Jeff Sessions: A mental throwback to the 70’s & 80’s “war on drugs mindset” ?

Jeff Sessions Wants To Unleash The DEA On States That Have Legalized Medical Marijuana

Jeff Sessions Wants To Unleash The DEA On States That Have Legalized Medical Marijuana

https://www.civilized.life/articles/jeff-sessions-medical-marijuana-dea/

Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants permission to crack down on medical marijuana across the United States. Last month, Trump’s top law enforcer wrote a letter to Congress asking them to remove the only thing stopping him from prosecuting state-legalized medical marijuana industries and patients.

The letter – which was first reported on by Tom Angell of MassRoots – specifically asks Congress not to renew the Rohrabacher-Farr amendment – a federal budget rider that prevents the Department of Justice and the DEA from using any money to enforce cannabis prohibition in states that have legalized medical marijuana. Right now, that rider is the only thing keeping the attorney general from cracking down on everyone involved in the industry – from state-legalized growers, to dispensary workers to patients. But Sessions wants that leash taken off the DEA.

“I believe it would be unwise for Congress to restrict the discretion of the Department to fund particular prosecutions, particularly in the midst of an historic drug epidemic and potentially long-term uptick in violent crime,” Sessions wrote. “The Department must be in a position to use all laws available to combat the transnational drug organizations and dangerous drug traffickers who threaten American lives.”

Sessions’ War on Facts

There are two glaring problems with Attorney General Sessions’ arguments. First off, he is perversely trying to link America’s opioid epidemic to cannabis use, even though studies have consistently found that cannabis does not lead people to abuse harder drugs like heroin. In fact, recent scientific studies suggest that medical marijuana could actually help wean addicts off of opioids. So blaming the epidemic on marijuana is like blaming starvation on food.

Cracking down on medical marijuana would force more patients across the country to use the prescription pills that do lead to opioid addiction. So instead of fixing this public health crisis, Sessions’ plan would likely fan the flames of an epidemic that claimed the lives of over 55,000 Americans last year.

The second problem is that the connection that Sessions is trying to make between marijuana legalization and violent crime is also contrary to fact. A 2014 study published by PLOS One found that marijuana legalization “may be correlated with a reduction in homicide and assault rates” in legal states. More recently, a study published in January 2016 in the Journal of Drug Issues found that “There is no evidence of negative spillover effects from medical marijuana laws (MMLs) on violent or property crime. Instead, we find significant drops in rates of violent crime associated with state MMLs.”

So if Sessions is serious about needing to put the DOJ in a “position to use all laws available to combat” international drug trafficking, why doesn’t he consider cannabis legalization? Allowing states to determine their own marijuana laws is healthier for the American people as well as the economy since the disastrous War on Drugs, which has wasted billions of taxpayer dollars, crammed more convicts into America’s overcrowded prisons and yet hasn’t curbed illicit drug use.

Will Congress Unleash the DEA?

Congress has not issued a response to Sessions’ letter, so we don’t know if they will give in to his request. But at least some members are speaking out against the attorney general.

“Mr. Sessions stands athwart an overwhelming majority of Americans and even, sadly, against veterans and other suffering Americans who we now know conclusively are helped dramatically by medical marijuana,” a spokesman for Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-California) told The Washington Post. Rep. Rohrabacher, incidentally, is the same Rohrabacher whose name appears on the budget rider protecting medical marijuana. He’s also the first sitting congressperson to step out of the cannabis closet, so Sessions will face fierce opposition from him on the issue.

And the American people will also be a major obstacle in the way of Sessions’ dream of renewing the War on Drugs. Nearly 80 percent of North Americans support legalizing marijuana in some form, according to Civilized’s 2017 Cannabis Culture Poll,. That means only one in five Americans oppose reforming the country’s cannabis laws.

So when it comes to America’s marijuana policy, Jeff Sessions is basically a talking fossil from the prohibition era. 

Mexican Cartels: Find a need and fulfill it… make GOBS of TAX FREE MONEY !!!

Mexican drug cartels could be behind deadly fake Percocet pills

http://www.11alive.com/news/mexican-drug-cartels-could-be-behind-deadly-fake-percocet-pills/448080815

Federal agents believe Mexican drug cartels could be linked to a deadly wave of fake Percocet pills moving through Georgia.

The Georgia Department of Public Health said that at least five people are suspected to have died and dozens more have been hospitalized after overdosing from the pills in central Georgia.

Last week, the GBI’s crime lab said that initial tests indicated that the fake yellow pills that read “Percocet” are a mixture of two synthetic opioids. One of the drugs is consistent with fentanyl analogue.

The Drug Enforcement Agency said the fake pills are a problem on the national level now entering Georgia. The DEA is investigating possible ties to Mexico.

“There is a concerted effort by these cartels to press fentanyl into pills illicitly and sell them,” said DEA Special Agent Dan Salder.

The DEA is working with local law enforcement in central Georgia to gather details about the recent overdoses in hopes of finding the original source.

“So I don’t think we know definitely as of yet, but I would say anytime that you’re seeing an explosion of a particular drug, it is coming from these cartels that impact us here in Georgia,” Salder said.

The fifth death in central Georgia possibly triggered by fake Percocet happened Sunday. A 34-year-old man who was found unconscious Friday died two days later.

Georgia Poison Control recently noticed the trend of overdoses all with similar symptoms. Doctors at their offices said the patients’ outcome depends on how quickly they get help.

“These synthetic — who knows what — causes people to stop breathing, so the longer that you’re without oxygen and supportive care possibly could mean a more severe outcome for the patient,” said Dr. Stephanie Hon of Georgia Poison Control.

Hon said that three suspected overdoses happened over the weekend — which was down from the previous week.

“Not as heavy as last week, so I don’t know if things are kind of quieting down or calming down, but about three of the unconfirmed suspected cases that meet our definition for the cluster,” she said.

While the cluster of overdoses possibly caused by fake pills is in central Georgia, the DEA believes it could spread to Atlanta.

“I think a fair assessment would be that it is just a matter of time, Salder said. “Obviously we are close to central and middle Georgia. Most oftentimes, drugs transit through here in Atlanta and go to our smaller counties.”

The DEA reports there is a large market for selling fentanyl-laced pills. A single kilo of the drug can sell for anywhere between $4,000 to $7,000, with a million one-milligram pills being made from the kilo.

US officials are starting to treat opioid companies like Big Tobacco — and suing them

US officials are starting to treat opioid companies like Big Tobacco — and suing them

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/us-officials-are-starting-to-treat-opioid-companies-like-big-tobacco-%e2%80%94-and-suing-them/ar-BBCfoAG

You can expect more lawsuits against opioid companies in 2017.

It is impossible to talk about the causes of the opioid epidemic without pointing to the manufacturers and distributors that marketed and proliferated these dangerous pills. Yet over the past several years, these multibillion-dollar companies have avoided much in the way of serious accountability.

Until — maybe — now.

This year, multiple lawsuits have been launched against opioid manufacturers and distributors. With the opioid crisis now having resulted in more than 300,000 deadly opioid overdoses since 1999 (greater than the population of Cincinnati), there’s a push to hold accountable the people and companies behind the products that spawned the epidemic.

The latest high-profile lawsuit came from Ohio, which sued five opioid manufacturers and their subsidiaries. The state’s Republican attorney general, Mike DeWine, said that these companies knowingly misled patients and physicians about the drugs’ risks.

“They knew they were wrong, but they did it anyway — and they continue to do it,” DeWine said in a statement. “Despite all evidence to the contrary about the addictive nature of these pain medications, they are doing precious little to take responsibility for their actions and to tell the public the truth.”

DeWine even compared opioid manufacturers to tobacco companies, arguing in the lawsuit that opioid manufacturers are “borrowing a page from Big Tobacco’s playbook.”

Previously, the Cherokee Nation also made headlines when it announced it was suing opioid distributors and pharmacies, including CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart, for their involvement in supplying the pills to the Cherokee population. At the center of their claim: data that shows 845 million milligrams of opioids were distributed in the 14 counties that make up the Cherokee Nation — which, if you assume an average pill size of 20 milligrams, amounts to 360 pills for each prescription opioid user in the Cherokee Nation.

© Provided by Vox.com

These lawsuits get to the two major legal arguments that different jurisdictions are raising against opioid makers and distributors:

1. Starting in the mid-1990s, opioid manufacturers unleashed a misleading marketing push underplaying the risks of prescription opioids and exaggerating the drugs’ proven benefits. This, the lawsuits argue, adds up to false advertising with deadly consequences — by encouraging doctors to overprescribe the pills and getting patients to think the pills were safe and effective.

2. Opioid distributors supplied a ton of these pills, even when they should have known they were going to people who were misusing the drugs. This is backed by data that shows that in some counties and states, there were more prescribed bottles of painkillers than there were people — a sign that something was going very wrong. Federal and some state laws require distributors to keep an eye on the supply chain to ensure their products aren’t falling in the wrong hands. Letting these drugs proliferate, the lawsuits say, violates those laws.

Opioid manufacturers and distributors, of course, ferociously deny these allegations. While some suits have been settled, and some executives have even been criminally convicted for their involvement in the epidemic in the past, opioid companies vigorously reject the argument that they have carelessly fueled the current drug crisis. And so far, what the companies have paid by and large amounts to peanuts compared with the profits they’ve taken in from the drugs.

Still, more lawsuits are likely coming. According to the lawyers I’ve talked to who have worked and advised on these cases, a growing number of jurisdictions are showing interest in such legal challenges. The ultimate hope is this could all lead to some sort of massive settlement — one that would finally quash the practices that helped lead to the deadliest drug overdose crisis in American history.

The case against opioid makers: false advertising

Ohio’s central claim against opioid manufacturers is that these companies knew — or at least should have known — that their products weren’t safe or effective, yet they advertised their products as safe and effective anyway. The state’s lawsuit goes after five opioid manufacturers and their subsidiaries: Purdue Pharma, Endo, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (and subsidiary Cephalon), Johnson & Johnson (and subsidiary Janssen Pharmaceuticals), and Allergan.

The lawsuit cites several examples of misleading marketing: An Endo-sponsored website, PainKnowledge.com, in 2009 claimed that “[p]eople who take opioids as prescribed usually do not become addicted.” Janssen approved and distributed a patient education guide in 2009 that attempted to counter the “myth” that opioids are addictive, claiming that “[m]any studies show that opioids are rarely addictive when used properly for the management of chronic pain.” Purdue sponsored a publication from the American Pain Foundation, which is heavily funded by opioid companies, claiming that the risk of addiction is less than 1 percent among children prescribed opioids — suggesting pain is undertreated and opioids are necessary.

This is only a small sampling. In total, DeWine claims opioid companies spent “millions of dollars on promotional activities and materials that falsely deny or trivialize the risks of opioids while overstating the benefits of using them for chronic pain.”

Contrary to opioid companies’ claims, there has been evidence for literally centuries that opioids are highly addictive. Some of their marketing, in fact, explicitly tried to debunk this well-known fact: They characterized the understanding that opioids are addictive and potentially deadly as “opiophobia.” They latched onto a five-sentence letter to a medical journal that, with nearly no proof, claimed addiction among opioid patients is rare. (One author of the letter later said he was “mortified” at what drugmakers had done.) And they directly communicated with doctors — through videos, pamphlets, and other marketing — to foster the idea that new opioids on the market were safe and effective.

The current epidemic is proof of what we already knew: As opioid companies saw their profits increase, so too did drug overdose deaths and treatment admissions.

As opioid painkiller sales increased, more people got addicted — and died.© Provided by Vox.com As opioid painkiller sales increased, more people got addicted — and died.
Annual Review of Public Health

It’s not just the addiction claims, though. Opioid companies also misled doctors and the public about the effectiveness of their drugs.

As an extensive Los Angeles Times investigation found, Purdue’s opioid OxyContin was marketed for its supposed ability to provide 12 hours of pain relief. But as Harriet Ryan, Lisa Girion, and Scott Glover reported, “Even before OxyContin went on the market, clinical trials showed many patients weren’t getting 12 hours of relief. Since the drug’s debut in 1996, the company has been confronted with additional evidence, including complaints from doctors, reports from its own sales reps and independent research.”

This was critical to Purdue’s competitive advantage: If it really didn’t provide 12-hour relief, then it wasn’t more effective than other similar painkillers on the market. In the face of the evidence, though, Purdue stood by its claim for years. And it told doctors that if patients weren’t seeing the promised results, then the problem was that doses were too low.

These efforts, it seems, were in the name of profit. One sales memo uncovered by the Times was literally titled “$$$$$$$$$$$$$ It’s Bonus Time in the Neighborhood!”

This is alarming for public health: As the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention warned, higher doses significantly increase the risk of overdose and addiction.

The Los Angeles Times investigation found, “More than half of long-term OxyContin users are on doses that public health officials consider dangerously high, according to an analysis of nationwide prescription data conducted for The Times.”

Opioid makers’ claims that their drugs are an effective treatment for chronic pain are similarly faulty. There’s simply no good scientific evidence that opioid painkillers can actually treat long-term chronic pain as patients grow tolerant of opioids’ effects — but there’s plenty of evidence that prolonged use can result in very bad complications, including a higher risk of addiction, overdose, and death. (Again, this has all been known for at least decades. Opium, morphine, and heroin have been around for a long time.)

Yet opioid makers were highly influential in perpetuating the claim that their drugs can treat chronic pain. Several public health experts explained the recent history of opioid marketing in the Annual Review of Public Health, detailing Purdue Pharma’s involvement after it put OxyContin on the market in the mid-1990s:

Between 1996 and 2002, Purdue Pharma funded more than 20,000 pain-related educational programs through direct sponsorship or financial grants and launched a multifaceted campaign to encourage long-term use of [opioid painkillers] for chronic non-cancer pain. As part of this campaign, Purdue provided financial support to the American Pain Society, the American Academy of Pain Medicine, the Federation of State Medical Boards, the Joint Commission, pain patient groups, and other organizations. In turn, these groups all advocated for more aggressive identification and treatment of pain, especially use of [opioid painkillers].

By encouraging long-term prescriptions for chronic pain, opioid companies fueled the epidemic. As a CDC study found, the risk of dependency, which can turn into addiction, dramatically increases the longer one uses opioids.

This is the kind of marketing that led Ohio to file a lawsuit. A similar challenge from Mississippi is going through the courts right now. Local jurisdictions in California, Illinois, and New York state have filed similar challenges. Kentucky previously settled with Purdue (for $24 million) and Janssen (for nearly $16 million) in cases alleging misleading marketing.

In 2007, Purdue Pharma and three of its top executives paid more than $630 million in federal fines for their misleading marketing. The three executives were also criminally convicted, each sentenced to three years of probation and 400 hours of community service.

As the opioid epidemic has continued, however, more and more lawsuits are expected to come.

I reached out to the companies named in Ohio’s lawsuit. Only Purdue gave a comment on the record: “We share the attorney general’s concerns about the opioid crisis and we are committed to working collaboratively to find solutions. OxyContin accounts for less than 2% of the opioid analgesic prescription market nationally, but we are an industry leader in the development of abuse-deterrent technology, advocating for the use of prescription drug monitoring programs and supporting access to Naloxone — all important components for combating the opioid crisis.”

The case against opioid distributors: allowing diversion

Beyond the false advertising charges, there’s a separate legal argument, dubbed the “diversion theory” by some of its proponents. This argument has so far been leveled against companies that distribute opioids, particularly in a recent lawsuit by the Cherokee Nation against big names like the McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, AmerisourceBergen, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart.

Under federal and some state laws, opioid distributors have a legal obligation to stop controlled substances from going to illicit purposes and misuse. The diversion theory argues that these distributors clearly did not do that: As the opioid epidemic spiraled out of control, and as some counties and states had more prescriptions than people, it should have become perfectly clear that something was going wrong — yet, the claim goes, distributors continued to let the drugs proliferate.

Mike Canty, an attorney at the New York–based firm Labaton Sucharow who’s advising states and other jurisdictions on opioid-related legal challenges, drew a comparison between opioid distributors and credit card companies.

“[Credit card companies say], ‘Someone tried to make a very large purchase on your account in another state and we flagged it as suspicious and stopped it from going through.’ That’s what distributors should be doing,” Canty said. “For example, there’s a small town with 500 residents, and the local pharmacies order a million pills from the distributors. That should set off an alarm bell from a compliance standpoint or a quality control standpoint, where the distributors say, ‘Wait a minute, what’s going on here? We need to investigate this order. And until it passes muster, we won’t ship.’”

The Cherokee Nation has some fairly alarming numbers behind its claim, suggesting there were literally hundreds of pills on average for each opioid user in the Cherokee Nation.

This is a national problem. The CDC, for example, put out 2012 data that found there were more painkiller prescriptions than people in several states.

Some states have more painkiller prescriptions than people.© Provided by Vox.com Some states have more painkiller prescriptions than people.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

West Virginia’s case is particularly striking. It is the state hardest hit by the epidemic, suffering the highest rate of opioid overdose deaths in 2015. A previous investigation by the Charleston Gazette-Mail in West Virginia found that from 2007 to 2012, drug firms poured a total of 780 million painkillers into the state — which has a total population of about 1.8 million. Some of the numbers were even more absurd at the local level: The small town of Kermit has a population of 392, but a single pharmacy there received 9 million hydrocodone pills over two years from out-of-state drug companies.

“When you have 140 prescriptions being written for every 100 people, you know that people have failed to meet their obligations,” Serena Hallowell, who’s also with Labaton Sucharow, said. “And they’re not just ethical obligations, which I would say they have too. They’re obligations under state and federal law and their own industry guidelines as well.”

The Cherokee Nation’s lawsuit is the first to really push against all of these opioid distributors at once. But other jurisdictions have pursued legal challenges as well; West Virginia, for one, settled with Cardinal Health and AmerisourceBergen for $36 million in payouts (although the companies denied wrongdoing), and several counties in the state are pursuing new legal challenges.

Meanwhile, some distributors have already been dealt penalties for their negligence. Just this year, for example, McKesson agreed to pay a $150 million settlement to the Department of Justice for failing to report suspicious orders of pharmaceutical drugs, particularly opioids, and stopped sales of at least some distribution centers in multiple states. And that came after McKesson paid a more than $13 million fine for similar violations in 2008.

CVS, Walgreens, and Cardinal Health paid fines, sometimes multiple times, for similar violations in the past several years.

Similar challenges could, in theory, be tried against opioid manufacturers as well. The Drug Enforcement Administration, for one, previously pursued one of the nation’s largest opioid makers, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, for the proliferation of its pills in Florida since 1999. But as the Washington Post found, the investigations went nowhere. In the end, the company agreed to pay, without admitting wrongdoing, just $35 million to settle the case with the federal government — far from the billions in dollars the DEA reportedly hoped for, and a tiny fraction of the $3.4 billion in revenue the company reported in fiscal year 2016.

I contacted the opioid distributors named in the Cherokee Nation’s suit for comment. AmerisourceBergen, Cardinal Health, and CVS said they are committed to stopping the misuse of their products, and that they will work closely with federal regulators to do so. Cardinal Health went further, arguing that it “is confident that the facts and the law are on our side, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against the plaintiff’s mischaracterization of those facts and misunderstanding of the law.”

One goal of the lawsuits: a tobacco-style settlement agreement

Although opioid manufacturers and distributors have already paid out some fairly high penalties and damages for their actions, the reality is that the total costs for the legal challenges so far don’t amount to much for these massive opioid companies. Hundreds of millions of dollars is obviously a lot of money for most people. But for companies that make billions of dollars a year, it’s not much.

Take Purdue Pharma. In 2007, it paid a penalty more than $630 million. But thanks to OxyContin, the company has reaped $31 billion in revenue since the mid-1990s. That fine adds up to just 2 percent of what the company has made in revenue, which isn’t much of a deterrent for Purdue. Indeed, Ohio’s lawsuit alleges that Purdue continued its misleading marketing after 2007 — citing, as one example, a 2011 pamphlet in which Purdue argued that signs of addiction are actually a form of “pseudoaddiction” that suggests someone needs more, not fewer, opioid painkillers to treat pain.

The crisis also likely demands far higher damages than a few hundred million dollars. A 2016 study, for instance, estimated the total economic burden of prescription opioid overdose, misuse, and addiction at $78.5 billion a year, about a third of which is due to higher health care and drug treatment costs. Many jurisdictions can’t afford to pay for these new expenses — and may need a big lawsuit settlement or legal damages to pay.

Richard Fields, an attorney with the Cherokee Nation case, put the cost for his clients in the hundreds of millions of dollars. “That’s an extraordinary sum for a sovereign nation of 350,000 people,” he said. “The suit is [in part] an effort to recover for what we think is a very direct harm caused by these companies.”

“But,” he added, “the hope is too that if enough attorneys general around the country bring these suits, they can do what the [federal government] hasn’t been able to do on its own.”

In the long term, one hope of the different lawsuits is that they’ll eventually snowball, leading to an outcome similar to what happened with tobacco companies in the ’90s.

A cigarette.© Provided by Vox.com A cigarette.

In 1998, big tobacco companies agreed to the Master Settlement Agreement with 46 states. This massive agreement forced tobacco companies to pay tens of billions in upfront and then annual payments, and it put major restrictions on the sale and marketing of tobacco products.

The parallels between the tobacco and opioid companies are clear: Both knew they were selling a dangerous product, yet they misled the public about it — leading people to get addicted and die. (And now that opioid companies are facing pressure at home, they are borrowing a page from big tobacco companies and taking their product internationally with the exact same kind of messaging, with claims that opioids are good for chronic pain and not very addictive.)

But there are some big differences that could make it much harder to get a tobacco-style settlement for opioids. The big one is that, unlike cigarettes at the time of the Master Settlement Agreement, opioids are already regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. This could effectively let opioid manufacturers and distributors punt responsibility to the FDA, since it, after all, approved these drugs for medical use. Jodi Avergun, a former chief of staff at the DEA and now a defense lawyer, told Reuters that this is a “fundamental weakness” of the current lawsuits.

There are other issues, like the involvement of the rest of the health care system in the opioid crisis, from medical boards to doctors to patients themselves. That all of this involved so many different actors could insulate opioid companies from carrying too much of the legal consequences. That’s especially true since some of these other actors have copped to serious negligence — the West Virginia Board of Pharmacy, for one, admitted that it didn’t enforce a law for reporting suspicious orders of narcotics for years.

“With tobacco, it really is an interaction between an industry and the consumer,” Keith Humphreys, a drug policy expert at Stanford University, told me. “In this case, there was supposed to be this intervening body that also failed. That doesn’t mean the pharmaceutical companies should get off, but … plenty of other people enabled it.”

Still, this is something that many levels of government are taking seriously. While they couldn’t offer details, the lawyers involved in some of these cases said they have been approached by several states. Fields in particular said to expect dozens more lawsuits just this year.

“Both Democrat and Republican attorneys general have expressed an interest in this,” Canty said. “They are serious about the epidemic. They are educated on the epidemic. They understand the magnitude of the problem and want be proactive in addressing it.”

I have been saying for WEEKS that the bureaucrats were viewing the end of the annual tobacco settlement payments money and that they had become FISCALLY ADDICTED to that money and had to start looking for another industry to go after to SUE and hopefully find a NEW SOURCE of revenue to feed that ADDICTION.

To a certain extent, bureaucrats cannot control their GREED… just think about it… there is a “sin tax” on Alcohol and Tobacco taxes, plus there is a sales tax on these products when they are sold.  Everyone in the retail/legal manufacturing/distribution of these products end up paying taxes on the profits they made on these products. Along with the property tax, employment taxes etc..etc.. that the bureaucracy extracts out of each business and individuals.

The bureaucrats make a product legal and tax the crap out of all those involved with the product and now they want to extract more monies out of the very entities involved in a particular industry… they did it with Tobacco … now they seem to be going after opiate manufacturers. Since hundred of millions of people have a medical necessity for many/most/all of these products… guess who is going to end up paying for any settlement out of this “GREED LAWSUIT ” ?

Even Moderate Drinking Changes Brain: Study

Even Moderate Drinking Changes Brain: Study

http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Health-News/moderate-drinking-changes-brain/2017/06/07/id/794639/?ns_mail_uid=38004974&ns_mail_job=1735839_06112017&s=al&dkt_nbr=fds1dvix

Drinking even moderate amounts of alcohol is linked to changes in brain structure and an increased risk of worsening brain function, scientists said on Tuesday.

In a 30-year study that looked at the brains of 550 middle-aged heavy drinkers, moderate drinkers and teetotallers, the researchers found people drank more alcohol had a greater risk of hippocampal atrophy – a form of brain damage that affects memory and spatial navigation.

 People who drank more than 30 units a week on average had the highest risk, but even those who drank moderately – between 14 and 21 units a week – were far more likely than abstainers to have hippocampal atrophy, the scientists said.

“And we found no support for a protective effect of light consumption on brain structure,” they added.

The research team – from the University of Oxford and University College London – said their results supported a recent lowering of drinking limit guidelines in Britain, but posed questions about limits recommended in the United States.

U.S. guidelines suggest that up to 24.5 units of alcohol a week is safe for men, but the study found increased risk of brain structure changes at just 14 to 21 units a week.

 A unit is defined as 10 milliliters (ml) of pure alcohol. There are roughly two in a large beer, nine in a bottle of wine and one in a 25 ml spirit shot.

Killian Welch, a Royal Edinburgh Hospital neuropsychiatrist who was not directly involved in the study, said the results, published in the BMJ British Medical Journal, underlined “the argument that drinking habits many regard as normal have adverse consequences for health”.

“We all use rationalizations to justify persistence with behaviors not in our long term interest. With (these results) justification of ‘moderate’ drinking on the grounds of brain health becomes a little harder,” he said.

 The study analyzed data on weekly alcohol intake and cognitive performance measured repeatedly over 30 years between 1985 and 2015 for 550 healthy men and women with an average age of 43 at the start of the study. Brain function tests were carried out at regular intervals, and at the end of the study participants were given a MRI brain scan.

After adjusting for several important potential confounders such as gender, education, social class, physical and social activity, smoking, stroke risk and medical history, the scientists found that higher alcohol consumption was associated with increased risk of brain function decline.

 Drinking more was also linked to poorer “white matter integrity” – a factor they described as critical when it comes to cognitive functioning.

The researchers noted that with an observational study like this, no firm conclusions can be drawn about cause and effect. They added, however, that the findings could have important public health implications for a large sector of the population.

Opioid crisis: Pain patients pushed to SUICIDE ?

 Opioid crisis: Pain patients pushed to the brink

Overdose prevention efforts have had unintended — and dire — consequences

www.bendbulletin.com/health/5342867-151/opioid-crisis-pain-patients-pushed-to-the-brink

Three weeks after her last appointment, Sonja Mae Jonsson got a call from her doctor’s office in Waldport, telling her she needed to come in. Her urine drug screen had tested positive for a drug she hadn’t been prescribed. The doctor would no longer prescribe her any pain medication.

Linda Jonsson, a registered nurse, had taken over her daughter’s care after a traumatic brain injury when she was 32, and carefully monitored her daughter’s medications. She pleaded with the clinic they had made a mistake. Without the pain medications, they would be condemning her daughter to a life of pain. But doctors had seen too many patients become addicted to painkillers and wind up overdosing. They were cutting her off.

A doctor in Lincoln City agreed to renew her medications until they could find a new pain specialist. For the next year, the Jonssons scoured the Oregon Coast for a pain clinic that would take her. They hadn’t found one a year later when her doctor left the area. Sonja felt she was out of options.

She swallowed an entire bottle of pills.

•••••

OxyContin 80 mg pills, photographed in the LA Times studio in 2013. Liz O. Baylen/Los Angeles Times/TNS
 

The nation’s struggle to corral the runaway opioid overdose epidemic with new restrictions on pain medications is backing pain patients into a corner. Patients are being dropped by their doctors, forced to cut their doses drastically and endure dangerous withdrawals, or abandoned to cope with a medically created opioid dependence on their own. Patients who have always taken their medications as prescribed say they are treated like drug addicts and are increasingly driven to despair.

Lost among the thousands of overdoses the health care system is trying to prevent is a small, but worrisome shadow effect of suicides among chronic pain patients who feel their suffering is the unintended consequence of the response.

“We all have a sense of desperation as the immense number of opioid deaths pile up, but the response is increasingly misdirected,” said Dr. Stefan Kertesz, an addiction medicine specialist at the University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine. “A significant number of chronic pain patients are killing themselves, and that should be a concern to society at large when people die as a result of something done to care for them.”

•••••

Editor’s note: There have been additional developments in this story related to a Bend Police investigation of Linda Jonsson and the circumstances of Sonja Mae Jonsson’s suicide. More details can be found here.

Sonja survived her suicide attempt, and her mother bought a metal lockbox to safeguard her pills. Sonja had been diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury in 2006 while living in Alaska. She told her mother a water tubing accident had affected her balance, and that she fell in her bathroom, hitting her head against a cast iron tub. She told her best friend that her husband had pushed her.

Divorced, broke and in constant pain, she moved to Depoe Bay in 2010 to live with her parents, Linda and Sven. Doctors at a pain clinic in Corvallis had developed a plan that included managing her pain with Percocet and oxycodone. The clinic in Waldport managed that plan, including monthly urine tests to check that she was actually taking the pills as prescribed.

A photo of Sonja Jonsson in her wedding dress. Diagnosed with a traumatic brain injury in 2010, she moved to Oregon to live with her parents. (Dean Guernsey/Bulletin photo)
 

The injury had changed her personality, and the normally sweet, outgoing woman was developing an increasingly difficult demeanor, prone to violent outbursts. She had become sensitive to loud noises and bright lights. There was little she could do but lie in bed in their mobile home just a stone’s throw from the ocean, tormented by noise of the neighbor’s radio. The pain, she told her mother, felt like an ax in the back of head.

•••••

How we got here

Opioid prescribing rose dramatically starting in the 1990s as drug companies exploited — some argue they created — a concern that doctors weren’t adequately treating pain. Sales reps told physicians that patients in legitimate pain wouldn’t become addicted, and regulators began tracking how well physicians treated pain. Every Oregon physician was required to undergo hours of training on pain management that emphasized liberal use of prescription opioids drugs like oxycodone or morphine.

Doctors and dentists were sending patients home with scores of pain pills. Many of those patients developed a physiological dependence on opioids and an increasing tolerance that required higher and higher doses to control their pain and stave off withdrawal. Pills were stolen or diverted to feed an increasing population with outright addiction.

Whether addictions started with a prescription or recreational use, the rate of addiction and overdose quickly spiraled out of control.

Markian Hawryluk is reporting this series during a yearlong Reporting Fellowship on Health Care Performance sponsored by the Association of Health Care Journalists and supported by The Commonwealth Fund. For the rest of the series so far, visit bendbulletin.com/opioids.

When pills became more expensive or harder to get, many turned to illicit opioids like heroin, and a black tar heroin distribution network expanded to meet demand. Dealers tried to extend their supply of heroin by adding a cheaper synthetic opiate called fentanyl that is 100 times more potent. Too much fentanyl in a dose of heroin creates a deadly combination that is now driving continued growth in overdose rates. By 2015, 91 Americans were dying each day from an opioid overdose. Health officials decided that to end the cycle, they had to stop the flood of pills.

While law enforcement shut down pill mills and medical boards targeted rogue doctors, the health system focused on reining in overprescribing.

In 2016, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, along with other health groups, issued prescribing guidelines to reduce the supply of pain pills. The guidelines emphasize a more judicious approach to prescribing, a careful weighing of the benefits and risks before starting a patient on painkillers or increasing the dose. Doctors should avoid prescribing patients more than 90 milligrams of morphine equivalent per day, the agency said, or carefully justify their decision to do so.

To get under that threshold, some doctors cut doses overnight. Some patients were referred to pain specialists. Others were dropped, left with no alternative than to go to the black market.

Anyone active in pain is getting contacted with a lot of very heart wrenching stories. You’re trying to curb abuse, but you’re actually making the medication less available for appropriate users.
— Dr. Daniel Carr, pain specialist at Tufts University, Boston

“It happens every day,” said Dr. Anna Lembke, a psychiatrist with Stanford University Medical Center, and author of a book on the prescription drug epidemic, titled “Drug Dealer, MD.” “Doctors suddenly realize that they have a patient who’s on a high dose or using in a risky way and just decide they’re going to bail. They tell patients, ‘I don’t treat pain anymore’ or ‘You’re too high risk.’”

Chronic pain patients who always took their medications as prescribed, who never refilled doses early or doctor-shopped to get extra pills, got caught up in the stampede.

“There are people who are totally innocent in this situation. They went to the doctor, they took their pills as prescribed, and they got cut off,” said Dr. Benjamin Schwartz, founder of Recovery Works Northwest, an addiction treatment practice in Portland.

Even patients on modest doses of opioids, well within the prescribing guidelines, may find themselves forced off their medications.

“Anyone active in pain is getting contacted with a lot of very heart-wrenching stories,” said Dr. Daniel Carr, a pain specialist at Tufts University in Boston. “You’re trying to curb abuse, but you’re actually making the medication less available for appropriate users.”

Past mistakes

For more than 15 years, Debra Bonanno has struggled with an intense pain in the center of her chest. Despite scores of tests and surgeries, doctors have never been able to find the cause. They prescribed her massive doses of extended-release morphine — up to 900 mg per day — to keep her pain in check. In 2015, Washington state passed a new opioid prescribing law requiring anyone taking more than 120 mg of morphine equivalent dose to see a pain specialist. With no such specialists in her hometown of Spokane, Washington, Bonanno traveled to Seattle. When doctors there heard her daily morphine dose, they looked at each other in disbelief. Even if they started her taper that day, one of them would have to write the prescription to get her started.

“Nobody wanted to write it for anything that high,” she said.

She agreed to a taper plan and after six months weaned herself off the morphine. Now she must stretch a supply of 30 pills of Dilaudid — a fast-acting opioid painkiller — the entire month.

“Sometimes I’m afraid to take some because I’m worried about the next attack,” she said. With 10 days left before her next refill, she had just two pills remaining. “There are some days that I literally crawl to the other room.”

Click image to view in window you can zoom

 
 

Only one of 12 recommendations in the CDC guidelines addresses what to do with patients like Bonanno who are already on high doses. Recommendation No. 7 calls for physicians to weigh the benefits and harms of opioid prescriptions for patients every three months. If the benefits do not outweigh the harms, doctors should look at other therapies, and work with the patient to taper to lower doses or to stop taking it entirely.

Kertesz said many have misread that to mean that they should reduce doses in patients who are currently stable and that reducing dosages actually helps that person.

“The CDC guidelines absolutely did not recommend that practice, and there’s not a shred of evidence to show that it is safe or effective,” he said. “And we have a mountain of anecdotal evidence to show that it causes the death of the patient in a certain number of instances.”

At the National Rx Drug Abuse & Heroin Summit in Atlanta in April, Dr. Deborah Dowell, a CDC senior medical adviser and coauthor of the guidelines, said that approach was not the authors’ intent.

“We do hear stories about people being involuntarily taken off opioids,” she said. “We specifically advise against that in the guidelines.”

Patients should be tapered off medications slowly, she said, at a rate of 10 percent per week, even slower for those who have been on their medications long term. For many medications, a large sudden drop in dose can have dangerous effects. What makes opioids so addictive also creates some of the worst symptoms of withdrawal.

Sudden tapers

When she moved from Canada to Oregon several years ago, Michele Mullenberg had been taking extended-release morphine sulfate for nine years to stem the pain of psoriatic arthritis. Doctors in La Pine were hesitant to renew her prescriptions, but after reviewing her medical records and calling the clinic in Canada, they reluctantly agreed. But when a blood test at one appointment showed Mullenberg had been drinking, her doctor gave her an ultimatum: quit drinking or stop the morphine. Frustrated with being treated “like a drug addict,” she lashed out, “Fine, take me off.”

Michele Mullenberg has been diagnosed with psoriatic arthritis in her hands and other joints. Without prescription painkillers, she struggles to be more active. (Dean Guernsey/Bulletin photo)
 

For the next six weeks she suffered through the consequences of her rash decision to quit cold turkey. Constant nausea, terrible diarrhea — she felt horribly ill.

“It was living hell,” the 68-year-old widow said. “I will never go back on morphine again unless it was going to be for my lifetime. I’m not going to go through that again.”

But the loss of her pain medications has had a profound effect on her life. She used to go on long walks, but now moving has become painful. She can’t vacuum or clean her house.

“It feels like everything is a whole lot more effort,” she said. “It’s almost embarrassing.”

Without her pain meds, her world has become much smaller.

Melissa Weimer, an assistant professor of medicine at Oregon Health & Science University, said prescribing guidelines were never meant as an across-the-board mandate.

“If a provider just applies them without doing any due diligence or evaluation of the patient, well, likely, you’re going to have a poor outcome,” she said.

Weimer recently looked at what happened when a single clinic tried to taper its high-dose opioid patients off their pain medications. Of 116 patients, less than half were able to successfully drop their doses below the recommended level within a year.

“In a strange way, we train people to basically increase doses without thought, and we never trained anybody to decrease doses of opioids,” Weimer said. “There was never an exit strategy.”

Nonetheless, the CDC guidelines and its dose threshold are quickly becoming a de facto mandate, a bright line to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate opioid use, and a yardstick by which to evaluate doctors.

“The guidelines very strongly emphasize dose and dose alone as the way of understanding the risk of overdose and risk of death,” Kertesz said. “And that really isn’t a scientific understanding of the research that’s been done on overdose risk.”

He gives the example of a patient with chronic obstructive lung disease stemming from a lifetime of smoking on 270 milligrams of morphine equivalent dose. That patient may be at lower risk for overdose than someone on just 60 milligrams but with bipolar disorder and anxiety.

While studies suggest that those on higher doses of prescription opioids are at higher risk for overdose, it’s not clear that opioids alone are responsible. Most overdose deaths involve multiple substances in people with complex health and psychological and social problems. It’s often a combination of factors that leads to their death.

Some insurance companies won’t cover opioids above the CDC threshold, and health systems are setting hard ceilings with forced tapers to get patients under their limits.

The National Center for Quality Analysis has proposed evaluating health plans based on how many of their patients are on high opioid doses. Many health systems, including the Veterans Administration, are establishing dashboards where doctors can see in real time their opioid prescribing data.

“When a doctor cuts the dose or discharges the patient, it helps the doctor look good in the eyes of their employer, in the eyes of the regulators, even if the patient dies,” Kertesz said. “I cannot think of any other situation in healthcare where having your patient die actually makes you look better.”

Click image to view in window you can zoom

 
 

At least 11 states have passed legislation based on an opioid threshold. Maine went so far as to ban prescriptions of more than 100 mg of morphine equivalent per day, other than for cancer or end-of-life care, and requires that all patients be tapered below that limit by July 1.

Patients can be cut off from their medications as law enforcement shuts down clinics with risky prescribing practices. When the Drug Enforcement Agency shut down a pain clinic in Baltimore in May, it closed the doors on thousands of patients. With no advance warning, the city’s health department could do little more than warn hospitals in the area to be prepared for a surge in overdoses.

Many like to think of pain patients and individuals with addictions as two distinct groups, but studies suggest there may be more crossover than realized. One study that interviewed 150 young adults in New York and Los Angeles who took illegally obtained pain relievers found that more than half had severe pain, and a quarter had been denied prescription opioids to treat it.

The data show that young adults are more likely to overdose on heroin, while older adults are more likely to die from prescription opioids. In part that’s because physicians are more reluctant to prescribe opioids to young adults than to older patients. But increasingly, even older patients are having trouble getting pain killers from their doctors.

“We don’t know whether they would go to purchase drugs on the streets,” Kertesz said. “But we are seeing those people kill themselves.”

•••••

Struggling to care for her 42-year old daughter alone 24 hours a day, Linda drove Sonja to Bend last summer, hoping to find a foster care home. In August, as Linda was doing laundry in a Bend motel, Sonja asked her mother for one last favor.

“I’ve got to leave this world, and I don’t want to do this alone,” she said.

“Sonja, you can’t ask me to do this,” Linda said.

“Mommy, I don’t want to die,” she told her, “but I have to.”

Unwilling to discuss the notion any longer, Linda said she turned back to the laundry as Sonja slipped quietly from the room.

Linda Jonsson thinks about her daughter Sonja while sitting in her trailer with her husband, Sven, in Depoe Bay on Friday, May 26, 2017. Sonja committed suicide in August 2016 after struggling with chronic pain for many years. (Dean Guernsey/Bulletin photo)
 

Considering suicide

The role of prescribing limits and involuntary tapers in patient suicides may be hard to tease out. Chronic pain patients have higher rates of suicide regardless, and studies have shown the risk of suicide increases when patients are prescribed opioids. And some opioid deaths considered accidental overdoses may in fact be suicides.
A 2015 Australian study of chronic pain patients found only one factor was significantly correlated with suicide ideation: how much the pain interfered with their ability to live their lives.

Lana Kirby, a retired paralegal and chronic pain patient from Ellenton, Florida, has collected more than 2,300 survey responses from pain patients about their experiences under the new CDC guidelines. While the survey wasn’t a random sampling, some 68 percent said they’d had their doses lowered, and 56 percent had been discharged from a physician’s practice. More than half said they have considered suicide.

“They’re confined to their home and in some cases, they’re confined to their beds. Many of these people have plans and those plans include rational suicide,” said Terri Lewis, a patient advocate and rehabilitation specialist at Southern Illinois University. “For some of these folks, there is nothing else that provides hope. It’s the best of all bad solutions.”

Pain specialists say most chronic pain patients will do better by reducing their opioids and relying more on other pain management modalities, such as physical therapy, yoga, acupuncture or mindfulness training. But that can be a long, slow process, and in many rural areas, those alternative approaches are just not available.

We screwed up as a medical community massively around prescribing opioids for persistent pain, and I think we now have an equally misguided notion that we can just take away those opioids and insert appropriate evidence based therapy.
— Dr. Rachel Solotaroff, medical director for Central City Concern, Portland

“We screwed up as a medical community massively around prescribing opioids for persistent pain, and I think we now have an equally misguided notion that we can just take away those opioids and insert appropriate evidence-based therapy,” said Dr. Rachel Solotaroff, medical director for Central City Concern in Portland. “It’s not a Lego set. You can’t just take out one piece and insert another.”

Dr. Jessica LeBlanc, a primary care physician with Mosaic Medical in Bend, said it can often take a year of talking before a patient is ready to begin a taper, and then another year or two before they can successfully implement the alternative strategies and reduce their dosages.

“Patients have already been discriminated against because they’re on opiates, so the first things we talk about probably should not be about weaning their medications,” she says. “It should be more about what else is working for them. What more can we do?”

Dr. Andrew Kolodny, co-director of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing, said much of the backlash about prescribing guidelines and legislation has come from patients scared they will be forced off their medications.

“These patient groups are being very effectively manipulated by what I would refer to as the opioid lobby,” he said. “The opioid lobby is able to manipulate them and tell them that they’re being basically punished because of the drug abusers, and through the efforts of CDC and PROP or state legislatures to stop the drug abusers, that they are being made to pay the price.”

But he argues that many of those patients aren’t getting the benefits from opioids they think they are.

“I see them as victims of our era of aggressive prescribing,” he said. “And we need a compassionate response.”

For the 10 million Americans on long term opioids, doctors should help them reduce their dose, and if possible, come off the drugs altogether, he said. Some may need medications, like methadone or buprenorphine, that act on the same receptors as opioids without providing the same type of high or the same overdose risk.

“We’re just starting to make some efforts on supply control, but we have not done an adequate job at all — not even close — of seeing that people who are opioid addicted can access treatment,” Kolodny said. “They have to see that treatment is easier to access than heroin or pills.”

In this Aug. 5, 2010 file photo, a pharmacy tech poses for a picture with hydrocodone bitartrate and acetaminophen tablets, the generic version of Vicodin.
(AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki, File)
 

A health disaster

Critics say that reducing access to opioids without adequately expanding access to treatment is harming patients.

“The reduction of the opioid analgesic supply has been an unmitigated disaster,” said Leo Beletsky, assistant professor of law and health sciences at Northeastern University in Boston.

The focus on reducing supply, he said, does little to help those with existing addictions or to reduce their risk of overdose, and doesn’t address the root causes of addiction. Prescription drug monitoring programs were established to better identify when patients were drug-seeking or doctor-shopping. But doctors often reacted by firing those patients. A recent survey of nearly 800 primary care practices found that 78 percent had discharged a patient for violating their chronic pain or controlled substance policies.

“That’s a huge public health disaster,” Beletsky said. “You want to have those patients in your practice, you want to focus on them, you want wrap them in care, you want to engage them on an even more intense level.”

When those patients are cut off from health care services, their risk increases tenfold, he said. “That person is probably not going to show up in the health care system again until they overdose.”

Linda collected the laundry and returned to her motel room at 8 o’clock that evening. She saw the metal lockbox lying open on the table, the padlock broken. She didn’t need to read the note her daughter had written. She knew what Sonja had done and why she had done it. After intervening in two previous suicides, Linda couldn’t interfere anymore.

•••••

“I just wasn’t going to fight it anymore. She tried so hard, but she couldn’t handle the pain,” Linda said. “I held her for a while and we said our goodbyes.”

I just wasn’t going to fight it anymore. She tried so hard, but she couldn’t handle the pain. I held her for a while and we said our goodbyes.
— Linda Jonsson

Sonja looked up at her mother one last time, and said, “I’m sleepy. I’m really sleepy.”

Linda lay down on the bed next to her and watched her daughter sleep. At 8:30 the next morning, she heard Sonja take one last gasp. She checked her pulse.

Sonja had asked her mom not to call anyone until she could no longer be revived. Linda waited 15 minutes and then called the police.

“My daughter has passed,” she told them.

The day before, Sonja had called her friend Alexander Myhill. They had become close years earlier in Alaska and he remained a lifeline to the outside world. Sonja talked about the burden she had become on her mother. She felt alone. She felt hopeless. She felt defeated.

“‘I just can’t do this anymore, I just cannot live with this level of pain any longer,’” he recalled her saying. “It was not her wish to die. She wanted to live, but there’s no way a person can live with that kind of pain for that long, and not just simply give up.”

Myhill had previously stopped Sonja from killing herself, calling the police in Depoe Bay when he heard her plans. This time he didn’t try to talk her out of it. He asked about her fondest memories and she recounted stories of going camping in Alaska.

Sonja had once been a vibrant, independent young woman. She would camp and fish all alone at a remote lake in the Alaskan backcountry in prime grizzly bear territory. Now she had become entirely dependent on others.

“She realized the only way she could go back there was in her mind,” Myhill said. “She enjoyed closing her eyes and thinking about those places. They brought her peace.”

Help us report on the opioid overdose epidemic

We’re interested in hearing about how the opioid epidemic and the public health response to it are affecting patients and doctors, family members and addicts. Fill out our online survey at bendbulletin.com/opioidsurvey . There are separate sections for patients, providers, family members and those with addictions. Please know these responses will be held confidential and nothing will be shared without express permission.

Nine months later, Linda said she still sees her daughter every night when she closes her eyes. It brings her no peace.

“(The clinic) told me she’ll be one of those drug overdose statistics,” Linda said. “It was just the opposite. People are killing themselves because they can’t handle the pain and they’re not being helped.”

— Reporter: 541-633-2162, mhawryluk@bendbulletin.com

 

So much COMMON SENSE…. explained in a 15 minute seminar

Pharmacist United for Change PLEASE SHARE ….

PLEASE SHARE ….

New closed Pharmacist FB page     https://www.facebook.com/groups/1909588882655993/

Pharmacist United for Change

No automatic alt text available.

FDA: removing first opiate from the market… due to it being abused… what is next ?

Image result for graphic opana bottle

FDA Asks Endo Pharma to Take Opana ER Off the Market

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/881337

UPDATE:   Number for FDA is 1-888-463-6332 option 3, then 2, then 4 to get pharmacist about Opana ER. If it goes and it will take the generic too.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asked Endo Pharmaceuticals to remove its abuse-deterrent extended-release formulation of oxymorphone (Opana ER) from the market.

“After careful consideration, the agency is seeking removal based on its concern that the benefits of the drug may no longer outweigh its risks,” the FDA said in a statement.

This marks the first time the FDA has taken steps to remove a currently marketed opioid pain medication from sale because of the public health consequences of abuse.

“We are facing an opioid epidemic — a public health crisis, and we must take all necessary steps to reduce the scope of opioid misuse and abuse,” FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, MD, said in a statement.

 “We will continue to take regulatory steps when we see situations where an opioid product’s risks outweigh its benefits, not only for its intended patient population but also in regard to its potential for misuse and abuse,” Dr Gottlieb said.

The FDA’s decision is based on a review of available postmarketing data, which demonstrated a significant shift in the route of abuse of Opana ER from nasal to injection after the product’s reformulation. Injection abuse of reformulated Opana ER has been associated with an outbreak of HIV infection and hepatitis C, as well as cases of thrombotic microangiopathy.

“The abuse and manipulation of reformulated Opana ER by injection has resulted in a serious disease outbreak. When we determined that the product had dangerous unintended consequences, we made a decision to request its withdrawal from the market,” said Janet Woodcock, MD, director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. “This action will protect the public from further potential for misuse and abuse of this product.”

As previously reported by Medscape Medical News, on March 17, an FDA advisory panel of independent experts voted 18 to 8 that the benefits of reformulated Opana ER for relief of severe pain no longer outweigh its risks.

Opana ER was first approved in 2006 for the management of moderate-to-severe pain when a continuous, around-the-clock opioid analgesic is needed for an extended period. In 2012, Endo replaced the original formulation of Opana ER with a new formulation intended to make the drug resistant to physical and chemical manipulation for abuse by snorting or injecting.

“While the product met the regulatory standards for approval, the FDA determined that the data did not show that the reformulation could be expected to meaningfully reduce abuse and declined the company’s request to include labeling describing potentially abuse-deterrent properties for Opana ER. Now, with more information about the risks of the reformulated product, the agency is taking steps to remove the reformulated Opana ER from the market,” the agency explains in the statement.

The FDA has requested that the company voluntarily remove reformulated Opana ER from the market. Should the company choose not to remove the product, the FDA said it will take steps to formally require its removal by withdrawing approval.

The agency will “continue to examine the risk-benefit profile of all approved opioid analgesic products and take further actions as appropriate as a part of our response to this public health crisis.”

Man’s best friend at risk of catching the FLU ?

Pet owners warned as highly contagious dog flu spreads after dog show

http://www.fox25boston.com/news/pet-owners-warned-as-highly-contagious-dog-flu-spreads-after-dog-show/531433602

VININGS, Ga. – Officials are warning about the dog flu after five confirmed cases in Georgia.

The new strain was apparently spread by out-of-state dogs at a dog show in Houston County last month.

Veterinarians said the dog flu is so contagious that a dog can sneeze 20 feet away from another dog and pass it or people can spread it by petting another dog.

“It can easily be transferred from one city to another, simply because of a plane flight or a car ride,” Dr. Cary Mackey said.

Mackey’s clinic is stocking up on vials of the dog flu vaccine, which may soon be administered all around the metro. 

“It may not offer full protection, but if the dog gets infected, it should help prevent severe symptoms of the flu in your pets,” she said.

A growing number of pet owners are getting their dogs vaccinated and state officials are spreading the word that the flu is out there. 

“(It can spread in) shelters, kennels, things like that where you have a lot of dogs collected in one place,” Assistant State Veterinarian Dr. Janemarie Hennebelle said. 

Officials advise dog owners to be on the lookout for dogs that are sneezing or coughing. They said the flu can make dogs sick, but it is not usually fatal. 

“Very rarely is this fatal, but unfortunately there have been a few patients that have passed away due to the flu and side effects of being infected,” Mackey said.

 

All you have to do is follow the money trail….

Genetic Testing Company Raided by FBI

PA fired: some of his patients were on high doses of opioids that exceeded clinic policy?

By Pat Anson, Editor

FBI agents have raided the headquarters of Proove Biosciences, a controversial genetic testing company that claims its DNA tests can improve the effectiveness of pain management and determine whether a patient is at risk of opioid addiction.

Over two dozen FBI agents appeared at Proove offices in Irvine, California Wednesday as part of a healthcare fraud investigation. They were later seen carrying dozens of boxes out of two buildings

“It is an ongoing investigation out of our San Diego office. It involves healthcare fraud. And unfortunately we are unable to say anything more about it at this time. The affidavit supporting the search warrant is under seal,” Cathy Kramer, an FBI special agent, told KABC-TV.

STAT News reported in February that the FBI and the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) were investigating possible criminal activity at Proove.

Former and current employees who were interviewed by the FBI told STAT the agents were focused on possible kickbacks to doctors who encouraged patients to take Proove’s DNA tests. Physicians reportedly could make $144,000 a year in kickbacks that were called “research fees.”

The HHS Inspector General issued a Special Fraud Alert in 2014 warning physicians that any payments, referrals, rent or reimbursements from lab testing companies could be seen as violations of anti-kickback laws.

Proove promotes itself as the “leader in personalized pain medicine” and claims its genetic tests can identify medications that would be most effective at treating pain. The company recently claimed that 94% of patients experienced significant pain relief within 60 days of treatment changes recommended by Proove. Critics say most Proove studies are not peer-reviewed and one genetic expert has called them “hogwash.”

According to STAT, doctors affiliated with Proove in California, Florida and Kentucky were also raided by FBI agents this week.

Proove Linked to Montana Pain Clinic

Proove is the second laboratory testing company raided by the FBI that has been linked to Benefis Pain Management Center, a pain clinic in Great Falls, Montana. 

As PNN has reported, FBI agents last November raided the offices of Confirmatrix Laboratories near Atlanta. Two days later, the company filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Confirmatrix was founded by Khalid Satary, a convicted felon and Palestinian national that the federal government has been trying to deport for years.

In 2013, Medicare identified Confirmatrix as the most expensive urine drug testing lab in country, charging an average of $2,406 for each Medicare patient.

logo.png

Benefis has continued to send urine drug samples to Confirmatrix for testing even after the company filed for bankruptcy. Some Benefis patients have recently been contacted by collection agencies seeking payment for urine tests costing over $1,000 that their insurance companies refuse to pay for. Similar tests by other labs cost only a few hundred dollars.

According to its bankruptcy filing, Confirmatrix has 152 employees in 15 different states, including one employee in Montana who apparently works on site at the Benefis pain clinic. PNN has also learned that Proove Biosciences has had employees working at the clinic. A Proove “patient engagement representative” was employed there as early as May 2016.

“We had a meeting one day and here are these people from Proove Biosciences. They told us they were doing a research project,” says Rodney Lutes, a physician assistant (PA) who was later fired by Benefis. “They wanted to come to Benefis, into the pain department, and test our patients.  We were told this would be at no cost to the patient. My understanding was that they weren’t going to charge anybody, but I found out afterwards they were charging insurance companies.

“They said providers who participated in this would get some form of payment for participating in the program and for filling out all the paperwork.  What they did is they had a technician there in the department and every day I would get a list from that technician of patients that they would like to try to include in the program.”

Lutes says he recommended the DNA test to many of his patients, but never received any money from Proove. He says some of his patients later complained that their insurance was billed for the DNA test.

“One of the things that bothered me was that I signed a lot of the papers, but they also had my supervising doc on all of those papers,” Lutes told PNN. “I also felt like she was the one that brought them (Proove) in there.”

Lutes is referring to Katrina Lewis, MD, a pain management specialist at Benefis who is listed as a member of Proove’s Medical Advisory Board.  Lewis plays a significant role at the pain clinic even though she only works there part time. 

“Dr. Lewis works for Benefis one week a month and has been instrumental in the development of our multidisciplinary approach and current protocols,” said Keri Garman, Director of Corporate Communications at Benefis.

In a statement emailed to PNN last month, Lewis said regular urine drug testing was necessary to ensure that “appropriate levels” of medication are present. Current clinic policy is that “high risk” patients should have a urine test at least once every two months.

“Presence of too high of a level of opioids or other substances in the urine can make it inappropriate and unsafe to continue prescribing opioids.  Presence of none of the prescribed opioids in the urine indicates the care plan is not being followed and further prescribing is medically unnecessary,” Lewis said.

Benefis: No Kickbacks from Testing Labs

PNN has made repeated requests to Benefis to clarify its relationship with Confirmatrix and Proove, and whether Lewis or any other Benefis employees were receiving compensation from the laboratories for referring business to them. 

“Benefis and its employees, including Dr. Katrina Lewis, do not receive kickbacks from Confirmatrix or Proove. As for any questions you have regarding the lab business practices of these facilities, these would be best answered by the companies directly,” Benefis spokesman Ben Buckridge said in a statement emailed to PNN last week. 

“We take these accusations and defamatory statements against our organization and staff seriously. We appreciate your diligence on this issue.” 

In an earlier statement, a Benefis official said the DNA tests are voluntary and only done on patients if they are appropriate.

“Patients have the option to decline this testing, however, it proves to be very helpful in determining treatment plans for our patients in many cases. This testing has not been readily available until recently,” said Kathy Hills, Chief Operating Officer of Benefis Medical Group.

“Genetic testing allows us to see if the patient is appropriately synthesizing specific medications and can drastically alter treatment plans, showing us that sometimes the medications are not effectively metabolizing and therefore not as effective, which is why some patients have needed high doses. Our partners in this have an extensive patient assistance program that waives many costs, and patients are not penalized or removed from opioids if they refuse to have a genetic test performed.”

But a recent copy of the clinic’s opioid policy obtained by PNN says the tests are not voluntary for everyone. 

“All patients on dosing levels at or higher than the maximum policy dose MUST be submitted for genetic testing,” the policy states. The word “must” is capitalized in the document. 

One Benefis patient who took the DNA test said Lutes recommended it.

“He said everyone was doing it and that the insurance would be billed, but if they did not pay for it then Benefis would. I think he said something about it being a $6,000 test,” she told PNN.  “To me it was a waste of time and money. The meds it said I should be taking either didn’t work, stopped working, or made me sick. And the meds I should not be taking I do just fine on.”

It is not clear whether the pain clinic’s association with Proove or Confirmatrix had anything to do with Lutes’ firing in March. The 68-year old Lutes treated several hundred pain patients and was popular with many of them. 

Lutes was discharged for violating Benefis policy about documentation, opioid dosage and urine drug testing, but feels he was “written up for violations that do not exist.” His supervising physician – Katrina Lewis – also requested removal from that role, meaning Lutes could no longer practice at Benefis as a physician assistant.

Since his dismissal, many of Lutes former patients who were on relatively high doses of opioids say their medication has been reduced or stopped entirely. One patient, whose opioid dose was cut significantly, committed suicide. Still others complain they were labeled and treated as addicts by clinic doctors and staff, and now have trouble finding new physicians in the Great Falls area. The ones who remain at Benefis say they are being told to take new tests and exams. 

Benefis says it cannot comment on the accusations because of patient and employee privacy rights.

“Unless Rodney Lutes, PA, or the patients with whom you are speaking will sign written releases allowing us to comment fully on the facts of their employment or their care, respectively, we are simply unable to engage in any further back and forth discussions.  We have provided all the information we are able given the legal limitations governing our industry,” Buckridge said.