Well, while I'm with you in general, I have to point out that maybe your doctor has a reason for wanting to see you. Maybe he has a new treatment he'd like you to try. Even if it's just a different medication, I'm sure that his malpractice insurance makes him schedule an office visit, if it's not a basic tenet of medical ethics. For that matter, maybe his insurer is now making him see patients before renewing prescriptions. Your point about the "War on Drugs" is no less valid because of those things, though. And while I can understand the idea behind restricting potential recreational drugs, why do things like extra-extra-strength ibuprofen prescription-only? I can understand them being restricted so that pharmacists can make people know the dangers behind misusing them (though taking four of those is not any different than taking a handful of ones you don't need any license for), but why make them inaccessible?
Which brings me to my other point, which is that it would certainly be (stupidly) illegal for you to obtain the Flexoril without a prescription, it is most certainly less illegal than the others you list, as it is an unscheduled drug, while Vicodin is Schedule III, Dilaudid is Schedule II. and marijuana is Schedule I.
Edit: Actually, if I understand the law correctly, as an unscheduled drug, it would not be illegal for you to possess your Flexoril without a prescription, only that it would be illegal for someone to dispense it. Which, I suppose, is how the Internet prescription drug trade works. Sounds a whole lot like our 18th Amendment now that I think about it.
Edited by wfaulk (18/12/2005 07:36)
_________________________
Bitt Faulk