THE PATHOLOGICAL DEA
THE PATHOLOGICAL DEA - The War on Doctors and the Pain Crisis in the Aftermath of the DEA FAQ Debacle - War on Pain Sufferers archival collection #10. Compiled by: DeLuca; War on Doctors/Pain Crisis blog of the Pain Relief Network,; originally posted: 2006-05-27; Revised: 2007-09-11 (link to DEA FAQ added. This archive includes selected articles from the January 2006 issue (Vol. 7, Num. 1) of Pain Medicine, and related documents.
Excerpt: “If those at the top of the DEA hierarchy can be so manifestly indifferent, if not hostile, to the insights and perspectives of such groups [as the NAAG and PPSG], then… we are tilting at windmills when we… beseech the DEA to genuinely embrace the [principle] of balance…” - Ben Rich, Of Smoke and Mirrors and Passive-Aggressive Behaviors, Pain Medicine, 7(1), 2006.
Comment (DeLuca): Truly Fascinating articles by Heit, Fishman, Passik, and Rowe - who contributed mightily to the FAQ - and by Rich commenting on the ethical-moral disaster in pain medicine. A must-read for serious students of the War on Doctors.
Includes:
Prescription Pain Medications - aka “THE DEA FAQ” - DEA, Last Acts, and the Wisconsin Pain and Policy Studies Group; published August 2004.
Healthcare Professionals and the DEA: Trying to Get Back in Balance - Howard Heit; Pain Medicine; 7(1): 72-74; 2006.
Pain Management Misstatements: Ceiling Effects, Red and Yellow Flags - Steven D. Passik; Pain Medicine; 7(1): 76-77; 2006.
Of Smoke, Mirrors, and Passive-Aggressive Behaviors - Ben A. Rich, JD, PhD; Pain Medicine; 7(1): 78-79; 2006.
Pain, the DEA, and the Impact on Patients - Will Rowe, MA; Pain Medicine; 7(1): 86-86; 2006.
Pain and Politics: DEA, Congress, and the Courts, Oh My! - Scott Fishman; Pain Medicine; 7(1): 87-88; 2006.
Related Documents:
Now You See It, Now You Don’t: The Amazing Vanishing DEA Pain FAQ - Drug War Chronicle, #358; 2004-10-15.
Drug Crime Is a (Major) Source of Abused Pain Medications in the United States - D.E. Joranson and A.M. Gilson, Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 30(4): 299-301, 2005.
An Ethical Analysis of the Barriers to Effective Pain Management - Ben Rich; Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 2000.
Comment on Prescribing Controlled Substances for the Treatment of Pain (PDF) - National Association of Attorneys General; 2005-03-21.
H.R. 3015 (NASPER) Continues War Against Pain Patients and Doctors - Michael Glueck, and Robert Cihak; NewsMax.com; 2004-11-23.
The War on Drugs, War on Doctors, and the Pain Crisis in America: Eighty Years of Naked Emperors - Alexander DeLuca; 2002.
The Dr. William Hurwitz Collection - War on Pain Sufferers #4; compiled by DeLuca; 2005, 2006.
Introduction and Index to the War on Pain Sufferers Special Resource Collections
Tags: chilling effect, csa, dea, diversion, ethics, persecuted physicians, prescription drug abuse, red flag, statistics
Comment by
James Stacks
The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Cephalon has issued a warning to physicians about deaths “associated” with their drug Fentora (fentanyl). The company is reportedly under investigation. It looks like the Purdue Pharma methodology is set to become a standard operating procedure for the drug warriors.
This is worrisome, because it points to a strategy where huge sums of corporate assets are being ‘seized’ to fund the drug war apparatus (the Purdue ‘settlement’ was earmarked by the court almost entirely for drug war funding).
I wonder what the patent status of Fentora is? I have always felt that the pharmaceutical industry has a natural interest in opioid prohibition. With physicians afraid to prescribe opioids, their efforts to “do something” for patients who have chronic pain usually involve resorting to a barrage of trials of expensive (patented) medications. I think chronic pain is a serious market asset for the pharmaceutical industry, and the nonpatentable opioids are a serious threat to them. It would be interesting to examine Cephalon’s lobbying history. Purdue had some unusual patterns in lobbying over the years before their debacle. Their “settlement” was a neat little deal where nobody really got in trouble, but the drug war got a huge injection of corporate cash.
From the quote below, it looks like that might be what is being planned with Cephalon. I wonder if it would be possible to do a cost/benefit analysis on pharmaceutical corporations here? If pharmaceutical corporations agreed to turn over all assets from opioid sales to the drug war, would that result in a net financial gain through increased sales of other more expensive patented drugs? Is it possible that what we are seeing here is a “privatization” of funding for the drug war? Are we being set up for a long string of corporate renouncements of, and “apologies” for, opioid therapies? Could this be a mechanism through which the industry itself could be laying plans for privately funding the drug war as public support for the issue dries up?
“A person familiar with the matter said Cephalon is ‘in active discussions’ about a possible settlement with the Connecticut attorney general and the U.S. attorney in Philadelphia, though the talks are at a sensitive stage and might break down. Any settlement would involve a large fine and require that Cephalon take remedial measures to reform its aggressive marketing practices, this person said.” (The Wall Street Journal Online, September 14, 2007, p. A4: http://tinyurl.com/36xtvp)
They call people like me “conspiracy theorists” (which is probably not a really bad thing to be in a world of corporate conspiracies!)
Comment by
James Stacks
uh…oh
Here it comes…”killer” drug on a rampage…
Painkiller kills four people; Sue Mueller; Foodconsumer.org; 2007-09-13.