Patriot Act & Tylenol

Posted by: robricc

Patriot Act & Tylenol - 23/05/2006 23:29

Did anyone else miss this one? I did:
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060511/phth002.html?.v=54

Quote:
With allergy season approaching its height, consumers are learning that popular nonprescription remedies containing pseudoephedrine have been moved behind store counters as of April 2006.

Quote:
Consumers who want to purchase these products from their pharmacist are required to show a photo ID and are limited to purchases of 3.6 grams a day of pseudoephedrine (the equivalent of about five to seven packages of adult medication, or 10 packages of children's medication) and only nine grams over a 30-day period (approximately 12-18 packages of adult medication, or 25 packages of children's medication).

As if the Patriot Act wasn't out of control already, showing ID to buy OTC medicine is a new level of stupidity.
Posted by: eliceo

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 23/05/2006 23:50

I noticed because I was sick and couldnt by nyquil or theraflu. I thought it was pretty lame.
Posted by: Ezekiel

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 23/05/2006 23:54

Know any meth freaks? Keeping the pseudafed out of their hands is a good thing.

If anyone has a better idea for stopping the spread of meth labs, please speak up.

Quote:
(the equivalent of about five to seven packages of adult medication, or 10 packages of children's medication) and only nine grams over a 30-day period (approximately 12-18 packages of adult medication, or 25 packages of children's medication).


Seems reasonable to me. You have to ask for codeine-tylenol/asprin from behind the counter in Canada.

Once people know about this it won't be any big deal. We card for cigarettes & alcohol too.

-Zeke
Posted by: gbeer

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:07

Nothing to do with the Patriot Act, and everything to do with the fact that this class medicine has been the prime source of raw materials for crystal meth (ice) creation.
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:08

It's only certain kinds of OTC drugs, not all cold remedies. For instance, the stuff I get is the 24-hour allergy relief medication, Claritin-D, or its generic equivalents. The regular claritin I could still get without showing an ID.

I don't think it has anything to do with the Patriot act. As stated before, it's to stop the drugs from being bought in large quantities to make meth. It's an example of everyone getting punished because of a few bad apples.

I agree that it's a pain. I tend to stock up on that sort of thing and go to the grocery store infrequently. This means I can only get it between 9 and 5 (the Pharmacy counter's hours), and only 10 tablets at a time. Meaning I'm forced to shop only during banker's hours, and forced to shop more frequently than I otherwise would.

The question was posed: What would a better way to stop meth labs be? How about the police showing up at the ALWAYS WELL KNOWN METH LAB LOCATIONS with a search warrant and jailing the perps. Instead of inconveniencing innocent people. *GASP* there's a novel idea.
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:48

Quote:
Nothing to do with the Patriot Act


From the article:
This move is a result of the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act, a component of the Patriot Act..
Posted by: Ezekiel

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:51

Uh, Tony, a meth lab can be almost anywhere and they're often used infrequently or only once with all the gear dumped by the roadside in a nice toxic pile. Not only that, but once a location's been used for cooking meth, it's essentailly a toxic site.

Good information here.

Besides, cooking meth often takes place in rural areas where there's no regular patrol, and even if there were, the short period of time it takes to cook means that it's unlikely for officers to catch the action.

A co-worker's brother in law is currently serving federal time for this, and some of his cooking stuff was found behind our offices under a tarp, so I know more than I really want to about this. It's really horrible stuff.

-Zeke
Posted by: robricc

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:52

Quote:
Once people know about this it won't be any big deal. We card for cigarettes & alcohol too.

I'm rarely carded for either of those (I'm 25 and can't grow facial hair worth a damn). I can also buy those things any time of day in any convenience store.

I will just have my mom buy medicine for me since she probably doesn't care about this.
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 00:53

Quote:
a component of the Patriot Act..

I stand corrected.

Gah. That sucks.
Posted by: Ezekiel

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 01:03

Rob,
Oh, I've no doubt that this incovenience will only slow down a determined cook just a little, and yes, it is an incovenience for the non-meth-cooking public. I tend libertarian, but in this case, it's a worthwhile step - even if it only raises awareness of meth abuse, which might lead to more police tips about questionable behavior. The reason for the ID is to leave a crumb trail for police when someone smurfs the stuff at a string of stores to get the amount needed.

-Zeke

edit: I'm 35 and still(!) get carded semi-regularly. It cheers me up.
Posted by: robricc

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 01:09

Quote:
The reason for the ID is to leave a crumb trail for police when someone smurfs the stuff at a string of stores to get the amount needed.

This is exactly why I won't participate in buying medicine. Whether I'm buying a cheeseburger or a bottle of pills, the government shouldn't be tracking me. I'm not usually a tin-foil-hat guy, but this crosses a line.
Posted by: Ezekiel

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 01:14

I guess it bothers me less than having a junkie break into my car or seeing orphaned kids. Cliche, I know.

-Zeke
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 01:21

Quote:
I guess it bothers me less than having a junkie break into my car ..


I would think that, if C-M enthusiasts were likely to break into your car, then this misguided law merely increases the chance of them doing so -- if they cannot get enough over the counter themselves, then some fools just might whack your windows to steal what they couldn't purchase.

Cheers
Posted by: tfabris

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 01:54

He just means that meth addicts are criminals in general, and would do things like steal stereos so they could fence them to buy meth.

Edit: On the other hand. If the thing with the cold medicine slows but doesn't stop meth-makers, all it's gonna do is push the supply/demand curve and drive the price up. Thus increasing the amount of crime committed by addicts. Greeeeeaaaat.
Posted by: DWallach

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 03:51

PBS Frontline did an excellent piece on the meth problem. You can chart meth-related deaths over time and that chart directly correlates with the chart of meth purity. The more powerful the stuff on the street, the more dead people. Simple as that.

To stop the problem, you need to attack the whole problem: raw ingredients, cookers, distributors, and consumers. The long-term stable answer is to go after the "precursor chemicals" that go into pseudoefedrine. They're made at only a small number of factories around the world. You can control that in the same way that they control opiates. Each country only gets to buy as much as they actually need for their legitimate medicinal needs.

Absent such controls, what we have now is sourced primarily from Mexican pharmacies, which don't have the sorts of controls that are increasingly standard in U.S. pharmacies. You can buy very high volume psudofed in Mexico, cook it there, and ship it into the U.S. using pre-existing gang-related distribution channels.

I certainly sympathize with the "you want my name for what?" argument, but if you're paying with your credit card, those records already exist. The additional privacy hit is relatively minor relative to the public health benefit of controlling the meth industry.
Posted by: TigerJimmy

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 04:23

And, as we have discussed elsewhere, that "junkie" wouldn't need to do that if the drugs were cheap and legal.
Posted by: canuckInOR

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 05:21

Quote:
We card for cigarettes & alcohol too.

The difference, however, being that when buying either of the above, your ID isn't recorded and kept on file for two years -- it's just to confirm you're of legal age to purchase those substances.
Posted by: canuckInOR

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 05:25

Quote:
Quote:
The reason for the ID is to leave a crumb trail for police when someone smurfs the stuff at a string of stores to get the amount needed.

This is exactly why I won't participate in buying medicine. Whether I'm buying a cheeseburger or a bottle of pills, the government shouldn't be tracking me. I'm not usually a tin-foil-hat guy, but this crosses a line.

I read somewhere (so grain of salt) that pharmacists are already legally required to keep logs of people purchasing some OTC drugs, anyway. The logs aren't automatically handed over to law enforcement, and still require a subpoena to look at. That said, we all know what the current government thinks about the need to obtain subpoenas.
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 10:59

Quote:

To stop the problem, you need to attack the whole problem: raw ingredients, cookers, distributors, and consumers. The long-term stable answer is to go after the "precursor chemicals" that go into pseudoefedrine. They're made at only a small number of factories around the world. You can control that in the same way that they control opiates. Each country only gets to buy as much as they actually need for their legitimate medicinal needs.


And exactly how many examples exist of this strategy ever working for any other contraband in the USA?

Zero.

Much better to simply unleash the USA's army of lawyers and bureaucrats onto the problem: legalize, productize, and regulate the heck out of it. This would result in safer meth on the street, far fewer home-brew stills for the junk, and sufficient profits to pay for the cremations.

Cheers
Posted by: DWallach

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 12:24

Quote:
And exactly how many examples exist of this strategy ever working for any other contraband in the USA?

Precursor regulation actually works quite well with opiates, and they've documented that, to the extent that they've been able to crack down on meth precursors, street purity of meth has gone down and fewer people die. Go watch the PBS thing. It's sobering.

Quote:
Much better to simply unleash the USA's army of lawyers and bureaucrats onto the problem: legalize, productize, and regulate the heck out of it. This would result in safer meth on the street, far fewer home-brew stills for the junk, and sufficient profits to pay for the cremations.

This sort of argument is better suited to marijuana, where you can at least make a case for the public good, as well as pointing out that alcohol abuse is generally much worse than marijuana abuse, and our society can tollerate alcohol. With meth, this kind of argument doesn't work. Meth is a nasty drug. If it was cheap and legal, it would kill more people and destroy more lives than it does now. There's just no way to argue that legalized meth is a good public policy.

(Really, go watch that PBS thing, if you can.)
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 12:52

Quote:
If it was cheap and legal, it would kill more people and destroy more lives than it does now.


Really? No evidence to back that one up, I suppose?
But perhaps the success of the rest of the War On Drugs might be a good indicator.

-ml
Posted by: tonyc

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 12:57

Quote:

Really? No evidence to back that one up, I suppose?
But perhaps the success of the rest of the War On Drugs might be a good indicator.

That doesn't mean it's not worth trying. Your country thinks so, too. Doesn't mean they're right, either, but for a country that's rather laissez-faire towards marijuana, it's notable that they're concerned about crystal meth production.
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 13:02

Quote:
That doesn't mean it's not worth trying.


Why not? All evidence from previous similar strategies there is that they have failed miserably, and at great social and financial costs.

Quote:
Your country thinks so, too.


I don't know if we do or not. Our minority government is doing so, though, as part of a general strategy to appease Dubya (we don't want to be next on the invasion list just yet).
Posted by: tonyc

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 13:10

I'm not really up on the Parliamentary system, so can you please explain to me how, in 2003, a minority party managed to make this legislation happen without the support of the majority party?

Also, you don't seriously believe what you're writing with respect to your country's laws being influenced by the prospect of invasion from the U.S., do you? If so, can I have some of what you're smoking?
Posted by: wfaulk

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 13:27

Quote:
street purity of meth has gone down and [as a result] fewer people die


Quote:
If it was cheap and legal, it would kill more people and destroy more lives than it does now. There's just no way to argue that legalized meth is a good public policy.


Club tweakers don't generally cause too many problems. It's mostly the destitute inner city and rural folks who do, and they did when they were high before meth became the societal malady du jour. That would imply that it's the people that are the problem, not the drug. I'm not going to get into what should be done about the people other than to say that I think their destitute state is a large part of the problem and something should be done about that.

But, to speak to your point, if lowering the purity of meth means it costs fewer lives, and the government can produce it cheap and legally, they can also produce it with lower purity, and probably regulate that the filler also be non-toxic, which I'm sure is not a guarantee now. If that were to happen, there would largely be no need to produce it illegally. It's not like you hear about moonshiners and people dying of methanol poisoning any more.
Posted by: DWallach

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 13:53

Wow, I'm not used to arguing this side of the drug wars, but I think it's important to make a distinction between different drugs. Bitt makes a valid point that the destructive effects of drugs are not independent of the different communities which abuse them. Mark's point about prior policies along these lines being failures is simply incorrect. When the precursor chemicals to meth are manufactured at precisely nine factories worldwide, regulation can and will have a significant effect in limiting the supply of meth: no input == no output.

Sure, you can make the argument that if every conceivable mind altering substance was entirely legal, that the criminal element would disappear (which appears to have worked with alcohol, but it's less clear that it's worked with gambling). Still, you have to make a public health argument. We took Vioxx off the market because a small number of people had serious complications, despite the large number of people who were happily using it. If the harm caused by the drug (legal or otherwise) outweighs any benefit from having the drug on the market, then you have a legitimate public health policy reason for taking the drug off the market. If you look at meth along these lines, it's clearly something you'd rather not have in the market.

(Fun thought: what company wants to be in the business of manufacturing, marketing, and selling "legal" meth? Who would be willing to take on the liability and lawsuits that would result?)
Posted by: mlord

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 14:52

Quote:
Mark's point about prior policies along these lines being failures is simply incorrect.


If only saying so were to make it so. I don't exactly see any signs of success from existing ("prior") policies there. And with only nine (?) points of production to block, one might expect to have seen some positive results from it all.

Oh well.
Posted by: DWallach

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 15:15

At present, they haven't been able to apply decent controls at those sources, mainly as a result of lobbying by the pharmaceutical industry (which gets to profit by selling pseudophed to the cookers without assuming any product liability for the resulting methamphetamines). Really, honestly, go check out the PBS thing. It's one of the better pieces they've done.
Posted by: loren

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 16:38

Agreed... Best Frontline I've seen in a while.
Posted by: tanstaafl.

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 24/05/2006 22:29

Precursor regulation actually works quite well with opiates,

Oh... so that's why heroin is no longer available in the larger cities.



tanstaafl.
Posted by: DWallach

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 25/05/2006 02:07

Quote:
Oh... so that's why heroin is no longer available in the larger cities.

Or, more specifically, it's relatively hard to abuse commercial opiates. Codeine cough syrup, at one point, was the drug abuse target of choice in and around Houston, leading to screw tapes, where they slowed down and otherwise distorted music in a way that apparently jives well with the opiated mind...
Posted by: wfaulk

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 25/05/2006 13:47

Quote:
We took Vioxx off the market because a small number of people had serious complications, despite the large number of people who were happily using it.

That's true, but the complications weren't due to misuse and it was impossible to find the subset of people who would get those complications.

In addition, comparing prescription drugs to recreational drugs isn't a very good path. After all, alcohol can cause lightheadedness, reduced motor function, liver dysfunction, and death in everyone, not just a subset, and it's still legal. In fact, some of those "side effects" are the reason it's ingested in the first place. For that matter, peanuts can cause serious complications in a subset of people, but they're not restricted. That's because alcohol and peanuts are effectively both recreational. (I know the peanut thing is a stretch, but you get my meaning.)

Quote:
the criminal element would disappear (which appears to have worked with alcohol, but it's less clear that it's worked with gambling)

Yes, but gambling is an incredibly easy way to launder large sums of cash, whereas alcohol sales are not, nor would sales of other products, including meth, be.

Quote:
Who would be willing to take on the liability and lawsuits that would result?

Are there lawsuits against Pernod Ricard now? I don't think so, but I could be wrong. Of course, there are lawsuits against tobacco manufacturers. What's the difference there?
Posted by: tanstaafl.

Re: Patriot Act & Tylenol - 25/05/2006 22:36

If the harm caused by the drug [Vioxx] (legal or otherwise) outweighs any benefit from having the drug on the market, then you have a legitimate public health policy reason for taking the drug off the market.

Ah, but here is a slippery slope, indeed.

All drugs carry the risk of adverse side effects, and determining the risk/benefit ratio can be tricky.

I am personally well acquainted with an individual who suffers from osteoarthritis, and she is quite definitive when it comes to quality of life vs. longevity issues. She would accept the <1% risk in a heartbeat (pun intended) rather than suffer the pain, immobility, and loss of quality of life caused by the disease. There are less effective alternatives to Vioxx, but if they prove unsatisfactory I would say the chances are high that she will die sooner than would have been the case with a possibly Vioxx-induced heart attack.

In the case of this particular drug, I feel that the benefits do outweight the potential for harm, if the user is made aware of the risks and is allowed to make his own decision. Unfortunately, due to our over-protective nanny-government, that option is no longer available.

tanstaafl.