant.

Here's a blog on the topic: The New DayQuil (and NyQuil) Blows ... A Lot

Well, Vicks has released new formulations of both NyQuil and DayQuil, removing the decongestant ingredient from NyQuil entirely, and replacing it will a far less effective decongestant in DayQuil. They both contain an antihistamine called doxylamine succinate, but as far as my nose can tell, it's not doing a damned thing. That's right, my Thanksgiving Holiday trip to the cabin has resulted in my whole family catching what we refer to as, the crud.

Back to my rant ... When I asked Annie to pick up the NyQuil, it hadn't occurred to me to have her check the ingredients or look for something better, and it hadn't occurred to me either. We'd always picked up the same product because it worked, dammit. This? This doesn't work worth shit.


An article from last year from the LA Times: Got a Cold? Methamphetamine Crackdown Will Affect You"

The newer cold medications expected to hit the market this fall are slightly less effective than most products now available. Over time, however, the new products could replace many of the medications consumers have used for decades because their ingredients can't easily be used to make methamphetamines.

One product, Sudafed PE, is already available, and as many as half a dozen other reformulated medications are expected soon. They will not contain pseudoephedrine, a popular decongestant that has been used in many cold and allergy medications such as NyQuil, Tylenol Flu and Claritin-D. Pseudoephedrine is a key ingredient in producing methamphetamines when it's boiled and mixed with household ingredients.

...

Newer medications use a different decongestant, phenylephrine, which is considerably more difficult and expensive to convert into methamphetamines. The drawback for consumers is that the medications are slightly less effective in treating colds and allergies in some people, according to several manufacturers and doctors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
68. If you can even buy it anymore.
My local grocery store no longer stocks it, because there's no pharmacy counter to hide it behind. So, I'm shit out of luck -- it's the one cheap, effective, non-prescription thing that helps my sinus congestion.

I haven't had time to drive around looking for somewhere that does carry it -- thanks meth heads!!! Fuck you!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VOX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
75. In So. Cal., it's all behind the counter now, too...
You pull a card from the shelf, go and turn that in at the counter, sign and pay.

Quite a hassle for seasonal allergies. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gollygee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
77. yes and it's annoying as hell
I use Claritin-D for my allergies. I wish it were still a prescription. I wouldn't be treated like I was buying contraband and it would cost me less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nickinSTL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-25-06 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
78. I didn't know it's gone federal
they passed a law in Missouri to require ID to purchase pseudoephedrine a couple years ago because rural MO has a serious meth problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Aug 22nd 2014, 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC