Something occurred to my while queuing to hand over my personal details to the government, so I get their permission to buy some cold medicine for my sick girlfriend.
There is now a pretty strong dividing line in the public psyche between “regular” cold medicine, and “the good stuff” that has pseudoephedrine, that wouldn’t have been there before these restrictions. That seems like a good way of quantifying the placebo affect. The drugs themselves haven’t changed, they are just the common and garden cold meds you’d have had previously, but now you have the added affect of taking “restricted”, “dangerous” drugs.
Well, part of the issue is that Pseudoephedrine was replaced with Phenylephrine in most OTC products. Phenylephrine isn’t as effective as Pseudoephedrine, so it’s not a matter of Pseudoephedrine being the “Good Stuff”, as Phenylephrine is the “Bad Stuff”.
I think the OP is more talking about different perceptions of pseudoephedrine’s effectiveness at two different historical eras: pre-restriction and post-restriction. This wouldn’t be that easy for researchers to study, given that they would have had to have known the ban would be coming into effect well enough in advance to get a study set up. You might be able to set up a study between the U.S. and another country that hasn’t enacted psuedoephedrine sales restrictions, but off the top of my head I’m not aware of any First-World countries where this is still the case.
Though the stuff you have to get IDed/fingerprinted/anally-probed for is still pseudoephedrine, correct ? So comparison of its efficacy before/after the restrictions would be valid.
But at the very least you have to have records of how well it worked before the change, and be able to measure in a comparable way. Because you can’t go back in time and set up the other half of the experiment before the laws changed.
Surely, though, there were already studies of its effectiveness before the laws changed, anyway? There would have to have been, for it to even be approved by the FDA in the first place, and it’s not too implausible to suppose that studies might have continued even after it was approved.
Pseudoephedrine effectiveness? Yes, for nasal congestion due to colds, allergies, or vasomotor rhinitis. But it’s more of a consensus opinion rather than one based on a lot of good scientific evidence.
It seems to help me in a very limited capacity (meaning it’s better than nothing at all). But before real Sudafed was so hard to get, my husband and I (who both suffer pretty serious allergy symptoms including stuffiness) bought pseudoephedrine-containing meds by the bundle at Costco because we used them so frequently. Believe me, if they weren’t doing what we were paying for them to do, we wouldn’t have used them so much!
Even now, when they’re such a PITA to get, I’d much rather stand in line at the pharmacy, show my driver’s license, sign on the dotted line, etc. than take that other nearly-useless crap.
As for the factual question in the OP, I got nothin’. I don’t know what studies have been done. I do know that pseudoephedrine worked very well for us before it was so hard to get, and it still works very well for us.
Wow Qadgop that quote you give almost makes it seem like fraud to sell phenylephrine as a decongestant. Where are you getting this info? Is it somewhere the layman can access online?
I hate the unregulated stuff. It doesn’t do anything, whereas one regulated sudafed works wonders.
The only difference between now and then, is that then, I could buy it. It took my husband 3 trips to CVS to be able to get real Sudafed. The local pharmacy doesn’t carry it, in all honesty, I could probably buy marijuana easier than I can real sudafed.
It’s just a summary of the official research on drugs. I use a pay webservice to get the info (fortunately work pays the fees).
You can go to http://www.thomsonhc.com and sign up for their service, it lets you research any drug in depth, along with a whole lot of other stuff. But it costs.
That same info may well be out there free somewhere on the web, if you know where to look.
the first time I used Sudafed I thought I’d died and gone to heaven. what a wonderful drug. No other drug is as effective for it’s intended purpose than Sudafed (ok, maybe morphine). I also remember accidentally buying Sudafed PE and it did nothing for a very painful sinus headache. They should change the name to Worthless Crap PE.
I’m sure you’re right about that. My hubby and I don’t subscribe to the ‘homeopathic’ path of reasoning, but what you say is 100% accurate.
OTOH, if, by some chance, some homeopathic remedy cleared my sinuses, I wouldn’t give a damn if it was backed by sinuses or not. What I would give a damn about is whether my sinuses are clear or not.
:smack:
I meant to say “science” as in “I don’t care if it’s backed by science or not. . .”
Right now, my sinuses are too blocked to back anything and I’m gonna go take some freakin’ pseudoephedrine!
