Marijuana Access Is Associated With Decreased Use Of Alcohol, Tobacco And Other Prescription Drugs

See Author Article Here
By Paul Armentano

A significant amount of data has been generated in recent years showing that cannabis access is associated with reduced levels of opioid use and abuse. But emerging data also indicates that many patients similarly substitute marijuana for a variety of other substances, including alcohol, tobacco and benzodiazepines.

Last month, a team of researchers from Canada and the United States surveyed over 2,000 federally registered medical cannabis patients with regard to their use of cannabis and other substances. (Medical cannabis access has been legal across Canada for nearly two decades).

Investigators reported that nearly 70 percent of respondents said that they substituted cannabis for prescription medications, primarily opioids. Forty-five percent of those surveyed acknowledged substituting cannabis for alcohol and 31 percent of respondents said that they used marijuana in place of tobacco.

Among those who reported replacing alcohol with cannabis, 31 percent said they stopped using booze altogether, while 37 percent reported reducing their intake by at least 75 percent. Fifty-one percent of those who reported substituting cannabis for tobacco said that they eventually ceased their tobacco use completely.

 

This documentation of cannabis substitution is not unique. A 2017 study of medical cannabis patients similarly reported that 25 percent of the cohort reported substituting cannabis for alcohol, while 12 percent substituted it for tobacco. A 2015 paper published in the journal, “Drug and Alcohol Review” also reported that over half of patients surveyed substituted marijuana in lieu of alcohol. A placebo-controlled clinical trialperformed by researchers at London’s University College reported that the inhalation of CBD — a primary component in cannabis — is associated with a 40 percent reduction in cigarette consumption.

Numerous studies also indicate that legal cannabis access is associated with reductions in overall prescription drug spending. While much of this reduction is the result of the reduced use of opioids, studies also report decreases in patients’ consumption of other prescription drugs, such as sleep aids, anti-depressants and anti-anxiety medications. A 2019 study by a team of Canadian researchers reported that the use of marijuana is associated with the discontinuation of benzodiazepines. (The popular anti-anxiety medication was responsible for over 11,500 overdose deathsin the United States in 2017, according to the US Centers for Disease Control). In their study of 146 subjects, the initiation of medical cannabis resulted in significant and sustained reductions in patients’ use of the drug.

By the trial’s conclusion, 45 percent of participants had ceased their use of benzodiazepines. In a separate study, also published this year, of over 1,300 US medical cannabis patients suffering from chronic pain conditions, 22 percent reported substituting marijuana for benzodiazepines.

These scientific findings run contrary to the so-called “gateway theory” – the long-alleged notion that marijuana exposure primes users to ultimately engage in the use of far more intoxicating and addictive substances. By contrast, for many people cannabis appears to act as an “exit drug” away from potentially deadly pharmaceuticals, booze, cigarettes and even other illicit substances such as cocaine.

As more jurisdictions move away from cannabis prohibition and toward a system of regulated access it will important to monitor the degree to which these trends continue and to assess their long-term impacts on public health and safety.

Paul Armentano is the deputy director of NORML — the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws. He is the co-author of the book, Marijuana Is Safer: So Why Are We Driving People to Drink? and the author of the book, The Citizen’s Guide to State-By-State Marijuana.  Laws.

Oregon Lawmaker Seeks $2 Million For Mental Health Centers

See Author Article Here
By Elliot Njus

The Oregon Senate’s Housing Committee advanced a bill that would enact a statewide rent control policy and restrict evictions, sending it to the full Senate for a vote.

Lawmakers heard nearly four hours of testimony from renters and landlords as Senate Bill 608 had its first hearing in the Senate’s Housing Committee. It’s poised to cruise through the Legislature, with support from leaders of the Democratic majority in both the House and Senate.

Oregon lawmakers propose unorthodox approach to rent control

Oregon lawmakers propose unorthodox approach to rent control

Their proposal attempts to sidestep longstanding criticism of the polarizing policy, but it’s also drawn some misgivings from rent control supporters.

Two landlord groups, the Rental Housing Alliance Oregon and the Oregon Rental Housing Association, are both remaining neutral, with their leaders saying the bill is palatable, if not appealing.

That’s a relatively friendly position for their constituency – both statewide advocacy groups geared toward small landlords.

“There’s a lot here for landlords to dislike,” said Jim Straub, the legislative director for the Oregon Rental Housing Association. “But I’d also like to recognize it for what it isn’t: an industry killer. As written, I do not believe it will be catastrophic to our livelihood.”

The larger Multifamily NW, whose Portland-area membership includes larger landlords and property management companies, opposes the bill, as did many landlords who testified on their own behalf. They argued it would hurt business and discourage investment, resulting in substandard housing.

They pointed to a large body of academic research that’s found rent control policies in other states have resulted in a reduced housing supply and higher rents.

“At best, Senate Bill 608 will have no effect,” said Deborah Imse, the executive director of Multifamily NW, “but at worst it will make housing less affordable in the long run.”

Renters and tenants’ rights activists largely argued the bill would help protect against eye-popping rent increases that have frequently grabbed headlines across the state.

“It doesn’t solve the entire problem,” said Katrina Holland, the executive director of the Community Alliance of Tenants. “It certainly does take a giant leap forward by giving a measure of predictability for hundreds of thousands of renters in hundreds of cities across the state.”

Senate Republicans on Monday released statements in opposition to the proposal.

The bill would cap annual rent increases to 7 percent plus inflation throughout the state — a rate that’s much higher than most municipal rent control policies in other states. In many California communities with rent control, for example, affected apartments see their rents climb only by the rate of inflation, or a fraction of it, each year. (Annual increases in the Consumer Price Index, a measure of inflation, for western states has ranged from just under 1 percent to 3.6 percent over the past five years.)

The rent increase restrictions would exempt new construction for 15 years, and landlords would be free to raise rent without any cap if a renter left of their own accord. Subsidized rent would also be exempt.

The bill also would require most landlords to cite a cause, such as failure to pay rent or other lease violation, when evicting renters after the first year of tenancy.

Some “landlord-based” for-cause evictions would be allowed, including the landlord moving in or a major renovation. In those cases, landlords would have to provide 90 days’ notice and pay one month’s rent to the tenant, though landlords with four or fewer units would be exempt from the payment.

The bill would not lift the state ban on cities implementing their own, more restrictive rent control policies.

Sen. Fred Girod, R-Stayton, the ranking Republican on the Senate Housing Committee, said Senate Democrats flatly rejected a suite of amendments, including the removal of an emergency clause. With the clause, the bill would take effect when it’s signed by the governor; if passed without it, the bill would take effect next year. Girod abruptly left the hearing after it became clear the amendments would not pass.

Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend, the only Republican remaining after Girod left, cast the lone “no” vote.

“We’re making policy that ultimately going to be counterproductive to hat all the people who testified said they actually want,” Knopp said.

Sen. Shemia Fagan, D-Portland, who chairs the housing committee, said she shared concerns from people who testified it doesn’t go far enough.

“I wish this bill would do more, and I would be willing to go further,” she said.

— Elliot Njus

Why Mental Illness Is Surging Even In The World’s Happiest Countries

See Author Article Here
By SOPHIE MCBAIN

In recent decades, economists studying life satisfaction have noticed a pattern – one that is remarkably persistent across different countries and cultures. Most people’s happiness levels begin dipping in adulthood, bottoming out when they reach their forties and fifties, before rising again.

This link between age and life satisfaction is known as the happiness curve. For discontented Generation Xers, it may provide relief to know that the midlife crisis is real but temporary, and that things will most likely get better. Young people might think rather differently, however. Could they feel any worse?

In both the US and the UK there has been a disquieting rise in depression, anxiety and other forms of distress among young people. Last April, a survey of more than 2,000 Britons aged 16-25 conducted by the youth charity the Prince’s Trust found that half had experienced a mental health problem, one in four said they felt “hopeless” and almost half felt they could not cope well with setbacks in life. The number of students dropping out of British universities because of mental health problems, and the number of campus suicides, have reached record highs. Similarly, a 2017 survey of 63,500 US college students found that 39 per cent had felt “so depressed it was difficult to function”. Between 2008 and 2015, the number of hospitalisations of suicidal teens doubled in America.

There are many economic and structural reasons why American and British teens might be struggling to cope. Inequality is rising, social mobility is stalling, competition for high-ranking universities and well-paid jobs is becoming fiercer. Yet this remains an insufficient explanation.

Last year, the Nordic Council of Ministers, an inter-parliamentary group comprised of representatives from Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, as well as several autonomous islands, released a report titled In the Shadow of Happiness. The Nordic countries consistently top the United Nations’ world happiness rankings, which is often attributed to their egalitarianism, extensive welfare states and work-life balance. But the Council wanted to examine a population that is overlooked in glowing UN reports: in the happiest countries in the world, who is sad?

It transpired that the populations most likely to be suffering or struggling emotionally were the very old (those over 80) and the young. The report found that 13.5 per cent of 18- to 23-year-olds in the Nordic states rated their life satisfaction as less than six out of ten, which means they are either struggling or suffering. The primary cause of this discontent, the authors concluded, was the rising rate of youth mental illness. In Norway, the number of young people seeking help for mental illness increased 40 per cent in five years. In Finland, named the happiest country in the world for 2018, suicide is responsible for a third of all deaths among 15- to 24-year-olds.

In her 2017 book iGen, Jean Twenge, an American psychologist, attributed the sharp increase in mental illness among young people to the proliferation of smartphones and the rise of social media. She noted that in the US, youth mental illness rose steeply from 2012 onwards, the year that more than half the population gained access to a smartphone. Perhaps the use of smartphones helps explain the similar trends observed among Nordic teens.

Twenge’s research found that the more time teenagers spend on social media, the more likely they are to report feeling unhappy or depressed. One of her studies found that teens who spend more than three hours a day using electronic devices were 35 per cent more likely to present a risk factor for suicide (such as having made plans to end their life). If modern technology is a prime culprit, then researchers should be worrying about teens in poorer countries too, where smartphone use is spreading but people are often less likely to report mental illness.

Mental illness is complex and there is unlikely to be merely one reason so many young people worldwide are miserable – or any simple solutions. Banning smartphones and social media would be neither practical nor effective: research shows that social media can also increase happiness. Yet finding ways to protect young people from the harmful effects of digital culture could save lives – and might benefit miserable middle-aged people too.

FDA’s Opioids Adviser Accuses Agency Of Having ‘Direct’ Link To Crisis

The Guardian Article Here

The Food and Drug Administration is sacrificing American lives by continuing to approve new high-strength opioid painkillers, and manipulating the process in favor of big pharma, according to the chair of the agency’s own opioid advisory committee.

Dr Raeford Brown told the Guardian there is “a war” within the FDA as officials in charge of opioid policy have “failed to learn the lessons” of the epidemic that has killed hundreds of thousands of people over the past 20 years and continues to claim about 150 lives a day.

Brown accused the agency of putting the interests of narcotics manufacturers ahead of public health, most recently by approving a “terrible drug”, Dsuvia, in a process he alleged was manipulated.

“They should stop considering any new opioid evaluation,” said Brown. “For every day and every week and every month that the FDA don’t do the right thing, people drop dead on the streets. What they do has a direct impact on the mortality rate from opioids in this country.”

Brown, an anesthesiologist who chairs the FDA committee of specialists advising the agency on whether to approve new opioid painkillers, said he no longer had confidence in repeated assurances by the FDA leadership that it was taking the epidemic seriously and prepared to put public health above the commercial interests of drug makers.

“I think that the FDA has learned nothing. The modus operandi of the agency is that they talk a good game and then nothing happens. Working directly with the agency for the last five years, as I sit and listen to them in meetings, all I can think about is the clock ticking and how many people are dying every moment that they’re not doing anything,” he said. “The lack of insight that continues to be exhibited by the agency is in many ways a willful blindness that borders on the criminal.”

Brown’s comments echo criticisms by US senators who have condemned the FDA for what they say is its “complicity” in the epidemic, for approving the powerful painkillers that drove the crisis and then failing to use its powers to protect the public as the death toll escalated.

Four US senators wrote to the head of the FDA, Dr Scott Gottlieb, late last year urging him not to allow Dsuvia, a powerful opioid pill, on to the market because it was “to the detriment of public health”.

Dsuvia is a branded narcotic sufentanil pill, a more potent version of fentanyl, made by Californian pharmaceutical company AcelRx. The signatories included Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, whose state has the highest rate of opioid overdose deaths in the country.

“This puzzling and unacceptable course of events is unfortunately reminiscent of previous FDA processes and practices that contributed to the opioid epidemic,” the letter said.

The FDA’s credibility has been badly damaged by the opioid crisis amid accusations that at times it behaved less as a regulator overseeing the pharmaceutical industry than a business partner of drug manufacturers. The agency helped unleash the epidemic two decades ago when it approved the sale of a high strength narcotic pill, OxyContin, as safer and more effective than other painkillers on the say so of the manufacturer, Purdue Pharma, and without requiring clinical trials. Since then the FDA has approved other opioids for wide prescribing even as evidence mounted the drugs were addictive, open to abuse and often not effective for long-term use.

The FDA was also embarrassed by revelations that officials responsible for opioid approvals were taking part in “pay to play” schemes in which manufacturers paid to attend meetings to draw up the criteria for approving prescription narcotics.

Donald Trump’s opioid commission identified the failure of the FDA and other federal institutions to properly regulate opioids and their manufacturers as an important factor in the epidemic.

After Trump appointed Gottlieb, the new FDA chief admitted the agency “didn’t get ahead” of the crisis and promised “dramatic” action. He said he favoured examining not only whether an opioid worked but whether it was needed and whether the risks of it feeding the epidemic outweighed benefits for patients.

But that commitment has been called into question by the slow pace of introducing new practices and regulations – and by the approval of Dsuvia, a potent pill developed with the US defense department.

An advisory committee rejected the drug in 2017 over safety concerns. The senators said that they were “deeply troubled” that when Dsuvia was resubmitted for consideration the following year, the FDA excluded members of the agency’s drug safety committee from the hearing. The senators also said they were concerned because the decision was made when Brown, a strong critic of Dsuvia, was absent at a professional conference in San Francisco.

“There’s no question in my mind right that they did that on purpose,” he said. “The FDA has a lack of transparency. They use the advisory committees as cover.”

The FDA is not required to follow the decisions of its advisory committees but has been wary of going against their decisions since 2012, when the agency created a political storm by overruling a decision to reject Zohydro, an opioid 10 times more powerful than regular painkillers.

Doctors and specialists on the committee questioned the safety of the drug and the need for it given the epidemic. The senior FDA official at the hearing, Dr Bob Rappaport, who was head of the agency’s opioid approval division, angered other members by telling them there had to be “a level playing field for business”, which was widely interpreted as putting the right of pharmaceutical companies to make money ahead of public health.

Brown described a breakdown in confidence and trust between his advisory committee and FDA officials responsible for opioid approvals. He characterized them as out of touch with the consequences of the epidemic and locked into a view promoted by drugmakers that those who become hooked are to blame for their addiction not the pills or prescribing practices.

Brown blamed the problem in part on “cozy, cozy relationships between the pharmaceutical industry and various parts of the FDA”. Since a change to the FDA’s funding in the 1990s, the agency division responsible for opioid approvals relies on the drug industry for 75% of its budget. The agency denies the money buys influence.

The FDA declined to respond to Brown’s specific criticisms.

Gottlieb has previously defended Dsuvia by saying it is required for use in circumstances where other drugs cannot be administered, such as a battlefield. The FDA chief promised “very tight restrictions” on its distribution to stop the drug appearing on the illicit market. He insisted the FDA had “learned much from the harmful impact” that prescription opioids have had.

But Brown remains skeptical.

“Nothing is fundamentally being done to effect change in the regulation of opioids. If the FDA continues to encourage the pharmaceutical industry to turn out opioid after opioid after opioid, and the regulation of those opioids is no better than it was in 1995, then we’ll be cleaning this up for a long time,” said Brown.

Chris McGreal is the author of American Overdose: The Opioid Tragedy in Three Acts

How To Cope With Addiction When We Also Have Depression

See Author Article Here

When we think of addiction, our thoughts tend to turn to drug and alcohol addiction but addiction can relate to numerous different things; drugs, alcohol, food, exercise, pornography, gaming, social media, tattoos, self-harm, gambling, shopping – anything that we feel as though we’re not in control of, and has an impact on our mood and behaviours. Addiction can be incredibly difficult to cope with, particularly when the things we’re addicted to are often readily available. Depression and addiction can go hand in hand. Addiction can help us to cope with depression, but equally, depression can be caused or worsened by the things we’re addicted to.

Depression: Coping With Addiction
IDENTIFY TRIGGERS
In terms of addiction, triggers are any emotional or environmental factors that cause us to feel as though we need to use our addiction. It could be related to people, places, things, times of the year, or something else. Working out what our triggers are can take time, but once we know what they are, we can avoid them or learn ways to manage them.

HIGH-RISK SITUATIONS
High-risk situations are similar to triggers, but rather than being a specific ‘thing’, such as ‘seeing a person walking a dog’, they’re specific situations. This could be something like Christmas, seeing family, or getting a piece of negative feedback at work. Sometimes these situations can be difficult to spot until we’re in them, so it can be helpful to make a note when a situation causes us to feel like we need our addiction.

Once we identify these situations, we can make a plan for how to cope with them without turning to our addiction.

For example, if one of our high-risk situations is ‘seeing my auntie’, we might choose to see them less often, only see them in the company of other friends/family, and invite a friend to stay over for the night whenever we do see them, so that we’re not having to cope alone. We could also note down any alternative coping mechanisms we could use, so that we don’t have to think about them ‘in the moment’, and can just refer to our notes. It’s often helpful to write down a couple of different ideas because sometimes our first or second ideas aren’t possible or don’t work.

Depression: Coping With Addiction
CLICK TO TWEET

WORKING OUR HOW OUR ADDICTION HELPS US
If our addiction didn’t help us on some level, we wouldn’t keep using it. Something that can be really key when coping with addiction is working out how it helps us and then finding a healthy coping mechanism to replace it. It can sometimes be helpful to use the acronym ‘Hungry Angry Lonely Tired (HALT)‘ when thinking about the need that we’re filling, as these are common emotions associated with addiction.

ALTERNATIVE COPING MECHANISMS
Having a list of coping mechanisms that we can use when we want to turn to our addiction is helpful. We’re all different, and we all turn to our addictions for different reasons, so we will find that different coping mechanisms work for different people. As an alternative to our addiction, we could try things like watching TV, reading, walking, talking to a friend, drawing, writing, painting, listening to music, listening to podcasts, doing some breathing exercises, ripping up sheets of paper, drawing on ourselves, running, cleaning, self-soothing, doing some puzzles, singing, hugging a pet, dancing, playing with play-doh or contacting a helpline. Sometimes we’ll have to try a coping mechanism a few times before we can get it to work for us – practice makes perfect!

REMINDERS
There are times when we don’t see the point in fighting our addiction. It feels too hard. We’re too tired. There’s no point because we can’t do it so why even bother trying?!

At times like these, we have no interest in reaching out for support, or in using healthy coping mechanisms.

These times are very ‘high risk’, in terms of falling back into our addiction. Having reminders of why we don’t want to go there can help us to keep going. This could be in the form of photos on our phone, on the wall, or in our purse or wallet. We might have lists of ‘reasons to keep going’, or ‘things we want to do once we’re up to it’. There might have been a time when we had a particularly amazing day, and we might have a momento from that day that we can hold. A specific smell or taste could take us back to happier times that we’re hoping to replicate at some point in the future. Keeping little reminders in our house, bag, or coat pocket, can help us to keep going at times when we want to return to our addiction.

REFLECT
There are times when things go really well, and we feel like we’re beating our addiction. At other times, things don’t go so well, and it can feel as though our addiction is beating us.

It’s important to remember that a lapse is not the same as a relapse. Recovery is not a straight line. Whether things go right, or wrong, it’s important to reflect and learn from them.

If we’ve managed a difficult situation without turning to our addiction, then that’s wonderful progress! How did we do it? What coping mechanisms did we use? Is there anything that could be helpful to note down so that we know to try it again in the future?

If we’ve struggled through a difficult situation and turned to out addiction, then we haven’t failed, we’ve just had a wobble. Recovery is a learning curve, and we can learn as much (if not more) from our mistakes as from our successes. What went wrong this time? Was there a trigger that we weren’t expecting, or a high-risk situation that we didn’t know would be high-risk? Did anything go right? Can we think of anything we could do differently in future? Sometimes we have to try a coping mechanism a few times before we can get it to work. At other times, we might have tried a coping mechanism that didn’t work for us at all, so it’s not one that we want to try again.

This reflection can be really important because it can help us to keep moving forward. Some of us might find it helpful to journal this sort of thing.

Depression: Coping With Addiction
HONESTY IS IMPORTANT
One of the most important things when it comes to addiction is honesty. Honesty to others, and honesty to ourselves. Lying to ourselves and others is likely to cause a lot of problems, so even when it’s really difficult, it’s important to try and tell the truth.

SUPPORT SYSTEM
We don’t have to cope with addiction alone. Addiction can be incredibly strong, so we need to try and build up a strong support system to fight it with. Our support system doesn’t need to be massive, but it can be helpful to have a couple of friends or family members or organisations we can turn to when we’re struggling. Sometimes, it can be dangerous to stop an addiction ‘cold turkey’, so it’s often a good idea to reach out for some professional support on top of the support we get from our loved ones. We might also find that some medication, therapy or counselling from professionals is something that we need.

There are times when we struggle to let people help us. We might feel as though we don’t deserve it or we’re being a burden – but we do deserve support, and in the same way that if one of our friends were struggling, we’d want to support them, our friends will probably want to support us. There are times when it can be hard to reach out for support because we don’t have any hope, but there’s nothing wrong with letting other people hold our hope for a little while until we’re able to hope again.

SUPPORT GROUPS
On top of support from our friends, family, and professionals, we might find that support groups with others who have experienced similar addictions to us can be comforting and can help us to cope. Sometimes being around others who’ve experienced similar things to us can help us to feel less alone, and can give us some hope of things improving. There are different support groups for different addictions including alcoholics anonymous, narcotics anonymous, national self-harm network, sex addicts anonymous, overeaters anonymous, Beat support groups, on-line gamers anonymous, and gamblers anonymous.

Please help us to help others and share this post, you never know who might need it.

Positive Psychology Exercises Increase Happiness In People Recovering From Substance Use

“’Addiction scientists are increasingly moving beyond the traditional focus on reducing or eliminating substance use by advocating treatment protocols that encompass quality of life. Yet orchestrated positive experiences are rarely incorporated into treatment for those with substance use disorders,’ said Bettina B. Hoeppner, lead author of the study.

As part of the study, the authors noted that effectiveness of positive psychology exercises may be promising tools for bolstering happiness during treatment and may help support long-term recovery.”

Link Here*

Opioid Expert Accuses FDA of ‘Willful Blindness’ After It Approves Powerful New Painkiller

National Addiction News Article Here

An expert tasked with helping the Food and Drug Administration weigh potential new opioid drug approvals is openly calling out the agency for what he alleges are its continued missteps in handling the opioid crisis. In an interview with the Guardian Thursday, Raeford Brown claimed that the FDA has failed to learn from its past mistakes by approving the drug Dsuvia last year, the tablet form of an opioid painkiller up to ten times more potent than fentanyl.

Brown, a professor of anesthesiology and pediatrics at the University of Kentucky, was tapped to chair the FDA’s Anesthetic and Analgesic Drug Products Advisory Committee in 2018. One of the committee’s duties involved recommending whether or not Dsuvia should be approved. (The FDA rarely goes against the recommendations made by its outside committees.) Ultimately, the committee voted 10 to 3 for its approval. But Brown alleged to the Guardian that the approval process had been manipulated, and that the FDA has still largely avoided taking any serious action to curtail the role of legal opioids in the crisis.

“I think that the FDA has learned nothing. The modus operandi of the agency is that they talk a good game and then nothing happens. Working directly with the agency for the last five years, as I sit and listen to them in meetings, all I can think about is the clock ticking and how many people are dying every moment that they’re not doing anything,” he told the Guardian. “The lack of insight that continues to be exhibited by the agency is in many ways a willful blindness that borders on the criminal.”

In 2017, Dsuvia was actually rejected for approval by the FDA, with the agency calling for additional safety data from its maker, AcelRx. But the vote by the panel convened last October occurred while Brown was unable to attend—a decision Brown contends was intentional. Brown had long criticized the potential approval of Dsuvia, a stance he says the FDA was well aware of.

“There’s no question in my mind right that they did that on purpose,” he said. “The FDA has a lack of transparency. They use the advisory committees as cover.”

Brown isn’t the only one who had trouble with how the FDA ultimately approved Dsuvia. In a letter sent to the FDA last October, senators Joe Manchin (D-WV), Edward Markey (D-MA), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn), and former senator Claire McCaskill (D-Miss) criticized the agency over Brown’s absence during the panel vote. The senators also criticized the FDA’s decision to not fully include another panel of experts, the Drug Safety and Risk Management Committee, in the approval process of Dsuvia.

Soon after its approval in November, FDA chief Scott Gottlieb went out of his way to tamp down criticism. In a statement, Gottlieb said that there were “very tight restrictions being placed on the distribution and use of this product.”

Dsuvia is a form of the opioid sufentanil, taken as a tablet that dissolves under the tongue. It’s currently approved for people with moderate to severe pain who haven’t responded to other treatments. The drug is supposed to be administered only in medically-supervised health care settings, such as hospitals and emergency rooms, by approved medical staff.

But sufentanil tablets like Dsuvia can still potentially be abused or improperly dosed to patients, according to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in the UK. And there’s still the possibility they can end up in the black market. The European Union approved a similar tablet version of sufentanil made by AcelRX, Dzuveo, last summer.

Brown, for his part, doesn’t buy Gottlieb’s assurances. And he thinks until the FDA has gotten its act together, no new opioid drugs should hit the market at all.

“They should stop considering any new opioid evaluation,” Brown told the Guardian. “For every day and every week and every month that the FDA don’t do the right thing, people drop dead on the streets. What they do has a direct impact on the mortality rate from opioids in this country.”

The FDA as well as AcerRX have not immediately responded to a request for comment from Gizmodo on Brown’s accusations.

We Now Have an App for Detecting Opioid Overdoses

“And that could save thousands of lives since over 130 people die every day due to opioid overdoses, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.”
See App Article HERE

My area of focus when studying Clinical Neuropsychology was Substance Use Disorders, & I’ve gotten some hands-on experience in clinics specializing in Vivitrol and Naltrexone treatments to maintain a clean lifestyle for many people on the road to recovery from addiction.

There always seems to be a new types of technology that are designed to help the modern-day addict who happened to may have overdosed ….again. The last pretty innovative gadget was then device picture below. A pocket-size Narcan dispenser that is user friendly to almost any age group that can follow simple spoken directions.

The “The app, called Second Chance, was created by researchers at the University of Washington. By using sonar to monitor a person’s breathing rate – one of the main indicators of an overdose – the app can determine whether a person is overdosing from up to three feet away. And if the phone owner is using opioids all by themselves, the phone could save their lives by automatically reaching out for help.

“The idea is that people can use the app during opioid use so that if they overdose, the phone can potentially connect them to a friend or emergency services to provide naloxone,” said co-corresponding author Shyam Gollakota. “Here we show that we have created an algorithm for a smartphone that is capable of detecting overdoses by monitoring how someone’s breathing changes before and after opioid use.”

And that could save thousands of lives since over 130 people die every day due to opioid overdoses, according to the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

On top of monitoring sound waves, the app as well as monitoring the person’s movement to see if they have lost consciousness. For now, it can’t interact with phone owners, but this is something the creators will look toward in the future.

“When the app detects decreased or absent breathing, we’d like it to send an alarm asking the person to interact with it,” Gollakota said. “Then if the person fails to interact with it, that’s when we say: ‘OK this is a stage where we need to alert someone,’ and the phone can contact someone with naloxone.”

So the smartphone could become the tool that health officials have been desperately seeking to combat the opioid epidemic. ”

-The Website

How Big Pharma Profits From Overdoses & More News On America’s Opioid Epidemic

I used to be a drug addict. I haven’t touched an opioid since August 22, 2011, but I get the struggle and barely made it out. I can’t count on all of my fingers and toes how many of my friends and acquaintances have died from overdoses. I know if you are in the throes of addiction, this won’t make you quit, but keep it in your back pocket.

I don’t know why I am surprised at these headlines anymore:

Study Finds Disturbing Link Between Opioid Overdose Deaths And Big Pharma Payments to Doctors

Opioid Makers Are Looking Especially Evil This Week

*The rate of overdoses AMONG FUCKING CHILDREN has doubled.
*The percentage of opioid overdoses seen in emergency rooms across the country has gone up 30%
*The life expectancy in the U.S. is down because of the spike in OD’s.

CNN provides a really informative “visual guide” for these statistics
America on Opioids

**A little dated, but number of overdoses has greatly increased even since 2015

Be well. Always here for support