yearly cold medicine rant

i swear id shoot every last fucking meth-head and do the time for it if it meant that when i got out i could buy some cold medicine worth a shit at midnight without any fucking hassle. i have a cold NOW… i didnt plan on it, and im going to be miserable until the fucking pharmacist gets in at 10 to sell me a 12 pack of pills and give me a legally required consultation that only a few years ago i could just waltz into any wal-mart, or kroger or fucking 24 hr walgreens and buy right off the shelf. fuck you junkies, death by OD is too good for you worthless sacks of shit.

So meth heads and junkies are the ones that made it a pain in the ass to get cold medicine huh? Well glad to see an honest assessment of the legislature!:wink:

Seriously your anger is misplaced, drug users and addicts didn’t cause this.

I see what you’re saying. I can’t take a piss in a San Francisco BART station because “the terrorists” might use the bathrooms as their staging points, despite nothing like that ever happening in history. Really I should blame the city. But all the same, I think the causal relationship is stronger in the OP. Whether Sudafed controls are effective is one issue. But it wouldn’t happen without tweakers.

Internet search suggests that it lowered meth production for a short period, but then people found alternate soures. This works, if Breaking Bad is to be believed. Interesting graph (PDF).

Another Oregon-based PDF cite (what’s with that state?) saying these laws weren’t effective.

…huh? At least where I live, the hoops were put into place because the cold medicines have ingredients that can be used to make meth. If the restrictions are in place because of meth, then yes, drug users and addicts caused it. The drug makers wouldn’t be in business if they didn’t have customers.

There’s a 24-hour CVS in my area with a pharmacist on duty all night. Came in handy a week or two ago when I had a case of the galloping crud DH brought home from work.

I agree with this rant (although I don’t think I’ve ever had to listen to a “consultation”, and I live in California). I do, however, feel a bit sorry for pharmacy staff who have to listen to customers complaining about the hassles imposed on law-abiding cold or allergy sufferers.

Central Illinois - we were told it was because of meth, and there is a lot of it here. I don’t think the law has made a difference.

I have a link, but can’t get it to show correctly.

http://http://illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/consumers/0105_Meth.pdf

The whole thing ticks me off, too. I was sick as a dog a few weeks ago and asked my daughter to pick me up a few things at Wally World, including generic Nyquil caps. Unfortunately, the law would not allow my 17 year old to purchase the medicine. So I get the meds myself or just suffer? Thanks a lot!

If your idiot neighbor burns down his and your house to get rid of the dandelions on his lawn is it the dandelion’s fault?

I am 100% with the OP up until the point where he blames the meth-heads. This legislation was created by our fearless leaders so it would appear they are solving a problem and doing something useful with their time. What the law does is makes the pharmacist into a DEA agent who has to guess, based on appearance, who might be using Pseudoephedrine for illegal purposes. Apparently I look like a meth producer because half the time I ask for the Pseudoephedrine they find some reason why I can’t have any or why I can only have a single sheet of 24 pills. I once found a pharmacy that would allow me 96 pills at one time - woo-hoo! The next time I went there - 24 pills only again.

The other possibility is to switch to a different formulation. My experience is that Alkaseltzer-Plus is the healing nectar of the gods when I have a cold, and it isn’t controlled at all.

I think it, like most OTC cold medicines now, replaces pseudoephedrine with phenylephrine, which is useless as a meth precursor and (in my experience) as a decongestant.

Your first cite is a graph from 1986 to 2003, the Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act was in 2005.

Your second cite is debating the effectiveness of Oregon’s prescription only law. It readily admits that Oregon’s previous “behind-the-counter” law and the federal laws have lower the incidents of meth production in Oregon. It just argues that the Rx only law is not statistically more effective than the laws of other States.

Totally agree that an M&M would probably be as good a decongestant as phenyephrine.

hmmm, seems a revision is necessary then… Fuck the junkies and the goddamn nanny-stater legislature that took away my right to easily buy cold medicine that worked because someone might misuse it!

that better?

Not to mention it takes me a hell of a lot longer to gather the ingredients to cook up a batch of meth.

Fuckers! :mad:

Heisenberg, is that you?

I wasn’t disagreeing with that part, I was confused about the OP not blaming meth production as a source of the ban. Yeah, it sucks they mess things up for everyone.

well production is driven by the market, and the market is junkies. if there were no junkies no one would be producing meth in volumes that would have people taking away my fucking cold medicine.