FDA Offers Pharmacists Opioid Training

FDA Offers Pharmacists Opioid Training

http://www.drugtopics.com/fda/fda-offers-pharmacists-opioid-training

The FDA’s new opioids Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) plan offers training to pharmacists and nurses for the first time, and adds new labeling for all opioids.

The agency’s final Opioid Analgesic REMS includes several measures to help better communicate the serious risks about the use of opioid painkillers to patients and health care professionals, including pharmacists.

Notably, the new REMS subjects immediate-release opioids analgesics—which account for around 90% of prescribed opioids—to a more stringent set of requirements as well as adds new labeling for all opioids, says FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, in a statement.

The new labeling includes information about REMS-compliant education in the Boxed Warning and Warnings and Precautions sections of labeling and strongly encourages providers to complete a REMS-compliant education program. The labeling also emphasizes to patients and their caregivers the importance of reading the Medication Guide every time it is provided by their pharmacists.

In addition, the expanded REMS requires that 347 opioid analgesics intended for outpatient use be subject to REMS, versus the 62 that were previously required.

The new REMS requires that the education for pharmacists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals cover broader information about appropriate pain management, including alternatives to opioids for the treatment of pain.

“Many people who become addicted to opioids will have their first exposure in the medical setting. Providers have a critical role to play in making sure these products are appropriately prescribed to patients,” Gottlieb says.

The FDA believes that all healthcare providers involved in the management of patients with pain should be educated about the safe use of opioids, “so that when they write or dispense a prescription for an opioid analgesic, or monitor patients receiving these medications, they can help ensure the proper product is selected for the patient and used with appropriate clinical oversight,” Lyndsay Meyer, an FDA spokesperson, tells Drug Topics.

The FDA’s goal is to reduce unnecessary and/or inappropriate exposure to opioids by making certain that prescribers are properly informed about appropriate prescribing recommendations, that providers understand how to identify abuse by individual patients, and know how to get patients with opioid use disorder into treatment, Meyer says.

“The crisis of opioid addiction is a public health tragedy of enormous proportions. The FDA’s goal is to reduce serious adverse outcomes resulting from inappropriate prescribing, misuse, and abuse of opioid analgesics, while maintaining patient access to pain medications,” she says.

Continuing education training under the modified REMS will be available to health care providers by March 2019.

There is no mandatory federal requirement that prescribers, pharmacists, or other healthcare professionals take the training provided through the REMS and completion of the training is not a precondition to prescribing opioid analgesics to patients, according to Meyer.

“However,” she adds, “the FDA’s Opioid Policy Steering Committee continues to consider whether there are circumstances when the FDA should require some form of mandatory education for healthcare providers and how the agency would pursue such a goal.”

This is a “can of worms”… The new REMS requires that the education for pharmacists, nurses, and other healthcare professionals cover broader information about appropriate pain management

If you notice that prescribers are not included in this statement, is the FDA trying to impose some reasoning on healthcare professionals that dispense and/or administer opiates to pts become the intermediary to “monitor” the prescribing of opiates to pts and perhaps become an “obstacle” between the prescriber and the pt  and the pt getting the opiates that have been prescribed to them ?

Could this be another “CDC guideline” type play by a federal agency since  There is no mandatory federal requirement that prescribers, pharmacists, or other healthcare professionals take the training provided through the REMS and completion of the training is not a precondition to prescribing opioid analgesics to patients, according to Meyer.

Is this something for the DEA to ‘hang their hat on” to go after prescribers and pharmacist that have not completed the course to accuse them of inappropriate “corresponding responsibility” because of their failure to take the course that is not mandatory ?

 

DEA reschedules Epidiolex, marijuana-derived drug, paving the way for it to hit the market

Epidiolex is the first FDA-approved drug that is derived from maijuana. DEA reschedules Epidiolex, marijuana-derived drug, paving the way for it to hit the market

  • The Food and Drug Administration in June approved Epidiolex, which is derived from cannabidiol, or CBD, a molecule contained in the marijuana plant.
  • This forced the DEA to consider how it would classify Epidiolex since marijuana is considered a schedule 1 drug, which it defines as having no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.

The Drug Enforcement Administration has rescheduled Epidiolex, paving the way for GW Pharmaceuticals to start selling the first FDA-approved drug derived from cannabis, but stopped short of reclassifying all cannabidiol products.

The Food and Drug Administration in June approved Epidiolex, which is derived from cannabidiol, or CBD, a molecule contained in the marijuana plant. This forced the DEA to consider how it would classify Epidiolex since marijuana is considered a schedule 1 drug, which it defines as having no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.

Epidiolex will be classified as a schedule 5 controlled substance, the lowest level, defined as those with a proven medical use and low potential for abuse. Other drugs in this category include some cough medicines containing codeine.

The drug is indicated to treat patients two years and older with Dravet Syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome, rare forms of epilepsy that emerge during childhood and can be difficult to treat. It does not contain tetrahydrocannabinol, or THC, the psychoactive compound in cannabis that makes people high.

GW Pharma said it would “work hard” to make Epidiolex available within the next six weeks. Shares of GW Pharma rose 7 percent on the news.

“We are pleased that the DEA has placed EPIDIOLEX in the lowest restriction Schedule, because it will help ensure that patients with LGS and Dravet syndrome, two of the most debilitating forms of epilepsy, can access this important new treatment option through their physicians,” GW CEO Justin Gover said in a statement.

The rescheduling applies to CBD containing no more than 0.1 percent THC, in FDA-approved drug products. Though this allows GW Pharma to sell Epidiolex, it does not broadly apply to CBD.

So while oils and lotions are becoming wildly popular, they’re still schedule 1 drugs and therefore illegal under federal law, though the DEA typically does not pursue, or enforce the law against, individual users, a DEA spokeswoman told CNBC. Some states have legalized CBD and other marijuana products.

The DEA classifies marijuana as a schedule 1 drug, which it defines as having no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Because CBD is a compound found in the marijuana plant, it is considered a schedule 1 drug and therefore illegal.

Coffee shops and other places selling CBD oil may be in line with state laws, depending on where they’re located, but they’re still skirting federal laws. And though the DEA may not pursue small-scale sellers, it may enforce those federal laws if consumer product conglomerates decide to enter the space.

Beverage giant Coca-Cola in September said although it has “no interest” in marijuana, it’s “closely watching the growth of non-psychoactive CBD as an ingredient in functional wellness beverages around the world.”

In announcing its approval of Epidiolex, the FDA was clear to distinguish that the drug contains purified CBD and the agency’s decision was not a broad approval of the substance. Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said the FDA remains “concerned about the proliferation and illegal marketing of unapproved CBD-containing products with unproven medical claims.”

 

CIAAG Calls for Pain management as Human Right to the United Nations

Lauren Deluca, founding president of Chronic Illness Advocacy & Awareness Group (CIAAG), addressed the United Nations’ Commission on Narcotic Drugs today on the effects of the United States’ opioid crisis policies on chronic pain patients. CIAAG also proposed practical solutions to help monitor opioid use and ensure patients access to essential healthcare. Ms. Deluca warned, “Failure to protect patients’ rights to access essential medications and healthcare, will result in the loss of innocent lives through suicide, and inflate an already deadly issue into a human rights crisis.” Chronic Illness Advocacy & Awareness Group is working with Elected Officials and the patient community to help restore balance between protecting the public health from drug abuse and the safe, essential access to opioid analgesics for the chronically ill, older persons, and persons with disabilities. Learn more at CIAAG.net

FOX6 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin coverage of pain-opiate protest

Corresponding responsibility or irresponsibility ?

No automatic alt text available.

Another example of a healthcare corporation taking away the professional discretion from their employed Pharmacists.  They use the “excuse”  of corresponding responsibility as justification for their actions.  Corresponding Responsibility is suppose to be a “two way street”… making sure that valid medications reach patients that need them and preventing the diversion of controlled substances.

Apparently some large corporations – like Walmart – that basically “dabble in providing healthcare”  have decided that they have the right to revoke the professional discretion of their employed Pharmacists and insert a corporate edict for them to follow.

Unfortunately, in this country we have a serious and growing Pharmacist surplus. Currently for ever TWO new pharmacists that we need, the pharmacy schools are graduating THREE. Some 5000 new pharmacists graduating every year looking for jobs that don’t exists. Pharmacists understand, don’t follow the corporate edict and you will be looking for a job.

Most/all boards of pharmacy have taken a similar stance..  their total focus seems to be on the prevention of diversion of controlled substances and those who have a valid medical necessity for controlled substance are just left to defend for themselves..

Since most of the 51 Boards of Pharmacy are “stacked” with non-practicing corporate Pharmacist and if you believe that these Pharmacists will stand up against the same corporations they work for…  you need a massive dose of REALITY.

The primary directive of the Boards of Pharmacy is to protect health/safety of the general public… and when individual pharmacists or healthcare corporations with pharmacies take the position that they are making a broad denial of care for certain pts… generally, the boards of pharmacy are as quiet as a “church mouse”

Generally speaking, independent pharmacies don’t “play games” with a pt’s necessary medications because you are dealing with the Pharmacist/owner and not a pharmacist that is being forced to walk in “lock-step” with their  corporate employers.

Here is a website that will help locate a independent pharmacy by zip code

http://www.ncpanet.org/home/find-your-local-pharmacy

 

Nearly 500,000 people signed a petition to get LAST MAN STANDING back on the air

Image result for last man standing tv show

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_Man_Standing_(U.S._TV_series)

Nearly 500,000 people signed a petition to get the ABC cancelled show LAST MAN STANDING brought back after it was cancelled.

FOX has picked up the show returning this fall season…

I find it interesting that when there is a petition for something being done AGAINST – and can harm – the chronic pain community… MAYBE a couple of thousand will sign it.

I guess that getting a TV show’s cancellation reversed is more important.. since that 500,000 signatures is about 8%-10% of the typical number of viewers that watch the show in its last year on ABC than the chronic pain community standing up for themselves.

I have had chronic painers state that they don’t want to put their pain management at risk by taking a stand…  here is a NEWS FLASH !! you can’t keep your head low enough to avoid being noticed as a chronic painer !

 

 

Boy Denied Life-Saving Treatment Because He Used Cannabis Oil To Treat Seizures

Boy Denied Life-Saving Treatment Because He Used Cannabis Oil To Treat Seizures

www.mommingschool.com/boy-denied-life-saving-treatment-because-he-used-cannabis-oil-to-treat-seizures/

Despite increasing evidence that CBD (cannabidiol), a nonpsychoactive cannabinoid, can help treat severe seizure disorders, a thirteen-year-old Virginia boy suffering from a rare disease has been denied treatment for his use of the plant.

Kaden Hartman suffers from Niemann-Pick disease, also dubbed “Child Alzheimer’s.” According to the National Niemann-Pick Foundation, it is a rare disorder that affects lysosomal storage and metabolism and can cause symptoms including progressive loss of early motor skills, slurred speech, seizures, and hypersensitivity to touch. Most children diagnosed with Niemann-Pick do not live past age 20.

Kaden’s mother, Kathy, contacted High Times magazine to tell his story after he was denied access to an experimental medication he has been taking for three years after the coordinating hospital found out he had also been taking CBD. He has been using the plant-based treatment since he first began experiencing symptoms.

She says Cyclodextrin, the experimental treatment, has been effective in treating his disorder. It was approved directly by the FDA. “When there’s nothing else out there to save his life, the FDA will approve an experimental medicine, and he’s been on it for almost three years,” Kathy told High Times.

She says it’s “definitely working.”

She also believes the CBD is helping reduce his seizures. He has been using it under the supervision of his primary neurologist and initially received a prescription for it from his pediatric neurologist, Dr. Ralph Northam, who is now the governor of Virginia (in Virginia, cannabis oil was approved to treat “intractable epilepsy in 2015, and lawmakers are currently crafting legislation to allow the use of non-psychoactive cannabis oils for a broader range of conditions). You can see this for the best marijuana products in town! This prescription has allowed him to access a more potent version of the drug. Kathy says she told Kaden’s primary neurologist that it “seems to be working great” and says CBD comes with far fewer side effects than traditional anti-seizure medications. You can also click here to go on Missouri Green Team, to get the right information about medical marijuana.

But when Virginia Commonwealth University Medical Center contacted her to tell her Kaden would be taken off Cyclodextrin if he continued to take CBD, Kathy removed CBD from his regimen. “Off CBD, Kaden experiences many seizures. He has since fractured his skull, concussed himself, and developed two blood clots in his brain,” High Times summarized.

“Not only was this 13-year-old denied life-saving treatment because he used CBD oil, but CBD oil itself was a lifesaving treatment for seizures.”

Nevertheless, VCU Medical Center warned Kathy that she had to take her son off the medication. According to her, after they sent the warning letter, they called her, saying “Your son is on CBD oil. He is terminated from the clinical trial. Don’t bother ever showing up again,” she summarized.

She showed up to his next two appointments, anyway, concerned that if she didn’t, the FDA would terminate Kaden’s participation altogether. VCU terminated his spinal tap appointments, which were held every other Monday.

VCU eventually amended their previous statements, saying that “once they have approval from the FDA, the International Review Board (IRB), and the pharmaceutical company,” Kaden could go back on Cyclodextrin.

But, as High Times summarized, “Mrs. Hartman says that they don’t need any of these approvals due to the nature of Kaden’s treatment and that they shouldn’t be sharing information with the pharmaceutical company in the first place.”

She believes doing so could warrant a medical malpractice suit. Worse, getting the approval VCU is demanding could take months. “The FDA only meets once a month. The IRB only meets maybe quarterly or once a month,” Kathy said, worrying that because the company that manufactures the medication has already been bought out twice, Kaden may never be able to go back on it despite the fact that, according to Kathy, he doesn’t even need FDA approval.

He’s not part of a formal clinical trial. He’s a single patient under the compassionate use law,” she said. Further, she says the trial never forbade CBD. Besides, as Dr. Rebecca Caffrey, a friend of the Hartman family pointed out, “[Kaden] has received many meds not on the protocol, like steroids for the swelling in his fractured skull and pain meds during his recovery from that injury.”

High Times notes that other patients participating in similar drug trials for Niemann-Picks have been able to take CBD with no trouble.

“All they have to do is write a two-paragraph letter to the FDA saying FYI we put him on this medicine,” Kathy says (however, cannabidiol does remain illegal at the federal level, and current compassionate use stipulations direct potential patients to a pharmaceutical version of cannabis). According to her, the doctor in the trial never attempted to do that.

According to 10-WAVY, a regional outlet, the hospital declined to comment on Kaden’s case despite having commented on him previously. The hospital spokesperson cited patient privacy.

In the meantime, Kathy worries that the suspension of Kaden’s trial treatment is endangering his life. She says her friend’s son, who also suffered from the disease, missed two doses of Cyclodextrin and ultimately died. Kaden has missed multiple doses already.

“First do no harm. By doing nothing, you’re creating harm,” as Kathy says she told Dr. Syndi Seinfeld of VCU, who is responsible for Kaden’s treatment.

Or, more bluntly, as she told VCU, “You take him off the study…you just killed my child.”

This article is full on contradictions…  first it is stated that he is part of a clinical trial and secondly he is being given the medications because of COMPASSIONATE USE LAW…

The hospital declined to comment on Kaden’s treatment after they had previously made comments.

If Kaden is part of a clinical trial, being on a medication that is unknown to those supervising the clinical trial could – at some later point in time – call to questions of the outcomes of the clinical trial.

If he is receiving this medication as part of a “compassionate law” and nothing to do with a clinical trial.. that is a whole another story.

I smell that some attorney has gotten involved in this issue..  because it is stated in the article that CBD oil is still consider an “illegal substance” by the DEA .. regardless of state’s law.

If this hospital – like most hospitals – get a large portion of their revenue from Medicare, Medicaid.. could there have been a “veiled threat” from someone in the Federal judicial system regarding the hospital being able to be able to continue to treat Medicare and Medicaid pts if they continue to allow one of their pediatric pts to receive/take what our federal judicial system considered a ILLEGAL PRODUCT.

Could this child’s quality of life – or life itself – have little meaning to those in our judicial system or whatever entity that has put the “fear of the feds” into the hospital’s administration and caused this reaction.  Much like the same reactions that has caused untold thousands of chronic pain pts into living in a torturous level of pain and some of them deciding that the only relief that they can get from their unrelenting pain is SUICIDE.

 

Medical Treatment Denial and Malpractice Lawsuits

Medical Treatment Denial and Malpractice Lawsuits

https://www.injuryclaimcoach.com/treatment-denial.html

Can you sue a doctor or hospital for refusing treatment? The answer is…it depends. State and federal laws vary widely on the issues of medical treatment denial. If you’re considering legal action against a doctor or hospital for refusing to treat, you should consult with an experienced attorney. These cases are complex.

Refusal of medical treatment usually occurs in emergency rooms and urgent care clinics. A trained medical technician’s or nurse’s assessment of a medical condition, known as triage, determines the priority of an injured person’s medical need. People with life threatening injuries may be seen immediately, while those with lesser injuries may have to wait.

For example, a patient with chest pains, which may indicate the onset of a heart attack, will receive immediate medical care. Those with head trauma, serious burns, or other life threatening injuries will also be high on the list. Someone with a sprained ankle, however, may have to wait for several hours before being seen.

There are times when a patient may be rightfully denied emergency medical care. Some of the most common reasons include:

  • The patient exhibits “drug seeking behavior.” Most emergency room doctors and nurses are trained to identify those who likely have a drug problem.
  • The patient is deluded, believing she is seriously ill when there is no real illness.
  • The patient displays destructive or dangerous behavior while waiting to be seen.

If you don’t fall under one of the above categories, you will still be able to see the emergency room doctor, even if you don’t have a medical emergency (due to liability reasons). You may have to wait until every patient with a more serious condition is seen, even if they arrived at the E.R. hours after you did, which is a legitimate exercise of emergency care triage.

The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act

The Federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), is part of the Consolidated Omnibus Reconciliation Act (COBRA). EMTALA.com offers a summary of its provisions. The Act applies to all hospitals in the United States and its territories. It sets out the laws governing facilities that provide emergency medical care.

The EMTALA requires hospital E.R. staff to provide medical treatment to all people with real emergency medical conditions, regardless of the person’s ability to pay (or provide medical insurance). Illegal denial of treatment may subject the medical provider to disciplinary action.

Under EMTALA, an emergency medical condition is defined as:

…one that manifests itself by acute symptoms of sufficient severity (including severe pain, psychiatric disturbance, and/or symptoms of substance abuse) such that the absence of immediate medical attention could reasonably be expected to result in the following:

  • placing the health of the individual (or unborn child) in serious jeopardy
  • the serious impairment of a bodily function
  • the serious dysfunction of any bodily function or part
  • the inadequate time to effect a safe transfer of a pregnant woman to another hospital before delivery, or, that the transfer may pose a threat to the health or safety of the woman or unborn child.”

Under EMTALA, people with medical emergencies must be treated to the extent their condition is stabilized. Stabilized means the patient is placed in a position so that discharge from emergency care will not adversely affect or otherwise cause a “material deterioration” of the patient’s condition.

This includes the time that passes during the patient’s return home, or to another medical facility. For women, this includes waiting until a baby is delivered.

Under the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964, and subsequent federal laws, hospital emergency rooms and registered clinics can’t deny treatment to patients based on race, color, creed, age, or sexual preference, presuming the patient has a true medical emergency.

Once stabilized, the EMTALA permits the medical facility to legitimately deny the patient medical care. Denial of care can be based on a number of legitimate reasons (barring descrimination), including inability to pay for services, lack of insurance, type of illness, and other practical reasons.

What to do if you were denied emergency medical treatment:

If you were denied treatment for legitimate reasons at an emergency room or urgent care center, you may have no legal recourse. If, however, you learn from a credible medical provider your condition did require emergency care, and you were turned away from an E.R., you may have the basis of a medical malpractice claim.

Additionally, you may report the emergency provider’s action to Medicare. They will investigate your claim, and if they find you were denied emergency medical care in violation of EMTALA, the facility may be subject to:

  • Termination of their lucrative Medicare provider agreement
  • Fines up to $50,000 per violation ($25,000 for a hospital with fewer than 100 beds)
  • Physician fines of $50,000 per violation, including on-call physicians

If you are wrongly denied treatment in an emergency room setting, ask to see the person responsible for operations. State that you are familiar with EMTALA regulations and you’re sure refusing to treat you is a violation. Cite the reasons you were wrongfully denied treatment, such as not having insurance, or being unable to pay the costs of treatment.

You have no rights to any fines levied against the hospital for violation of EMTALA. However, if you can prove their treatment denial resulted in an unnecessary aggravation of a pre-existing condition, or was responsible for unnecessary physical pain and suffering, you may have the basis of a medical malpractice case.

If the hospital was fined or censured by the government for violating EMTALA, those violations will go a long way towards supporting a malpractice claim.

If you were refused medical treatment based on discrimination, as set out under the Federal Civil Rights Act, the violation can be reported to your state attorney general’s office, or the local office of the United States Attorney.

Can private doctors refuse to treat patients?

The short answer is, yes. A private doctor isn’t subject to the provisions of EMTALA, and can dismiss you as a patient at any time (barring discrimination), for just about any reason, without fear of credible legal reprisals. Doctors in private practice are basically small business owners. In a sense, a sign stating “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service” can be applied to doctors, as well as to your local restaurateur.

A doctor can refuse to treat a patient because:

  • The doctor’s practice is so busy she is unable to accept new patients.
  • The doctor doesn’t have a working relationship with your health insurance company.
  • The doctor chooses not to treat patients with the illness or injury you suffer from.
  • You can’t pay for the costs of treatment.
  • You or your spouse is a medical malpractice attorney.

Your doctor can refuse to continue treating you because:

  • You haven’t paid your bill.
  • The doctor has stopped doing business with your health insurance provider.
  • You continue to exhibit drug seeking behavior.
  • You are a disruptive patient.
  • For reasons of conscience (including religious, contraceptive, or palliative care beliefs, or deciding not to prescribe narcotics for pain management).
  • The doctor learns you or your spouse is a medical malpractice attorney.

There is an exception:

You can’t be discharged if it will result in your medical condition worsening before you find another doctor, or will result in another medical condition.

If your doctor says she has to stop treating you, you must try to find another doctor as soon as reasonably possible. Whether or not your doctor can discharge you as a patient after giving you adequate time to find another doctor, and you refused to do so, is a question for the courts.

If your doctor refuses to continue to provide treatment, and as a direct result your condition worsens, you may have the basis of a medical malpractice claim.

Get an Attorney

If you believe you were wrongfully denied medical treatment by a doctor or emergency care facility, and that denial caused you further injury, you must seek the advice and counsel of an experienced medical malpractice attorney.

Malpractice cases are complex, and can sometimes take years to resolve. Hospitals and doctors pay millions of dollars in malpractice insurance premiums. Any malpractice claim will be defended aggressively by “take no prisoners” attorneys working for the insurance company. Only an experienced attorney can handle a case like this and properly represent your interests.

If the treatment denial occurred in an emergency room setting, you should retain an attorney with experience in EMTALA violations. Most malpractice attorneys don’t charge for an initial consultation. In almost all cases, you won’t have to pay any legal fees or other costs until, and unless your attorney wins your case.

WE THE PEOPLE Restoring Due Process

WE THE PEOPLE

Restoring Due Process

Would you accept our judiciary deciding that we no longer have a right of free speech, or privacy or right to bear arms?  Of course not!  So of course you cannot accept the fact that we no longer have a right of due process.

This cause is about restoring our right of DUE PROCESS that has been usurped by our corrupt legal profession.  WE THE PEOPLE, here assembled, do not reflect our political party affiliation.  DUE PROCESS is essential to all free people.  The term “republican” is used on this website to describe our form of government NOT PARTY AFFILIATION.

Think back to our pledge of allegiance…  “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to  the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible,  with liberty and justice for all.” 

Become a Co-Plaintiff

Make sure you verify your address by clicking the link in an email you will receive momentarily. And thank you for taking the first step in reforming our broken legal system.

To let us know it’s really you and that you’d like to receive emails from us, please click the link in the confirmation email we just sent you. You can unsubscribe from these emails at any time.

About Us

What WE THE PEOPLE are about

 

We are going to bring the people of this country together and join  hands and demand reform of our governments.  We are not asking!  We are  asserting our right to do so.

This demand will be made in the  form of a lawsuit filed directly in the Supreme Court Of The United  States (SCOTUS).  A “Petition For An Extraordinary Writ In The Nature of  Mandamus” pursuant to Sup. Ct. Rule 20.

The SINGLE purpose of this site is to assemble THE PEOPLE in this type of “class action” lawsuit filed directly in SCOTUS.

We are going to file this Extraordinary Writ as co-plaintiffs  (“Petitioners” in SCOTUS lingo) numbering hundreds of thousands strong.

Corrupted Legal System

Our corrupt judiciary, made up in large part of corrupt attorneys wearing black robes (costumes), have FORSAKEN PUBLIC TRUST.  Our judiciary is unwilling to provide objective oversight of themselves and the legal profession, resulting in rampant rights violations and federal crimes perpetrated under color law.

We are going to assert our right to REFORM our government and return power to the people and RESTORE DUE PROCESS.  We are going to demand an end to judicial corruption routinely occurring during court proceedings.

You only need add your name as co-petitioner and DEMAND reform.  It is  time to stop whining and complaining without taking action.  The time is  now to STAND UP and FIGHT for your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!!

If you would like to learn more, ask questions about this project, interact with thousands who have joined this cause, find someone to invite you to the “secret” Facebook group  WE THE PEOPLE v. THE FIFTY UNITED STATES, you must be invited by a FB friend to join this group of patriots who are committed to peaceful reform of our broken and corrupt legal system.

I want to be a co-plaintiff / co-petitioner

Are you ready for reform?  Hold onto your seats! If you want to be a co-petitioner on the most historic and most important lawsuit ever presented to the Supreme Court of the United States – Enter your email address below and “Become Co-Plaintiff”   Our team will pay all the legal costs, all costs of filing.  

Please make sure you verify your email address!!! after you subscribe

Become Co-Plaintiff

You CAN NOT copy/paste your email address to prevent robot submissions. You MUST manually type in your email address. Enter your email address below and we will contact you via email about joining this cause of action as a Co-Petitioner. HAVING TROUBLE SIGNING UP? If so, email johng@wethepeoplev50.com and your email address will be manually added to the database.

https://wethepeoplev50.com/

Click on link to get on mailing list

 

Drug OD’s had been growing exponentially for 15 yrs BEFORE OXYCONTIN WAS INTRODUCED TO THE MARKET

Drug Overdose Epidemic Has Been Growing Exponentially For Decades

https://www.news-line.com/PH_news27263_enews

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Death rates from drug overdoses in the U.S. have been on an exponential growth curve that began at least 15 years before the mid-1990s surge in opioid prescribing

suggesting that overdose death rates may continue along this same historical growth trajectory for years to come, according to a University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health analysis published today in Science.

The type of drug and the demographics of those who die from overdoses has fluctuated over the years. When the use of one drug waned, a new drug filled in, attracting new populations from different geographic regions at faster rates. These findings suggest that, to be successful, prevention efforts must extend beyond control of specific drugs to address deeper factors driving the epidemic.

“The current epidemic of overdose deaths due to prescription opioids, heroin and fentanyl appears to be the most recent manifestation of a more fundamental, longer-term process,” said senior author Donald S. Burke, M.D., Pitt Public Health dean and UPMC-Jonas Salk Chair of Global Health. “Understanding the forces holding these multiple individual drug epidemics together in a tight upward exponential trajectory will be important in revealing the root causes of the epidemic, and this understanding could be crucial to prevention and intervention strategies.”

Burke and his team collected all the accidental drug poisoning – overdose – deaths reported through the U.S. National Vital Statistics System since 1979, when drug overdoses began to be reported in their own category. In the past nearly four decades, the drug overdoses plot as a near-perfect curve, with each yearly data point falling almost exactly on the smooth upward exponential curve.

“This remarkably smooth, long-term epidemic growth pattern really caught our attention,” Burke said. “If we can figure it out, we should be able to bend that curve downward.”

The team then examined overdose death rates for individual drug types, such as cocaine, heroin and prescription opioids, which began to be reported in 1999. What they found was far from perfect.

“There is no regular or predictable pattern to the overdose rates for any of these drugs. Cocaine overdose death rates curved down and up and down and back up over the past 20 years. Methadone deaths have been on a downturn since the mid-2000s. Prescription opioids have been on a fairly steady, steep climb. Heroin deaths shot up in 2010, followed in 2013 by synthetic opioids, such as fentanyl.

Methamphetamine appears to be on the verge of its own dramatic climb,” said lead author Hawre Jalal, M.D., Ph.D., assistant professor of health policy and management at Pitt Public Health. “Nonetheless, when we plot the annual sum of all drug overdoses, we get a remarkably smooth, inexorable exponential curve.”

The team also explored the underlying demographics – age, race, gender and geographic location – of the people who died of drug overdoses. Again, they found great variability depending on the type of drug. Heroin and cocaine impact urban populations, whereas prescription opioids and methamphetamine skew a bit more rural. Cocaine has higher death rates in black men than other populations. When it comes to heroin, younger whites and older blacks have higher death rates.

But, when the overall demographics are combined for all types of drugs, a clear picture emerges of growing death rates spreading across people ages 20 through 65 as the years tick by.

When overdoses are plotted on a U.S. map, certain drugs dominate different areas.

But, when taken as a whole, almost every region in the country is a hotspot for overdose deaths from one or more drugs, with the exception of the north central states.

None of these analyses suggest an obvious mechanism as to how multiple, drug-specific sub-epidemics have merged into a single, tight, exponential curve. However, the researchers believe that improved communications and supply chains, efficiencies in drug manufacturing, expanding drug markets and lower prices could all be making illicit drugs more available, while sociological and psychological forces, such as loss of purpose, dissolution of communities and despair, could be accelerating demand.

“This is a paradox – inexorable growth in the aggregate, composed of variable sub-epidemics,” said Burke. “But it should be solvable. Evidence-based public health responses have contained past epidemics. If we understand and address these root causes at the same time that we take on the opioid crisis, we should be able to curb the epidemic for good.”

Co-authors of this research are Jeanine M. Buchanich, Ph.D., and Mark S. Roberts, M.D., both of Pitt Public Health; Lauren C. Balmert, Ph.D., of Pitt Public Health and Northwestern University; and Kun Zhang, Ph.D., of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

This research was supported in part by CDC grant IPA1605230, National Institutes of Health grant 1KL2TR0001856 and Robert Wood Johnson Foundation grant 72858.