[HN Gopher] FDA proposes ending use of oral phenylephrine as OTC...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       FDA proposes ending use of oral phenylephrine as OTC nasal
       decongestant
        
       Author : impish9208
       Score  : 236 points
       Date   : 2024-11-08 00:56 UTC (22 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.fda.gov)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.fda.gov)
        
       | ClassyJacket wrote:
       | Finally. I hope this reaches Australia and the rest of the world.
       | Phenylephrine doesn't work, it never worked, it's obvious that it
       | doesn't work, it's a literal scam, and the companies selling it
       | are fraudulent.
        
         | denkmoon wrote:
         | Half the products in chemist warehouse are pretty blatant
         | scams. It's insane how effective, important pharmaceuticals are
         | sold side by side with products known to be ineffective and
         | that exist purely to strip uneducated customers of their money.
        
       | tdeck wrote:
       | Next I hope they do cough medicines, I looked a few years ago
       | when I had a cough and it seems like literally none of the OTC
       | ones are more effective than placebo.
        
         | hammock wrote:
         | Dextromethorphan (DM or DXM) is the OTC cough suppressant.
         | Marketed as Delsym comes in an orange box, or you can find it
         | in various combo formulations, and it works
        
           | realce wrote:
           | Delsym is dextromethorphan-polistirex, a long-acting
           | formulation of DXM that is supposed to last 12 hours. DXM is
           | available in almost all cough syrups.
        
             | hammock wrote:
             | The 12 hour formula is the only way you can get it OTC by
             | itself. That's because it's a recreational drug that is
             | commonly abused ("robo tripping") and extended release
             | prevents that. Otherwise you have to get it in a combo drug
             | like NyQuil, which I don't prefer because I can't manage
             | distinct symptoms and dosages independently with a combo
        
           | HideousKojima wrote:
           | Can also give you incredible diarrhea as a nice side effect
        
         | deelowe wrote:
         | Dextromethorphan is the only otc cough medicine that works and
         | pretty much the only prescription stuff that works is opiate
         | based. Of course both are regulated.
        
           | pitaj wrote:
           | DXM can be more or less effective. I wish codeine cough syrup
           | was still available without a prescription.
        
             | yubiox wrote:
             | Exactly. Why do I have to cough my head off because some
             | idiot abuses codeine?
        
               | rustcleaner wrote:
               | Because you and your neighbors think you can interfere
               | with people through your voting decisions. Government has
               | grown so out of line, 'crime' has no meaning anymore
               | beyond "doing that which some group of humans with guns
               | and cages says, who nobody _really_ consented to or
               | contracted with (they 've always been there bullying
               | everyone into paying taxes and obeying edicts)." It
               | certainly doesn't mean what it used to mean anymore!
               | 
               | We as a people need to become even more ungovernable, we
               | need to be the opposite of German and be the most
               | annoying red blooded American caricatures we can be.
               | 
               | Don't join the beehives, they're not worth it! My
               | corollary to Franklin: those who would give up essential
               | sovereignty to gain inclusion into a society deserve and
               | shall receive neither.
        
       | master_crab wrote:
       | Back to Pseudoephedrine! It's behind the counter at your local
       | pharmacist.
        
         | bsder wrote:
         | Unfortunately there is an absurdly low limit on purchasing
         | amount in the US.
         | 
         | In addition, I can't seem to find the 24 hour versions
         | _anywhere_ right now. I could probably buy meth more
         | conveniently. :(
         | 
         | Cue: "A Simple and Convenient Synthesis of Pseudoephedrine From
         | N-Methylamphetamine"
         | https://improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume19/v19i3/Pse...
        
           | hadlock wrote:
           | I've only had to buy it in three states, but generally my
           | experience has been that you can buy a "30 day supply" per
           | month. How often are you sick that you need more than 30 days
           | of the stuff every month? If we run out I'll buy a 30 day
           | supply and that generally lasts the whole family a year or
           | more.
        
             | HideousKojima wrote:
             | You definitely don't have anyone in your family who gets
             | severe congestion from allergies then. The "funnest" form
             | it takes for me is when I start going partially blind in
             | one eye due the the sinus pressure
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | When it's that bad why wouldn't you just get a
               | prescription for an appropriate amount for your
               | situation?
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _When it's that bad why wouldn't you just get a
               | prescription for an appropriate amount for your
               | situation?_
               | 
               | Prescriptions take time and money.
        
               | rootusrootus wrote:
               | I could do it with less effort and cost than OTC. Online
               | message my PCP, prescription sent to pharmacy, mailed to
               | me at my house, cost $0 since it's just a generic. And I
               | have a cheap as shit high deductible plan with a steep
               | out of pocket maximum, not some cadillac plan.
               | 
               | OTC would be faster, but if I have a chronic need for
               | large amounts of pseudoephedrine I'm not waiting until it
               | hurts before I run to the store. I'm getting my doc to
               | make sure I have a hell of a good stash (and I checked,
               | just to be sure -- the limits don't exist if it's
               | prescription; at least not in Oregon, which is famously
               | restrictive on pseudoephedrine).
               | 
               | Would it be better to relax the restrictions that now
               | seem pointless on the OTC version? Yep. But if someone is
               | bitching on HN about how they can barely get what they
               | desperately need, I'd say it's time to stop being
               | idealistic and go get the damn drugs already.
        
               | Brian_K_White wrote:
               | "I don't have this problem, therefor this problem doesn't
               | exist, and so you don't have this problem."
        
           | mike_d wrote:
           | > Unfortunately there is an absurdly low limit on purchasing
           | amount in the US.
           | 
           | The maximum safe dose for an adult is 240 mg in a 24 hour
           | period. Current guidelines allow for getting a 10 day supply
           | (the average cold lasts 7-10 days) in a single visit, and
           | basically a limitless supply with a few visits (37 days worth
           | every 30 days).
           | 
           | If you are running into purchasing limits, you are either
           | making meth or blowing out your liver.
           | 
           | Edit: Math is hard. The 30 day limit is 7.5 grams (a 31 day
           | supply), or 3.6 grams per trip (a 15 day supply).
        
             | PittleyDunkin wrote:
             | > If you are running into purchasing limits, you are either
             | making meth
             | 
             | This would also be an insanely expensive way to make meth.
        
             | bsder wrote:
             | I seem to only be able to buy 10 days of Sudafed 24 Hour
             | every 14 days. That doesn't work if you have allergies.
             | 
             | Presumably because places like Walgreen's can't adjust
             | compliance per state and places like Alaska have "No person
             | may purchase or possess more than 6 g of PSE, EPH or PPA
             | per 30 days unless dispensed pursuant to a prescription"
             | 
             | Note that 6g / .240g = 25. So I can only buy 25 days worth
             | of pills every 30 days. Or 12.5 pills every 15 days which
             | is _suspiciously_ close to that 10 every 14 days number.
        
               | ahazred8ta wrote:
               | This is where you need to bring a buddy on every trip...
        
               | mike_d wrote:
               | > Note that 6g / .240g = 25
               | 
               | Fortunately we are both wrong. I have updated my previous
               | post up thread.
        
               | bsder wrote:
               | How am I wrong? I quoted the Alaska requirements. Are
               | those not correct? Please reference.
        
               | mike_d wrote:
               | I guess you found the one state who isn't in line with
               | federal law. :)
               | 
               | https://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/meth/cma2005.html
               | https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-
               | rankings/pseudoephed...
        
               | stephen_g wrote:
               | Aren't there better things to take longer term for
               | allergies? Pseudoephedrine is amazing for colds etc. but
               | I've always seen warnings not to take it for more than a
               | few days at a time...
        
             | fragmede wrote:
             | What's 10 days/4 people? like... a family that lives
             | together? Who will almost inevitably get each other sick?
             | If the average cold lasts 7-10 days, one of them's going
             | shopping for more while sick.
             | 
             | Sounds like great public health and safety policy there.
        
             | terribleperson wrote:
             | At least some states track it on a household (address)
             | basis.
        
         | PittleyDunkin wrote:
         | I was denied this the last time I tried to buy it and the
         | pharmacist couldn't even tell me why aside from "the system
         | won't let me". I went to a different chain a half mile away and
         | walked out with a month's supply of the stuff. Hilariously
         | incompetently-designed regulation.
         | 
         | Meanwhile meth making is more efficient, cheaper, and delivers
         | purer-grade glass than ever.
        
         | adrr wrote:
         | Most worthless law. Now i have to wait in line for 10 minutes
         | to get it and yet meth is still widely available and usage
         | actually increased. Did nothing except shift manufacturing to
         | outside of the US.
        
           | HideousKojima wrote:
           | And I can't stockpile it for allergy season (which is about 9
           | months out of the year for me). I have to make regularly
           | scheduled trips to the pharmacy every two weeks which is a
           | huge pain in the ass
        
             | deelowe wrote:
             | You take 48 pills in two weeks?!
        
               | ksenzee wrote:
               | That's pretty easy when the dose is two pills every six
               | hours.
        
               | pitaj wrote:
               | They make twelve hour extended release versions now.
               | There are twelve per box and you can get three boxes at a
               | time. That's 18 days but only if you take them twice a
               | day, which you probably shouldn't if you like sleeping.
               | If you take one a day, that's a whole month's worth.
        
               | deelowe wrote:
               | You're going to have serious issues if you take that
               | much. It's causes major problems after a few days.
        
               | HideousKojima wrote:
               | I can get 15 of the 24 hour generic Claritins every 2
               | weeks. Works out to about 1 a day
        
             | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
             | My life on an ADHD med, a mental health med, and 3 other
             | meds for transgender stuff.
             | 
             | I am very lucky to have a backlog of estradiol, my main HRT
             | drug, because I was purposely "playing under speed" for
             | most of a year, otherwise all 5 drugs would be randomly
             | running out at 5 different times throughout the month.
             | Almost nothing gets assigned to 90-day fills for some
             | stupid fucking reason.
        
               | terribleperson wrote:
               | So from personal experience you can often just ask docs
               | for a longer prescription if something isn't particularly
               | restricted (like stimulant-type ADHD medications).
               | 
               | From friends, I know that some therapists and
               | endocrinologists are willing to give 6 mo or even 1 yr
               | scripts of hormones, though some will only do so under
               | certain conditions. You might want to find a different
               | doc. I know one person who gets a 3 mo supply of
               | estradiol from a telehealth provider.
        
             | caturopath wrote:
             | I once actually got denied and had to buy a smaller box
             | (for the same price). What the hell happens to families
             | with multiple teens who all get sick at the same time?
        
             | philjohn wrote:
             | Any reason you choose to take PE rather than a
             | corticosteroid nasal spray?
        
               | zxexz wrote:
               | Corticosteroids are powerful substances, and have lots of
               | potential adverse effects - and long-term usage can wreak
               | havoc. The physiological side-effects of corticosteroid
               | withdrawal can be quite awful. They are amazing,
               | necessary, drugs for society. But, when something as safe
               | and effective as pseudoephedrine can do the trick (it
               | really is _quite_ safe, and even has less potential
               | interactions with things than plenty of OTC drugs do),
               | there is literally no reason for anything else.
               | 
               | When I get a cold, (pseudo)ephedrine is the only
               | medication that actually really helps. I don't need it
               | often, I just try to remember to buy some once in a blue
               | moon when I'm already at the pharmacy so that when I need
               | some, it will be there. But for people with allergies or
               | those who get sick a lot, the current process is yet
               | another completely pointless annoyance.
        
               | mfru wrote:
               | Corticosteroid nasal spray does not have the same effects
               | as when it is administered in other ways and is safe even
               | for long-time use as three different doctors in my
               | country told me.
        
               | philjohn wrote:
               | Yep - I think parent poster is conflating the effects of
               | oral corticosteroid use (which believe me, I know, and
               | they SUCK) with topical usage.
        
               | zxexz wrote:
               | Yes, I was. Thank you both for pointing this out.
        
               | zxexz wrote:
               | I just spent dug in to this and, wow, I was wrong! Most
               | all the negatives that occur with parenteral and oral
               | routes appear to be absent in the intranasal form. And
               | there is quite a lot of research to back that up.
               | 
               | Thank you for correcting me. And likely sending me down
               | another rabbit hole.
        
           | quickthrowman wrote:
           | Pseudoephedrine should be unrestricted, there's no way to
           | compete on price with meth cooked in an industrial lab in
           | Mexico by using pseudoephedrine as a precursor. Keep it
           | behind the counter (to prevent theft) but let adults buy as
           | much as they want.
        
             | adrr wrote:
             | There was actually a push to make it rx only. Oregon and
             | Mississippi passed laws to make it RX, luckily those laws
             | have been rolled back.
        
           | loeg wrote:
           | Bring back domestic manufacturing jobs!
        
             | cyberax wrote:
             | Small batch, organic, artisanal, fair trade meth for the
             | win!
        
         | yellowapple wrote:
         | Or just straight ephedrine, which is also behind the counter at
         | your local pharmacist (brand name Bronkaid).
        
       | zeroonetwothree wrote:
       | Great. I always have to explain to people not to buy this crap
       | and get the good stuff instead
        
       | peterldowns wrote:
       | Just as a reminder, you are completely allowed to buy
       | pseudoephedrine without a prescription, you just have to ask your
       | pharmacist. My local pharmacy keeps it behind the counter already
       | pre-compounded, and it's cheap and effective. One of those little
       | things that I never used to purchase because I was somehow not
       | certain if I could actually get it. Yes, you can.
        
         | jey wrote:
         | What country are you in? In the US, pseudoephedrine has to be
         | requested at the pharmacy counter, but it's not a compounded
         | medication. Instead it's sold as pills in the usual "blister
         | pack" format.
        
           | peterldowns wrote:
           | I live in the US. You're right, it's not compounded by my
           | pharmacy, I was confused because of the branding on the
           | package -- it's manufactured somewhere else and just
           | repackaged by my pharmacy:
           | 
           | https://files.catbox.moe/9pbj43.jpg
        
             | khuey wrote:
             | Ohm Laboratories appears to be a subsidiary of Sun Pharma
             | which is one of the largest generic drug manufacturers in
             | the world. This looks like a pretty standard generic drug
             | with store branding package to me.
        
             | mikeweiss wrote:
             | It's not repackaged by your pharmacy, Good Neighbor
             | Pharmacy is a generic drug brand for pharmacies and
             | supermarkets that don't have their own generic brand.
        
         | bluedino wrote:
         | You need a drivers license though. And they enter something
         | into the computer.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | My local pharmacies keep it behind the counter, but the counter
         | has shorter hours than the rest of the store. And you've got to
         | submit your license to be entered into their system (and who
         | knows what happens with that data).
        
         | elric wrote:
         | In Belgium it's no longer available without prescription since
         | this month. Reasoning is that it can trigger cardiac issues,
         | neurological issues, and even psychiatric issues in some
         | people.
        
       | biglyburrito wrote:
       | So stupid. It was plainly obvious how ineffective it was,
       | compared to pseudoephedrine, anytime you got sick.
        
       | nimbius wrote:
       | whats wild is this was a solution to a problem that was directly
       | caused by neoliberal capitalism.
       | 
       | in the 90s and 2000s when meth first began to spike, the rural
       | economy was changing. Jobs weren't paying as well or were going
       | away altogether. Meth found a niche as a kind of performance
       | enhancement drug for people working long hours at physically
       | demanding jobs. journalist Nick Reding found this in the pork
       | industry in Iowa, and anthropologist Jason Pine found in general
       | in Missouri.
       | 
       | neoliberalisms solution was a ham fisted market based restriction
       | that turned a normal cold drug into a rarity. we didnt start
       | working to treat methamphetamine addiction as a disease until it
       | began to spread into more affluent white-collar neighborhoods.
       | 
       | this could have been avoided with competent market reforms and
       | regulation, as well as stronger labor protections and minimum
       | wage law.
        
         | realce wrote:
         | And it's much more profitable to scrape every ounce of working
         | life out of the poor, then use them as slave labor in a prison
         | once their addictions get them into a critical situation or
         | farm them out to a rehabilitation facility that pays councilors
         | 20 bucks an hour and gets a large chunk of it's funding from
         | taxpayer subsidies. If there's any issue, blame the overworked
         | poor for turning to drugs, then sell them energy drinks.
        
         | userbinator wrote:
         | You mean caused by the war on drugs.
        
         | refurb wrote:
         | > whats wild is this was a solution to a problem that was
         | directly caused by neoliberal capitalism.
         | 
         | Did you pull a muscle stretching that argument into place?
         | 
         | People like meth. People in capitalist countries and non-
         | capitalist countries alike.
         | 
         | It was in fact a hamfisted government regulation that drove
         | this.
        
         | treflop wrote:
         | Neoliberals believe in free market and deregulation, not market
         | restrictions.
         | 
         | Nixon was the one that started the war on drugs and also
         | enacted price controls. I would not call him a neoliberal. He
         | also primarily interested in foreign policy and not the
         | economy.
         | 
         | Also, Sudafed was only banned from being purchased easily in
         | 2006. The bill was introduced by a random congressman from
         | Indiana, a congressman was also easily offended by an offensive
         | joke written on someone's else cake.
        
         | rustcleaner wrote:
         | I blame Progressivism(tm) and the expansion of the role of
         | government. Laissez Faire is the ideal policy for a force-
         | monopolist to perform by. It is better to have a weak
         | government precisely because it's way easier to fell a badge-
         | less gangster than a badged one.
        
       | MBCook wrote:
       | And yet homeopathy stuff is legal and often mixed in on the shelf
       | with actual drugs.
       | 
       | Sigh. Still an improvement.
        
       | sodality2 wrote:
       | I remember complaining to my friends about how frustrating it was
       | to hear that a medicine I frequently used turned out to be
       | placebo, exactly one year ago today. Opened this article up, I'm
       | currently taking the _exact same_ one in the article photo - it's
       | what I had lying around and I had forgotten the name of the "bad"
       | sudafed (it's sudafed PE). They need to take it off the shelves
       | quicker. Every day is tens of thousands of more people who are
       | scammed.
       | 
       | Putting my money where my mouth is and leaving a comment on the
       | FDA proposal...
        
         | jart wrote:
         | How can you believe you've been taking a placebo for years?
         | Phenylephrine is used for the illicit synthesis of
         | methamphetamine, so there's an inherent bias towards anything
         | that gets it off the shelves. Cherry picking studies that say
         | it's ineffective is more velvet glove than using only the iron
         | fist to ban the stuff. But make no mistake that the iron fist
         | is taking your meds away either way.
        
           | culi wrote:
           | I think you're confusing Pseudoephedrine (which works and is
           | used to produce meth) with Phenylephrine (which doesn't work
           | and cannot be used to produce meth).
           | 
           | This article is about removing phenylephrine (sudafed PE)
           | from shelves. Studies have pretty thoroughly showed it is
           | completely ineffective for what it is marketed for
        
           | sodality2 wrote:
           | I believe that it doesn't work wholeheartedly, because every
           | time I try it, it is ineffective - but my sinus problems are
           | rarely bad enough to warrant medication (it's been one year)
           | and by then I've forgotten what works and what doesn't.
           | 
           | Also, I suspect you're mixing up your drugs. Phenylephrine
           | (the drug in this article) lacks the methyl structure to be
           | used for the synthesis of methamphetamines. In fact, that's
           | why it was popularized - pseudoephedrine, the truly effective
           | sibling, was becoming too good for meth production, so they
           | created a less potent alternative, phenylephrine, that lacks
           | the ingredients necessary. They then locked pseudoephedrine
           | behind the counter. Turns out the oral form of phenylephrine
           | is less than "weaker" - it's largely useless - so they pumped
           | out enough of this crap to the tune of $1.7B that the
           | American public spent every year for 18 years after they
           | knew.
        
             | jart wrote:
             | Ah gotcha. So the cynical thing I thought would happen
             | already happened.
             | 
             | Glad to hear we're on a road where peak cynicism is looking
             | behind us.
        
           | stephen_g wrote:
           | _Pseudoephedrine_ is the one that is both proven to be
           | effective and is the precursor to meth. Phenylephrine is the
           | useless placebo that they put in the tablets on the shelf
           | only because it _can't_ be used to make meth. It should be
           | torn off the shelves because it's useless.
           | 
           | The only reason the 'PE' (marketing term for the ineffective
           | phenylephrine) tablets might be helpful is because they
           | usually also have paracetamol (acetaminophen) in them which
           | is probably the only bit that works. They don't work as a
           | decongestant for most people like pseudoephedrine does
           | though.
        
         | mmazing wrote:
         | My grocery store pharmacy has homeopathic stuff next to the
         | Sudafed too. Is literally a placebo.
         | 
         | At least the Sudafed has acetaminophen in it ...
        
           | bitwize wrote:
           | If you're referring to Zicam, there's actually evidence that
           | zinc gluconate helps reduce the length and severity of
           | colds... and it's actually present in more than trace amounts
           | in Zicam. They market it as "homeopathic" in order to get
           | around FDA regulations, and they've gotten in trouble because
           | zinc in your nose can knock out your sense of smell, perhaps
           | permanently. (The lozenges don't appear to have this issue.)
        
         | matwood wrote:
         | I remember when the law first went into place. I bought some
         | meds and the next day was back at the store because the new
         | stuff didn't work. For me it was even more obvious because
         | pseudoephedrine works so well for me.
        
         | cbau wrote:
         | PE = Placebo Effect
        
       | currymj wrote:
       | phenylephrine is still pretty effective as a topical nasal spray.
       | so don't write it off if you see it in that form.
        
       | crb3 wrote:
       | My anecdata is that, though it's not as effective as
       | pseudoephedrine, phenylephrine actually _is_ effective in an
       | inhaler, and a helluva lot better at clearing up a stuffy nose
       | than  "scents and essential oils". Of course, a cylindrical
       | inhaler with a wick inside it doesn't go _near_ my digestive
       | tract... Now I 'll have to look around for a replacement inhaler,
       | something quick enough to avert choking-panic. Thanks, CVS.
        
         | ksenzee wrote:
         | No you won't! It's just the oral formulations that are being
         | taken off the shelves. The inhaled version does indeed work and
         | will still be available.
        
           | crb3 wrote:
           | It's off the shelf at my local CVS (e: and has been for
           | weeks). I looked.
        
             | lucubratory wrote:
             | That's their company policy or a supply issue, not the
             | FDA's decision.
        
               | crb3 wrote:
               | Thanks, CVS.
        
         | lucubratory wrote:
         | It's only the oral version which has no effect and is thus
         | being pulled. The inhaled version has more evidence that it
         | works and will remain available.
        
       | ramenmeal wrote:
       | Does anyone else feel like dayquil is an effective decongestant?
       | I do. I can literally feel the gunk running down from my sinuses
       | to the back of my throat when I take it. Confusing to me cause
       | it's phenylephrine, which is what the article states is
       | ineffective. I've had this experience after reading these reports
       | about a year ago.
        
         | solveit wrote:
         | Might be the other ingredients reducing inflammation, widening
         | your clogged pipes and letting stuff drain.
        
         | pitaj wrote:
         | It's probably the guaifenesin (Mucinex) that you're feeling.
        
         | shagie wrote:
         | As mentioned in a sibling, try looking at Mucinex a try. There
         | is a 12h version that has Guaifenesin
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaifenesin and Dextromethorphan
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextromethorphan as the only two
         | active ingredients.
         | 
         | Compare with Dayquil - Acetaminophen 650 mg (pain
         | reliever/fever reducer), Dextromethorphan HBr 20 mg (cough
         | suppressant) and Phenylephrine HCI 10 mg (nasal decongestant).
         | 
         | > Guaifenesin, also known as glyceryl guaiacolate, is an
         | expectorant medication taken by mouth and marketed as an aid to
         | eliminate sputum from the respiratory tract.
         | 
         | > ...
         | 
         | > Guaifenesin is used to try to help with coughing up thick
         | mucus, and is sometimes combined with the antitussive (cough
         | suppressant) dextromethorphan, such as in Mucinex DM or
         | Robitussin DM.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | > Dextromethorphan (DXM), sold under the trade name Robitussin
         | among others, is a cough suppressant used in many cough and
         | cold medicines.
         | 
         | > ...
         | 
         | > The primary use of dextromethorphan is as a cough
         | suppressant, for the temporary relief of cough caused by minor
         | throat and bronchial irritation (such as commonly accompanies
         | the flu and common cold), or from inhaled particle irritants,
         | as well as chronic cough at a higher dosage.
         | 
         | ---
         | 
         | The combination of the two is designed to reduce coughing and
         | when you _do_ cough, it is much more productive with the
         | expectorant and cough suppression. It isn 't a decongestant,
         | but it has (personal anecdotal take) a good effect on getting
         | rid of the secondary effects of congestion.
        
           | TheJoeMan wrote:
           | Only issue is the bilayer tablets taste aweful! Why they
           | can't do dual speed capsules is beyond me.
        
           | SeanLuke wrote:
           | Guaifenesin, like Phenylephrine, is now widely viewed as
           | having no efficacy.
        
         | toast0 wrote:
         | I swear I read a report somewhere that said something like PE
         | is effective iff you take twice the dose on the box or you take
         | it with other drugs (I think ibuprofen was tested?), although I
         | can't find it again, and I may have read it when I was
         | congested and only had PE.
         | 
         | My lived experince with PE is it never works most of the time.
         | But if I realise I need psuedoephedrine and I'm not somewhere
         | or sometime where I can access it, I'll get PE and hope.
         | Sometimes hope works, but it usually doesn't clear my sinuses
         | very effectively. But if I have sinus congestion related to
         | flying, I might also have soreness related to flying and take
         | PE (because you can get it at the airport) and ibuprofen
         | together, and maybe it works.
         | 
         | But also some people are more sensitive to some drugs, so it
         | could work for you, while not being very effective in general.
        
           | joecool1029 wrote:
           | > I swear I read a report somewhere that said something like
           | PE is effective iff you take twice the dose on the box or you
           | take it with other drugs (I think ibuprofen was tested?)
           | 
           | Oh yeah combine with Tylenol and increase the dose if you
           | want to experience adverse cardiac events. The oral form of
           | PE is really only good for jacking up blood pressure, it
           | doesn't help with congestion more than placebo:
           | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4500855/
        
       | colechristensen wrote:
       | Here's a solid completely factual reason why people don't trust
       | the FDA or the government to give health advice. Pointless drug
       | allowed for decades.
       | 
       | If you want to be trusted you have to be consistently
       | trustworthy.
       | 
       | What else is the FDA wrong about and will continue to be wrong
       | about for decades?
        
         | OutOfHere wrote:
         | It makes me wonder if it has anything to do with Trump winning
         | the election.
         | 
         | > What else is the FDA wrong about
         | 
         | Too much. For one, numerous harmful additives are freely
         | allowed. These additives may not cause immediate damage, but
         | over the long term they really inflame the gut. They serve no
         | good purpose in the medicines. Examples include: propylene
         | glycol, sodium lauryl sulfate, titanium dioxide, talc, ammonium
         | hydroxide, monoethanolamine, n-butyl alcohol.
        
         | rileymat2 wrote:
         | This conversation is confusing without the FDA isn't everything
         | allowed by default and you get far worse like the current
         | supplement industry?
        
           | initplus wrote:
           | Regulatory challenge is that the FDA have to combine 3
           | related but seperate concepts:
           | 
           | 1. Manufacturing quality/ingredients accuracy (is the product
           | what is says on the tin) 2. Safety 3. Efficacy
           | 
           | Medicines must pass all three, supplements don't have to meet
           | any.
        
           | rustcleaner wrote:
           | FDA and DEA should be concerned mainly with the contents
           | matching the box, and not on medical claims of effectiveness.
        
             | rileymat2 wrote:
             | In your opinion, should any government agency monitor truth
             | of claims, or is this all outsourced to private things like
             | consumer reports? Is it class action lawsuits?
             | 
             | And in the case of drug effectiveness, isn't this a very
             | expensive endeavor, where the primary source of funding
             | would be the companies themselves biasing results?
             | 
             | In this case we had companies happily selling us
             | ineffective drugs, not because the FDA wanted it, but
             | because they did not reject it. In a world without the FDA,
             | what entity rejects?
        
         | Brian_K_White wrote:
         | Well? What else indeed? Is this the exception or the rule?
         | 
         | I bet you think people should trust you even though I also bet
         | you were wrong about something once.
        
           | colechristensen wrote:
           | >I bet you think people should trust you even though I also
           | bet you were wrong about something once.
           | 
           | Is there anything I've been wrong about which has been
           | significant for a couple of decades?
           | 
           | Pseudoephedrine left OTC in about 2006, phenylephrine has
           | been the main decongestant available and there's been solid
           | evidence out there for a long time that it didn't do
           | anything.
        
             | Brian_K_White wrote:
             | Did you think this addressed the point?
             | 
             | I don't hear anything that shows that this mistake is part
             | of the majority or minority.
             | 
             | How long ago it was made is insignificant.
             | 
             | I have no reason to think that you do not have a similar 20
             | year old ongoing error unless you are physically not yet 20
             | years old. I'm sure I probably do. I'm sure everyone does.
             | It's not a remarkable thing.
             | 
             | They are also right now self-correcting this error, while I
             | still have mine whatever they are.
             | 
             | Regardless, it still doesn't answer the question of
             | exception vs rule. No matter _how_ bad or long-running this
             | error is, it doesn 't matter, what matters is, is it
             | representative of most of their policies and actions? It
             | might be, but you have not shown that it is and I have not
             | shown that it's not.
        
         | telgareith wrote:
         | Easy: Foam of any type and any chemistry in CPAP or ventilators
         | of any type. Also, "soclean" and any other ozone 'cleaners'
        
         | refurb wrote:
         | If you were informed on how we got to this point, you'd likely
         | have a different opinion.
         | 
         | But that would take some research, and hey, it's easier to just
         | have a kneejerk reaction right?
        
         | autoexec wrote:
         | Companies lie to the public and sell products that contain a
         | useless drug that does nothing, the FDA wants the products with
         | the useless drug removed because the companies selling them are
         | just ripping people off, and your conclusion is that the FDA is
         | the problem?
        
       | kens wrote:
       | One of my favorite papers is "A simple and convenient synthesis
       | of pseudoephedrine from N-methylamphetamine" [1].
       | 
       | This is a satirical paper. Because pseudoephedrine (i.e. the good
       | decongestant) is very difficult to obtain due to restrictions,
       | but "N-methylamphetamine can be procured at almost any time on
       | short notice", the paper describes how to synthesize
       | pseudoephedrine from meth with a procedure that looks valid.
       | 
       | [1]
       | https://improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volume19/v19i3/Pse...
        
         | hansvm wrote:
         | I found out recently that you don't just need a decent
         | government ID; it needs to be from the state you're purchasing
         | the Sudafed from, because apparently each state administers its
         | own database. If you run out and have a persistent cough
         | (weakened immune system from not licking doorknobs the last few
         | years of covid, or so do the doctor says) from a common cold
         | while on vacation, you're shit out of luck unless you go back
         | home or you and an accomplice are willing to procure your cough
         | medicine with their license.
        
           | randrus wrote:
           | Seems like it varies by state - I've purchased Sudafed in at
           | least two states other than my own.
        
             | numbsafari wrote:
             | Same here.
        
               | schmidtleonard wrote:
               | Me too.
        
           | Gibbon1 wrote:
           | My WAT.
           | 
           | Refused sale of Sudafed because my license was expired.
           | Apparently I accidentally tossed my new license and kept the
           | old one. Doh! However they happily refilled my schedule III
           | meds with the expired license.
           | 
           | As I said WAT.
        
           | pdonis wrote:
           | _> you don 't just need a decent government ID; it needs to
           | be from the state you're purchasing the Sudafed from_
           | 
           | The FDA rule on this [1] doesn't appear to be quite that
           | strict: it says the ID can be "a photo identification card
           | issued by the State or the Federal Government or a document
           | that is considered acceptable by the seller". It doesn't
           | explicitly say it has to be from the same state as the one in
           | which you are buying the medication, and it leaves the seller
           | some latitude in what to accept.
           | 
           | Possibly some states have more restrictive rules. Or
           | particular sellers might be more leery about what they are
           | willing to accept.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-drug-class/legal-
           | requi...
        
             | _moof wrote:
             | The FDA rule doesn't restrict the IDs but the phrase "that
             | is considered acceptable by the seller" lets the pharmacy
             | put any restrictions in place they want. They can tell you
             | it has to be hot pink and glow-in-the-dark and you've got
             | no choice but to deal with it.
        
               | arcticbull wrote:
               | While true as long as they're in compliance with the law,
               | wouldn't they want to sell all the Sudafed they can? They
               | can deny service to anyone for pretty much any reason. No
               | shirt, no shoes, no Sudafed or anything else. So yeah,
               | but in reality it isn't aligned with their interests and
               | if they don't want to serve you they can always find a
               | different justification.
        
               | safety1st wrote:
               | Maybe they want that, maybe they don't. Retail drug
               | stores in the US are an oligopoly, that industry may not
               | be a monopoly (yet) but they don't function under perfect
               | competition. Maybe if you're the management or the
               | shareholders of a retail drug chain you're just kind of
               | shrugging your shoulders and working on the next merger
               | at this point since the fewer competitors you have, the
               | less hard you have to work for the customer's dollar.
        
               | jkaplowitz wrote:
               | The "acceptable by the seller" wording only applies if
               | the ID is not issued by "the State" or "the Federal
               | Government". Wouldn't the latter option mean that a US
               | passport, a green card, a Global Entry card, or a NEXUS
               | card must be accepted as suitable ID by any seller in any
               | state? All of those are issued by the feds.
        
               | potato3732842 wrote:
               | And the pharmacy has the state regulators breathing down
               | their neck so being super uptight about it is the obvious
               | choice.
               | 
               | Of course all of this is stupid in a world where the real
               | junkies use fentanyl and there's other easy ways to make
               | meth.
        
               | vrc wrote:
               | States like MA legally only accept MA IDs and federal
               | govt IDs for age verification. That's why a lot of bars
               | and packies will turn people away or ask for additional
               | proof like CC's. You're more likely to be held liable for
               | misconduct if the license you accepted is out of state.
        
             | jkaplowitz wrote:
             | Any seller in any state should have to accept a federally
             | issued ID such as a US passport, no?
        
               | vrc wrote:
               | Yes but then you'd have to carry that for domestic
               | travel.
        
           | seattle_spring wrote:
           | That's not universally applicable, as I've purchased it in
           | Washington plenty of times with an Oregon ID.
        
           | bigfatkitten wrote:
           | I've purchased Sudafed in Nevada with a foreign drivers'
           | license with no issues.
        
           | esperent wrote:
           | Here in Vietnam it's completely impossible to get
           | pseudoephedrine at all and I think it's the same in all Asian
           | countries. I even resorted to trying to buy some ephedra tea
           | (Chinese medicinal herb from which ephedrine was first
           | discovered). I ordered a box of tea bags from Shopee.vn and
           | rather amusingly received an envelope with the amount I had
           | paid including shipping in cash and an apology letter saying
           | they could no longer sell this herb and please don't leave a
           | bad review.
           | 
           | However, a few months earlier due to a Google translate mixup
           | where I thought I was ordering peppermint oil, I got 100ml of
           | sassafras oil [0]. It's a precursor to MDMA and at least as
           | restricted as pseudoephedrine.
           | 
           | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safrole
        
             | exe34 wrote:
             | just been banned in the UK. was the only thing that worked
             | on my allergies.
             | 
             | edit: my bad, no it's codeine linctus that was banned,
             | there was talk of making pseudoephedrine prescription only
             | but that hasn't gone through.
        
               | pj1115 wrote:
               | Pseudoephedrine, banned? That's news to me, I bought some
               | OTC a couple of weeks ago.
        
             | angry_octet wrote:
             | It's readily available in Thailand and Indonesia. You can
             | get it mixed with paracetamol OTC in Singapore, but almost
             | everything in Singapore requires a prescription (even e.g.
             | throat lozenges) so find a doctor if you're staying for a
             | while. In Malaysia you need a prescription.
        
           | cowsandmilk wrote:
           | I've definitely purchased Sudafed in Seattle with a Virginia
           | Drivers License.
        
           | Pxtl wrote:
           | Once again, big thanks to paranoid "mark of the beast"
           | conspiracy theorists with funny ideas about federal
           | government IDs and digital IDs.
           | 
           | We have the technology. "Behind the counter" could just mean
           | a vending machine with good ID tech instead of queuing up for
           | an overworked pharmacist behind a dozen people.
        
         | echelon wrote:
         | Pseudoephedrine being pulled from the shelves is one of the
         | biggest crimes of our time.
         | 
         | Pseudoephedrine should be easy and plentiful to obtain. I don't
         | care if people use it to make meth. What they do in their
         | private time doesn't concern me. Not being able to get Sudafed
         | when I'm sick kills me. It's not like those people won't be
         | able to get meth some other way.
         | 
         | We let people buy cars and cause 43,000 automobile deaths a
         | year. People should be able to live life without stuffy noses.
         | Maybe license people to buy meds and take it away if they abuse
         | it? That's better than the draconian system we have now.
         | 
         | And don't get me started on ADHD medication and their
         | shortages.
         | 
         | Edit: and there are 178,000 alcohol related deaths per year in
         | the US. If you're going to allow that without prohibition, then
         | please let us unstuff our noses.
         | 
         | I'm tired of living in a nanny state when we let people buy and
         | own guns and swords and flamethrowers. Simply hiking on a
         | mountain can kill you. Must we install guardrails on all the
         | high places?
         | 
         | It's not that bad of a negative externality. Honestly. Not
         | relative to all the other ones we've deemed acceptable. This is
         | weird picking and choosing that doesn't make sense.
        
           | equestria wrote:
           | > Maybe license people to buy meds and take it away if they
           | abuse it? That's better than the draconian system we have
           | now.
           | 
           | I sympathize with your broader point, but... how is that
           | better? "Sorry, you were buying too much nasal decongestant a
           | decade ago, so no cancer medication for you"?
        
             | PeeMcGee wrote:
             | I think they were deliberately pointing out the absurdity
             | by comparing it to other far more dangerous things we just
             | waive off if you have a license.
        
             | otherme123 wrote:
             | I understood your parent comment in a specific drug way:
             | you can buy pseudo until your license to buy that specific
             | compound, or maybe a group or related chemicals, is
             | revoked. But you can still get any other compound.
             | 
             | Not that different from current situation: we have all our
             | "license" to buy scheduled compounds revoked, but we still
             | can get a lot of other compounds.
        
             | renewiltord wrote:
             | How is that any better than the current system which is
             | just "no cancer medication for you"?
        
           | Nursie wrote:
           | I read a study here in Australia a little while ago that
           | showed that removal of easily accessible pseudoephedrine had
           | done nothing to either stop the proliferation of clandestine
           | labs, nor curtail the availability of crystal meth. They just
           | switched to different syntheses, and there are still large-
           | scale imports that sometimes get caught, sometimes don't.
           | 
           | People were still trying to claim the program was a success
           | because they had stopped gangs getting pseudo as a precursor.
           | 
           | But so what? it's done literally nothing to stop criminals
           | profiting, nor to stop people getting addicted to meth, with
           | all the associated public health and petty-criminal
           | consequences of that. And now it's harder for ordinary people
           | to get effective decongestant.
           | 
           | It just seems that nobody is willing to admit the whole thing
           | was pointless.
        
             | EdwardDiego wrote:
             | Same in New Zealand, we removed pseudoephedrine as an
             | option unless you had a special dispensation from the
             | Ministry of Health - mainly due to pharmacies being ram-
             | raided for the pseudo.
             | 
             | The end result? The gangs just started importing pseudo,
             | before later just switching to importing methamphetamine
             | directly (something that Australia's deportation policies
             | really helped with as the "501s" as we call them that were
             | deported back to NZ often had existing connections that
             | could facilitate the direct importation of meth).
             | 
             | It's a really interesting supply chain that involves
             | organised crime groups in multiple countries, often starts
             | in India for the precursors, then clandestine labs in
             | Laos/Vietnam/Thailand overseen by Chinese groups in
             | conjunction with local groups, then smuggled via the
             | Pacific Islands, notably Fiji and Samoa where the Chinese
             | groups have established transshipment facilities, before
             | being smuggled into Australia and NZ by local groups who
             | then distribute and supply it.
             | 
             | A new development has been the Central American cartels
             | branching out from cocaine to meth so there's been a bunch
             | of meth coming directly from the Americas.
        
           | epistasis wrote:
           | The car stat is a good example of trying new policies to
           | lower car deaths! They are the greatest risk to my children's
           | lives and I find it terrifying that we let them roll around
           | everywhere so close to people, like we do in parking lots.
           | 
           | >Maybe license people to buy meds and take it away if they
           | abuse it?
           | 
           | I'm a bit confused, because you can buy it already with an
           | ID, correct? You don't even need a purchasing license, just a
           | drivers license or other government ID.
        
             | 0x457 wrote:
             | No, they mean you get a license to buy meds and that
             | license gets revoked if you abuse them. Not that you need a
             | _driving_ license to buy meds.
        
           | loopdoend wrote:
           | It is even easier to get in Singapore.
        
             | radicality wrote:
             | Really? As in, in spite of how bonkers the overall import
             | rules in Singapore are?
             | 
             | I just travelled there few weeks ago, and the government
             | websites made it sound like it's best to just not bring any
             | pills at all (or chewing gum).
             | 
             | - Tool you can to use to check active ingredients and
             | whether its allowed: https://www.hsa.gov.sg/personal-
             | medication/check-requirement...
             | 
             | - Anything that might be controlled/require prescription,
             | have to apply for permit it to bring it:
             | https://www.hsa.gov.sg/personal-medication/submit-
             | applicatio...
             | 
             | - They provide a tool to show illegal health products.
             | Better not bring one of them: https://oscar.hsa.gov.sg/Publ
             | ication/ahpdm/faces/AHPPublicat...
        
             | refurb wrote:
             | It's the same in Singapore.
             | 
             | You can only buy from a pharmacist (behind the counter) and
             | you need to provide your national ID number. Your purchase
             | is put in a database that any pharmacist can see.
        
           | cyberax wrote:
           | > Pseudoephedrine being pulled from the shelves is one of the
           | biggest crimes of our time.
           | 
           | What's even worse, modern pseudoephedrine is produced in a
           | form that makes meth synthesis from it extremely tedious and
           | generally impossible in home conditions:
           | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3793278/
        
             | 15155 wrote:
             | 99% of pseudoephedrine sold is not this form and this
             | specific product has already been debunked years ago with
             | Mississippi's complete ban (and their refusal to allow it.)
             | 
             | I remember the video of the pharma rep or cop or whoever
             | trying to make meth out of the new pills and the product
             | getting squishy. Months later, a different video was
             | published, where some household solvent was used to easily
             | pull the very-dissolvable pseudoephedrine salts from the
             | paste.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _Pseudoephedrine should be easy and plentiful to obtain_
           | 
           | Anything that isn't directly physically addictive ( _e.g._
           | opiates) or subject to a tragedy of the commons ( _e.g._
           | antibiotics) should be over the counter.
        
             | AnthonyMouse wrote:
             | Addictive is the argument _in favor_ of making it over the
             | counter. Addicts will do whatever it takes to get their
             | fix, so if there isn 't a legal path, they buy on the
             | street, creating a funding source for organized crime and
             | spurring gang violence.
             | 
             | Then, because the black market is already in violation of
             | the law, there are no purity standards. The customer who
             | thinks they're getting Adderall or codeine is actually
             | getting fentanyl because fentanyl's much higher potency
             | makes it easier to smuggle, but for the same reason makes
             | it much more prone to addiction and overdose, especially
             | when careless street dealers get their proportions wrong.
             | All of which is avoided if you just let them buy it from
             | the pharmacy.
             | 
             | Notice that there is no thriving black market for
             | antibiotics propping up international drug cartels, because
             | they're not addictive.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _Addictive is the argument in favor of making it over
               | the counter_
               | 
               | You want to control the general population's access to
               | physically-addictive substances to control addiction.
               | Managing addicts is not a pharmaceutical matter.
        
               | echelon wrote:
               | We don't control access to alcohol, paints/volatiles,
               | aerosols, and so many other things people abuse.
               | 
               | Just yesterday on Reddit there was a thread that went
               | viral for "cutter" reviews on Shein razor blades, with
               | cutesy language like "beautiful beans for my followers"
               | (referring to subcutaneous dermal appearance when deeply
               | cut open). Every product can be abused in horrible ways.
               | It's the nature of the stochastic bubble we're in. People
               | will find every nook and cranny of the human experience.
               | 
               | You can't stop this stuff from happening. So at least let
               | the normal use cases that benefit society through. Don't
               | put everyone else in the same straight jacket. We don't
               | deserve to be punished for the bad gradients some people
               | fall into.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | Ok, if you want to control it, than mediate access
               | through a public health institution.
        
               | TeMPOraL wrote:
               | Strongly agreed, with one correction: black markets are
               | driven by _shortage_. The role of addiction is in
               | creating demand, and at the same time making authorities
               | restrict access.
               | 
               | There is no thriving black market for antibiotics,
               | because they are accessible when you need them (and most
               | people need them very infrequently for a short duration).
               | In contrast, I believe there _is_ a black market for
               | _insulin_ in the US, and that 's because of how
               | ridiculously expensive it is. Exuberant pricing is a form
               | of restricting access, too.
        
           | cnity wrote:
           | You can get it in the UK, fortunately.[0]
           | 
           | 0: https://www.nhs.uk/medicines/pseudoephedrine/about-
           | pseudoeph...
        
           | qzw wrote:
           | It is a bit silly to ban a useful drug like pseudoephedrine
           | while large parts of the US is in an opioid crisis. Kind of
           | like how lawn darts have disappeared from stores but you can
           | still buy all sorts of weapons. That said, a lot of laws are
           | based on established traditions. Alcohol use goes back
           | thousands of years, and the other things you mentioned such
           | as vehicles and weapons are tools going back even longer.
           | They are dangerous tools, to be sure, and often employed
           | unnecessarily in this society, but tools nonetheless. Once
           | upon a time most people depended on their weapons and
           | vehicles to survive, and differences in the quality and
           | quantity of weapons and transportation technology have
           | historically led to the rise and fall of entire
           | civilizations.
        
           | heartbreak wrote:
           | > I don't care if people use it to make meth. What they do in
           | their private time doesn't concern me.
           | 
           | You ever seen a meth lab that blew up?
        
         | cyberax wrote:
         | How did I miss this article before?!? Love it!
         | 
         | > Other side effects may include violent urges or, similarly,
         | the urge to be successful in business or finance. ... > We
         | expect that the simultaneous trends of restricting
         | pseudoephedrine sales while N-methylamphetamine becomes less
         | expensive and of higher purity will make the methods presented
         | here increasingly attractive.
        
         | LM358 wrote:
         | "simple and convenient" does a lot of heavy lifting in this
         | paper - _n_ -BuLi, chromium hexacarbonyl and MoOPH (had to look
         | that one up!) is not something you find outside of a well
         | equipped lab and shouldn't be touched by anyone who isn't
         | highly experienced.
        
         | winocm wrote:
         | Fun fact, there (was?) is a isomer of methamphetamine that is
         | actually over the counter, levomethamphetamine was often found
         | in Vicks brand inhalers, though they appear to be discontinued,
         | being replaced with a 'non-medicated' version. There are
         | apparently generic inhalers that still do contain it though.
         | 
         | https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/other-methamphetam...
        
           | stzsch wrote:
           | See also selegiline, which partially metabolizes to
           | levoamphetamine and levomethamphetamine. Not OTC though
           | (antidepressant).
        
             | winocm wrote:
             | Oh man, I have fun stories about selegiline.
        
               | hyperdimension wrote:
               | Come on, you can't be vague like that and expect no one
               | to ask. Do tell!
        
               | winocm wrote:
               | If you _really_ would like to know and enjoy mortal
               | suffering, just contact me privately.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | The problem I found was that nobody wanted to deal with the
         | database after a certain time in the evening. Odds are good you
         | don't admit you're coming down with something until after work.
         | Or at least admit to yourself that medicine would be helpful.
         | So by the time you see you're out of Sudafed or can't find the
         | old pack, it's often too late to go to the store to get a new
         | one before morning.
        
         | ykonstant wrote:
         | That's actually hilarious.
        
       | Spivak wrote:
       | Am I taking crazy pills, because I've been taking PE for years
       | and it works just fine? Like yes the behind the counter stuff is
       | _stronger_ but it also comes with more annoying side effects.
       | 
       | I use it to sleep during allergy season and I can tell when I
       | don't take it when I mouth breathe the whole night. I might try
       | some experiments to see if I can tell but I didn't think you
       | could placebo while sleeping.
        
         | ClassyJacket wrote:
         | You're almost certainly experiencing the placebo effect.
         | There's mountains of evidence phenylephrine does exactly
         | nothing.
        
       | readthenotes1 wrote:
       | The US government, hard at work.
       | 
       | Next up: FDA proposes ending use of panaceas marked as overpriced
       | drugs.
        
         | spoonsies wrote:
         | Next up, eliminating the work of the Fiendish Fluoridators
        
         | wombatpm wrote:
         | I've hearing great things about this new drug called placebo.
         | You can apparently prescribe it for anything and in many cases
         | it's just as good as existing medications.
        
           | jabits wrote:
           | Well, I guess I'm here because of one of these miracle drugs.
           | My kidneys would have crapped out year ago without it. I
           | guess call me a fan...
        
           | dudeinjapan wrote:
           | It's also a great band!
        
       | evanjrowley wrote:
       | Phenylephrine worked great for clearing my mucus overproduction.
       | Unfortunately, this has little to do with allergy relief, so I
       | can see why many here hold that it's ineffective. I can imagine
       | how frustrating it must be to have actual allergy issues and be
       | prescribed something that doesn't solve the problem.
        
         | Nursie wrote:
         | It's not just allergies - taken orally there is no evidence it
         | works for anything, and there's pretty good evidence it is
         | basically metabolised away.
         | 
         | The frustration largely comes from pharmacists and
         | pharmaceutical companies selling decongestant remedies that do
         | nothing and are known to do nothing.
        
       | tobinfricke wrote:
       | Well, it doesn't work.
        
       | gnabgib wrote:
       | Discussion (136 points, 76 comments)
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42083559
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Merged hither. Thanks!
        
       | schoen wrote:
       | Context for readers from countries where this isn't an issue, or
       | anyone who hasn't followed decongestant news: one of the most
       | effective decongestants is called pseudoephedrine.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoephedrine
       | 
       | In the past this was easily available, with the most popular
       | brand being Sudafed. My parents always told me that one should
       | take Sudafed when flying after having had a cold, in order to
       | avoid severe ear pain from the pressure changes, but people would
       | also obviously take it when not flying, just in order to reduce
       | the discomfort of the congestion itself.
       | 
       | Pseudoephedrine is very effective. It is also used to synthesize
       | the somewhat related illegal drug methamphetamine ("meth").
       | Historically, meth manufacturers would hire people to buy large
       | amounts of pseudoephedrine pills at pharmacies and supermarkets,
       | then grind them up and synthesize meth from them.
       | 
       | In order to deter this, authorities in the U.S. restricted the
       | availability of pseudoephedrine, while not making it
       | prescription-only, by limiting the amount that people could buy,
       | and requiring buyers to show ID and be put on a registry (which
       | law enforcement could use in investigations). I think this is the
       | only drug that is treated this way. Some people stopped buying
       | pseudoephedrine entirely, either because they were offended by
       | these rules or because they were afraid that they could wrongly
       | be implicated in meth investigations if they appeared to buy it
       | too often.
       | 
       | The pharmaceutical industry produced an alternative called
       | phenylephrine, the substance that this proceeding relates to.
       | Most manufacturers of pseudoephedrine-based drugs, including
       | Sudafed, formulated alternative decongestants using
       | phenylephrine. There are no legal restrictions on phenylephrine
       | drugs; one can buy them anonymously and in any quantity.
       | Customers have complained for years that these are much less
       | effective than the original formulations.
       | 
       | A couple of years ago this regulatory authority started looking
       | into the question of whether phenylephrine is actually
       | _completely useless_ as a decongestant (rather than just much
       | worse than pseudoephedrine). Their preliminary review of studies
       | suggested that it is probably, in fact, useless. This proceeding
       | is now proposing to ban it on the grounds that it 's ineffective
       | and so people should not be encouraged to buy and use it as a
       | medicine for purposes for which it doesn't actually work.
       | 
       | (There doesn't seem to be much corresponding initiative to remove
       | or reduce the restrictions on pseudoephedrine.)
        
         | gniv wrote:
         | I read this and was puzzled, until I realized that you are
         | talking about the pills. The nasal spray is effective, although
         | probably not more effective than a saline solution.
        
           | notpushkin wrote:
           | > although probably not more effective than a saline solution
           | 
           | I guess saline is a baseline against which effectiveness
           | should be measured here, especially since nasal sprays are
           | usually saline plus something. (I guess? Not sure about
           | Sudafed specifically.)
        
             | bottom999mottob wrote:
             | I'd argue that saline should be the panacea here. I doubt
             | very many people do at-home saline rinses with filtered,
             | sterilized water and a simple mixture of salt and baking
             | soda.
             | 
             | Do people really want to spray PFAS water directly into
             | their mucus lining?
             | 
             | I bought an Arm and Hammer Saline spray out of curiosity.
             | It smelled awful, and the BPS lined can had an awful smell
             | despite the ingredients being: water, salt, baking soda,
             | and no suspicious preservatives.
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | True except it is definitely more effective than saline.
           | Phenylephrine nasal spray is not as effective or long-lasting
           | as oxymetazoline, but it's also not as dependency-inducing.
        
           | rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote:
           | The efficacy of the nasal sprays had already been
           | demonstrated when they introduced the pills. Surprisingly,
           | the efficacy of the pills was never properly demonstrated,
           | and now that it's being investigated, they're pulling it from
           | the shelves.
        
         | seattle_spring wrote:
         | In my experience phenylephrine is worse than useless. Not only
         | does it do nothing for congestion, but it makes me feel wired
         | in a bad way and unable to sleep for at least 24 hours. I
         | _hate_ phenylephrine.
        
         | joeevans1000 wrote:
         | Good summary. To add to what you've said, Sudafed (as an
         | example brand name) opens your eustachian tubes which are
         | passages from your inner ear to your throat. If you think you
         | might be getting an ear infection, Sudafed increases draining
         | and potentially helps prevent a worse infection. As mentioned,
         | it helps air equalize to the atmosphere via these tubes. If you
         | make a yawning motion now and hear your ears crackle, that's
         | the air moving through your eustachian tubes. You'll notice
         | that crackling decrease when an ear infection may be imminent.
         | I tried the useless alternative and discovered on my own that
         | it was, indeed, useless. And it was quite expensive, with great
         | marketing on the box.
        
         | deng wrote:
         | So at least here in Germany, we pretty much all use nasal spray
         | with xylometazoline, and it's very effective as it also binds
         | to adrenergic receptors. It does not seem to be available in
         | the US, and at least from a cursory search I cannot find out
         | why...?
         | 
         | EDIT: After looking a bit more, the simple answer seems to be
         | that it's not FDA approved for nasal congestion, and since
         | there's not much money to be made, there's simply no incentive
         | to go through the costly approval process..
        
           | relistan wrote:
           | I've wondered this also. As an American who lived in Germany
           | and found this while living there, I can attest that it's
           | quite effective for me. There are other quite useful and safe
           | drugs that are not available in the US.
        
             | Aurornis wrote:
             | The US equivalent is oxymetazoline
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymetazoline
             | 
             | It's actually slightly more selective for a1 receptors than
             | the German alternative. They both have the same dependence
             | potential and rebound liability.
        
           | robinduckett wrote:
           | They have oxymetazoline but I think the problem with this
           | class of decongestants is that it is ineffective and
           | dependency is basically guaranteed if used for more than a
           | couple of days
        
             | deng wrote:
             | Oxymetazoline is different from Xylometazoline, although it
             | was derived from it. Xylometazoline is pretty harmless for
             | adults when not used over extended periods (it is advised
             | to not use it longer than 6 days, but that will cover your
             | typical cold). It is true that if you take it regularly
             | over extended periods, you will have a rebound effect and
             | your nose will get congested when not taking it, so in that
             | way, you develop a "physical dependency", but that's
             | obviously much more harmless than other medication
             | dependencies. Getting off a Xylometazoline dependence means
             | that you'll have to deal with a congested nose for a few
             | weeks...
        
               | sph wrote:
               | I don't see from your comment how the risk from congested
               | nose for a few weeks deems it "harmless" for you. Two
               | fully congested nostrils is hell for one night alone,
               | imagine a few weeks of that. A few weeks of terrible
               | sleep, if any. It's torture.
               | 
               | It can also cause permanently enlarged turbinates with
               | chronic use.
        
               | deng wrote:
               | I said it's more harmless than other medication
               | dependencies, like getting hooked on pain medication or
               | benzos. Even here in tightly regulated Germany,
               | Xylometazoline can be bought without a prescription. It
               | is very effective and, compared to other drugs, pretty
               | harmless.
               | 
               | Look, there are always extreme cases. Just look up how
               | many people need a liver transplant or even die each year
               | from misusing paracetamol. So should we make it a
               | prescription drug? Maybe, I don't know, it's always a
               | trade-off.
        
               | gojomo wrote:
               | Is there any basis to think xylo- is better than the
               | similar oxymetazoline available in the US? Both the
               | efficacy and downsides seem similar from discussion so
               | far.
        
               | sph wrote:
               | > I said it's more harmless than other medication
               | dependencies, like getting hooked on pain medication or
               | benzos.
               | 
               | I've never taken any opiod, but two weeks of being unable
               | to breathe properly or sleep sounds as hellish as my idea
               | of quitting heroin.
               | 
               | I mean, I quit smoking, hardest thing I've ever done, and
               | the physical withdrawal effects were insignificant
               | compared to that.
               | 
               | It's funny; looking back, I quit smoking exactly BECAUSE
               | I was suffering from crazy congestion, and after a week
               | of Afrin and poor sleep I thought quitting smoking
               | altogether would help me regain my sanity.
        
               | deng wrote:
               | > I've never taken any opiod, but two weeks of being
               | unable to breathe properly or sleep sounds as hellish as
               | my idea of quitting heroin.
               | 
               | Let me assure you that there's (yet?) no Xylometazoline
               | epidemic ravaging though Europe, with tens of thousands
               | of people dying each year, destroying families and
               | communities, in effect causing endless grief for people
               | and huge profits for pharma companies. There's also no
               | black market for Xylometazoline, with people overdosing
               | because there's nasal spray on the street that is
               | contaminated with a much more potent derivative than can
               | kill pretty much instantly. I've also never heard of
               | babies born with congested noses that spend their first
               | weeks of life going through a Xylometazoline withdrawal.
               | 
               | So to summarize, I think my initial statement that a
               | physical dependence on Xylometazoline is less harmful
               | than a dependence on opioids is probably correct.
        
               | qwerty456127 wrote:
               | Many medicines pose some risk to some people who would
               | abuse it for too long. Xylometazoline just is crazy
               | effective (instantly eliminates congestion and running
               | nose completely in most cases) and completely harmless in
               | what looks like 99% cases of usage - nearly-everyone here
               | in the EU uses it happily and has no problems. I would
               | really dread a cold without it and never travel without
               | having it with me. Just try to not over-use habitually.
               | The sense of measure is always a key to healthy and happy
               | living.
        
               | jorvi wrote:
               | That's why if you developed a dependence you don't quit
               | cold turkey.
               | 
               | The strategy I've heard is purchasing a normal bottle,
               | and refilling it with boiled cool water when it's 1/2
               | empty. Then refilling it again when it's 3/4 empty.
               | 
               | Xylometazoline is an absolute godsend, and has even more
               | efficacy in a dual-action spray with saline water.
               | 
               | It feels nothing short of magical to do one spray per
               | nostril, and be completely uncontested in less than 10
               | minutes.
        
               | gojomo wrote:
               | In my experience oxymetazoline has similar fast-action -
               | even "10 minutes" seems a bit on the long side.
        
             | sph wrote:
             | Worse, the symptoms gets worse after you stop using it, see
             | _rhinitis medicamentosa_.
             | 
             | Many people have used decongestants so much they cannot
             | quit them or will have to suffer weeks of nasal congestion.
             | I risked going through that; later I swore I will never
             | touch one ever again.
        
               | wruza wrote:
               | Same. I'd rather start and quit smoking again than this.
        
               | Terr_ wrote:
               | > Worse, the symptoms gets worse after you stop using it,
               | 
               | Very tangentially, "iatrogenic" is a nice niche
               | vocabulary word: Something unintentionally caused by a
               | medical activity, usually undesirable.
        
               | morsch wrote:
               | Kind of funny to see a medication that's super common in
               | Germany, widely recommended by doctors, given to
               | children, etc. to be discussed in those terms.
        
               | Moto7451 wrote:
               | This isn't that strange in the context that all
               | medicines, while generally safe in OTC form, can have
               | negative side effects if used for too long or at the
               | wrong dose or in the wrong circumstance.
               | 
               | My wife has one kidney and as such is told to avoid
               | NSAIDs as a class of medicine. She's realistically fine
               | taking it every so often but her doctors are asking her
               | to avoid using kidney capacity that could hypothetically
               | be needed to filter and excrete something else.
               | 
               | Acetaminophen/Paracetamol is great alternative for her
               | since it's processed in the liver. However if you're a
               | frequent drinker, have a liver deficiency, or have to
               | take some other drug straining your liver, it's
               | contraindicated.
               | 
               | For most of us most of the time you're completely correct
               | though.
               | 
               | In the case of these nasal spray decongestants I had a
               | case of rebound congestion due to over-reliance on them
               | while surviving some family bringing really bad colds
               | into the house and my son starting daycare. It was really
               | bad. I then managed by switching to an alternating
               | schedule of pseudoephedrine and the nasal spray so I
               | could reduce the physical dependency on the latter and
               | get a good night's sleep.
               | 
               | My doctor eventually cleared me to take an allergy spray
               | medication (Fluticasone propionate) that is safer for
               | long term use but generally not used for colds because it
               | inhibits immune response and mask the symptoms which can
               | cause new infections and hurt your ability to heal. Yet
               | another case of the mundane medicine that is
               | contraindicated. While seemingly being the wrong thing to
               | be put on while fighting off infections it worked out
               | great.
               | 
               | After four months I had seen enough child germs and no
               | adult has brought their own plague or food poisoning (it
               | was a very bad summer for me) and I finally became
               | healthy again.
        
               | deng wrote:
               | > Acetaminophen/Paracetamol is great alternative for her
               | since it's processed in the liver. However if you're a
               | frequent drinker, have a liver deficiency, or have to
               | take some other drug straining your liver, it's
               | contraindicated.
               | 
               | What many people don't know: Overdosing on paracetamol is
               | the leading cause of acute liver failure. It's also
               | contraindicated for people with Gilbert's syndrome, which
               | is actually pretty common (~5% of people in the US) and
               | most people don't even know they have it, as it's
               | harmless and usually only found accidentally through high
               | bilirubin levels in the blood.
        
               | pfdietz wrote:
               | What is very common is hepatosteatosis, or fatty liver
               | syndrome. Something like 1/3rd of American adults have
               | it.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | Go read the side-effects and restrictions of commonly
               | used medicine some day, it's unsettling.
        
               | Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote:
               | I've been through this and sucked hard. Never will I use
               | a decongestant nasal spray again.
               | 
               | If there was a way to somehow sum up all of the suffering
               | caused by these sprays from dependency (which lasts
               | weeks, months, years even) and compare that with the
               | suffering alleviated from a cold (which lasts a fews
               | days), my bet is these cause more harm than good.
        
               | bondarchuk wrote:
               | Did you really develop such heavy dependence after using
               | it a few days at a time? I don't get that at all.
        
               | pull_my_finger wrote:
               | It's not a dependence like mental addiction. Your body
               | becomes dependent on it. Your sinuses "rebound" and all
               | but completely block in absence of the spray. I had a
               | cold that blocked my nose up so bad I couldn't sleep
               | because I was afraid of suffocating so I tried one of the
               | sprays and it opens you up like magic, super effective.
               | But about an hour after use if would completely block up
               | again where you literally can't inhale through your nose
               | at all. That's how it is even after you get over the
               | cold/illness. You have to continue to use the spray to
               | keep your airway open until you suffer through breaking
               | the "addiction" by not using it for however long that
               | takes. It really does immediately open your airway, but I
               | won't EVER use it again because it's really scary to be
               | completely blocked like that and have to get a dose in
               | every 30mins-hour just to breath.
        
               | karmonhardan wrote:
               | The best thing I ever did for decongestion was to get
               | outside and start wearing a mask during the winter. The
               | air entering my nose is clearer and warmer, which causes
               | less mucus production. The mucus that is produced is more
               | likely to drain, rather than sit around thickening and
               | waiting to be blown out. I wish I'd thought to wear a
               | mask while out when I was younger; could have saved
               | myself much suffering waiting at the bus stop and during
               | the subsequent schoolday.
        
               | derekp7 wrote:
               | Back when I was a kid, scarfs were more popular and
               | served a similar purpose.
        
             | dreamcompiler wrote:
             | Oxymetazoline is an _extremely_ effective nasal
             | decongestant. It works almost instantly and it lasts 24
             | hours.
             | 
             | It also creates dependency. A drug that is ineffective
             | cannot cause dependency.
        
               | admash wrote:
               | Of course it can. You take drug A for 5 days to get rid
               | of symptom X. The symptom X does not go away. It is
               | ineffective! You stop taking drug A and immediately
               | experience brutal migraines that go away when you start
               | taking drug A again. Ergo, you have become dependent on
               | drug A for normal functioning, even though it is
               | ineffective at ridding you of symptom X.
        
           | AdamN wrote:
           | There are nasal sprays in the US - and yes they are more
           | targeted and better in general than pills. But Americans love
           | their pills ... almost as much as Germans love their
           | homeopathic remedies :-)
        
         | lynx23 wrote:
         | No worries, "Meth" was largely unknown in my area, until you
         | guys exported "Breaking Bad". Roughly a year or two later, it
         | started to be available here as well. Thanks for that, media
         | industry, that was a wonderful move! /s
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | pseudoephedrine have serious side effects, they are rare but
         | could be fatal
        
           | dreamcompiler wrote:
           | Also true of aspirin, ibuprofen, acetaminophen,
           | dextromethorphan, melatonin, vitamins, supplements, and
           | practically every other over-the-counter drug that is not
           | homeopathic.
        
             | TeMPOraL wrote:
             | Homeopathic too - water allergy is a thing.
        
               | delecti wrote:
               | Homeopathic pills are usually literally sugar pills,
               | essentially small crummy candy, so not really any water,
               | despite the purported basis of the "technology".
        
             | immibis wrote:
             | ESPECIALLY acetaminophen aka paracetamol aka Tylenol aka
             | Panadol. This is the single drug with the smallest ratio
             | between the effective does and the lethal dose, and it
             | would not be approved today because of that. Oh, and you'll
             | be fully conscious while you're dying and there's no known
             | antidote.
        
               | Aerroon wrote:
               | > _and there 's no known antidote._
               | 
               | Isn't NAC (N-acetyl-cysteine) used for that?
               | 
               | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537183/
        
               | xienze wrote:
               | My Googling says 7.5g-10g is a lethal (acute) dose for an
               | adult. The extra strength Tylenol pills come in 500mg,
               | and they recommend two of those at a time. Not saying
               | it's wrong that the gap between "effective" and "lethal"
               | is small, but at the same time it's hard to accidentally
               | take 15-20 pills at a time.
        
               | cloverich wrote:
               | I've commonly been recommended 3-4 g per day by
               | Physicians. I take 1 gram as my standard dose.
        
               | dreamcompiler wrote:
               | 1 gram is the standard dose for a full-sized adult with a
               | healthy liver who is not taking the drug in conjunction
               | with alcohol.
               | 
               | As to frequency I limit myself to 2 g per day but that's
               | just me giving my liver extra time to recover.
        
               | NikkiA wrote:
               | Now consider people with memory issues such as dementia
               | where they might have a headache, take 2 pills, then 10
               | minutes later think 'I have a headache...'
        
               | 0x457 wrote:
               | if we're talking about people with dementia and/or memory
               | issues - almost everything becomes dangerous. Not an
               | argument. Doors aren't dangerous, but now imagine a small
               | child being hit with one.
        
         | qwerty456127 wrote:
         | > Their preliminary review of studies suggested that it is
         | probably, in fact, useless. This proceeding is now proposing to
         | ban it on the grounds that it's ineffective
         | 
         | Is ineffectiveness really a good reason to ban a substance? Why
         | not just ban labeling it as a medicine instead?
        
           | drpossum wrote:
           | If you read the article title it is not a ban on the drug.
           | 
           | > Ending Use of Oral Phenylephrine as OTC Monograph Nasal
           | Decongestant Active Ingredient
           | 
           | It is a ban on marketing/listing this as an active ingredient
           | on those products. If you read further into the article this
           | is only for oral use and they're requesting comments for
           | nasal use, which would be unaffected by this.
        
             | qwerty456127 wrote:
             | Makes sense. Thank you for clarifying.
        
           | viciousvoxel wrote:
           | That is actually what is happening, per the article. It's
           | being banned as being labelled an "active ingredient" in OTC
           | decongestant pills.
        
         | potato3732842 wrote:
         | But think about all the jobs the government by created running
         | that registry, prompting the drug makers to formulate and
         | manufacture bogus decongestants and then eventually studying
         | that those bogus decongestants were in fact bogus.
         | 
         | (in case it wasn't obvious, this is broken windows fallacy)
        
           | a_c_s wrote:
           | The "registry" is signing your name on a sheet of paper on a
           | clipboard - less than 1% more work for the pharmacy
           | employee's overall job, approximately 0 new jobs created.
        
         | matttproud wrote:
         | The need to show an ID to purchase real pseudoephedrine (feels
         | like an oxymoron to write that) can be a legitimate PITA. I am
         | American who lives abroad but is frequently back in the U.S.
         | for family reasons. I suffer from sinus problems, so I
         | periodically need to purchase pseudoephedrine-based products.
         | Because I have no state ID, the show-ID-based workflow
         | essentially fails. For whatever reason, the pharmacies won't
         | take a U.S. passport (or foreign ID card), so they end up
         | spending 15 minutes futzing with the data entry software, only
         | to resign to entering garbage into the system.
         | 
         | And as OP points out: Phenylephrine is 100% useless.
        
           | slowmovintarget wrote:
           | Phenylephrine is useless. As an extra added bonus, it will
           | still spike your blood pressure, so it isn't just useless,
           | it's dangerous to people with high blood pressure.
           | 
           | Nasal irrigation is the way to go for sinus trouble. It's
           | more work and takes a little getting used to, but no ID
           | needed to buy saline and baking soda packets, and it actually
           | works.
        
             | Tagbert wrote:
             | ORAL phenylephrine is useless, Nasal is not.
        
           | Rebelgecko wrote:
           | I was 17 for my first few months of college and got horribly
           | sick and congested. The school pharmacy wouldn't sell me the
           | real Sudafed because of my age... not sure if that was part
           | of the nationwide Patriot Act restrictions on Sudafed or a
           | specific state law. I thought about getting someone of age to
           | buy it for me but I was too much of a goody two shoes to go
           | through with it.
           | 
           | I ended up going to the doctor and getting sent home with a
           | bottle of opioid cough syrup. Fortunately didn't end up
           | addicted or anything, but it was very frustrating at the
           | time.
        
           | bityard wrote:
           | Stores around me stopped selling it altogether because they
           | got tired of dealing with both the registry itself and the
           | customers who get irate when told they're going on a list for
           | buying cold medicine. It sucks but I can't say I blame them.
        
         | Zak wrote:
         | The restrictions on purchasing pseudeophedrine should be
         | repealed. Their imposition led methamphetamine manufacturers to
         | switch to a more efficient process based on different
         | ingredients. Purity and production volume increased
         | substantially.
         | 
         | A repeal won't turn back the clock on that of course, but it
         | will make life easier for people with congestion.
         | 
         | https://dynomight.net/p2p-meth/
        
           | Stevvo wrote:
           | Wasn't that literally the plot of Breaking Bad? Walt's meth
           | was p2p meth.
        
             | jcpham2 wrote:
             | Yes. Jesse couldn't score enough product via his smurfs, so
             | they had to find an alternate industrial method for
             | quantity purposes - in the show.
        
           | mullingitover wrote:
           | I'm just as annoyed with the hurdles to buying real
           | pseudoephedrine as anyone else, but let's not make the
           | production of bathtub meth any easier. It is not worth it.
        
             | Clubber wrote:
             | Why? Do you believe it made any dent in meth manufacturing
             | what so ever? It's just drug war theatre.
        
               | verteu wrote:
               | It seemed to decrease the number of exploding meth labs
               | in the country:
               | https://www.statista.com/statistics/942043/laboratory-
               | incide...
        
               | Zak wrote:
               | That seems to track pretty well with the rise of P2P
               | meth. It's unlikely many people would return to setting
               | up small labs using pseudoephedrine because large scale
               | operations using P2P have driven the price down to the
               | point that it wouldn't be profitable.
               | 
               | There might be an increase in people making tiny batches
               | for personal use if pseudoephedrine became easier to get,
               | but nothing on the scale of 20 years ago.
        
             | Zak wrote:
             | Given the prevalence of P2P meth and apparent inability of
             | governments to do anything about it, this does not seem
             | like a rational position to me. If there was any reason to
             | believe that large scale production will ever be
             | substantially curbed, there might be a case for it.
        
               | mullingitover wrote:
               | Yes, P2p meth is rampant and cheap. However I look at it
               | like this: Meth addicts will absolutely decide to become
               | chefs if the ingredients are readily available, even if
               | there's a McDonalds down the street. You're approaching
               | this rationally, which is not what meth addicts are going
               | to do.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | If it is readily available down the street, it looks to
               | me that people cooking their own is a superior outcome
               | for society in every single way than they buying it down-
               | street.
               | 
               | Even more if the professional labs close down due to lack
               | of customers.
        
               | mullingitover wrote:
               | A buddy of mine worked his way through college cleaning
               | out meth labs in homes and motels after they had
               | (typically) blown themselves up. They are toxic
               | nightmares. He was especially shaken when he'd find the
               | family photos indicating that the labs were operating
               | while children were in the home.
               | 
               | The professional labs would absolutely not close down due
               | to lack of customers, there would just be even more meth
               | available, more contaminated, with the bonus of hazmat
               | sites peppering communities.
        
           | busterarm wrote:
           | Right, but would reopen the door to your random tweakers
           | setting up shit labs in squats/rental properties and
           | destroying property values.
           | 
           | That stuff's toxic AF even if the labs don't blow up.
        
             | standardUser wrote:
             | Restrictions on pseudoephedrine did nothing to curtail the
             | manufacture, sale or use of amphetamines in this country.
             | It didn't even raise the price. If anything, speed of all
             | kinds is easier to get today.
        
               | HDThoreaun wrote:
               | The restrictions centralized production though. Now
               | almost all meth is being made in a lab that can import
               | Phenylacetone from china. That's safer than someone next
               | door setting up an explosive cookhouse.
        
               | willcipriano wrote:
               | Even safer if they sold it at Walmart.
        
             | 0x457 wrote:
             | meth production didn't stop, in fact it switched to far
             | more efficient ingdidient and made meth much worse than it
             | was before.
             | 
             | It's cheaper and pure than it was ever been since the ban.
        
           | jjice wrote:
           | > ...but it will make life easier for people with congestion
           | 
           | I haven't purchased pseudeophedrine, but my understanding was
           | that you just walked up to the counter and had to sign your
           | name at the pharmacy. Is that not the case? Doesn't seem like
           | a big pain if that's the case.
        
             | jcpham2 wrote:
             | You can can do this or your doctor can write you a
             | prescription. I've never stopped using pseudoephedrine and
             | depending on how congested I am sometimes it's the little
             | red 4 hour pills or sometimes it's the big monster 12 hour
             | version - but your doctor can write a generic prescription
             | for pseudoephedrine and the quantity and amount and you can
             | buy a box that way via cash or insurance too.
        
             | Zak wrote:
             | It means you have to go to the pharmacy when it's open.
             | That's a significant hurdle if you're sick, especially if
             | you have something contagious and you're trying not to
             | expose people to it, or if you work weird hours, or if you
             | don't have reliable transportation, or if you're the
             | primary caregiver for young children, etc....
             | 
             | It also means you can't get it delivered, can't stock up,
             | might have trouble sending someone else to get it, etc....
             | It's a big pain for some people, and particularly for
             | people who already have a harder life than average.
        
             | ultrarunner wrote:
             | GP said:
             | 
             | > Some people stopped buying pseudoephedrine entirely,
             | either because they were offended by these rules or because
             | they were afraid that they could wrongly be implicated in
             | meth investigations if they appeared to buy it too often.
             | 
             | This has actually happened [0], and I seem to remember more
             | instances (at least when the law was first passed). I know
             | I have also gone to buy it in a headache-induced fog and
             | found that I've forgotten my ID, and on at least one
             | occasion the national drug whatever system was down and
             | they refused to sell it. Because it has to be run through
             | the specific national database, it has to be run through
             | one department and I have been unable to purchase because
             | that department has closed for the day.
             | 
             | These are just what comes to mind when I think about
             | purchasing pseudoephedrine over the years; it's just
             | generally become a pain to get. It makes me wonder if it'd
             | be quicker and easier to just buy meth and reintroduce the
             | hydroxyl group to get my cold medicine.
             | 
             | [0] https://reason.com/2009/09/28/hoosier-grandmother-
             | arrested-f...
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | That happened 15 years ago, just a couple years after the
               | policy is created. A more compelling example of a
               | spurious prosecution would be one more recent, say, after
               | 2016. We can probably find some! The last time people
               | looked, we found a pretty interesting story.
        
               | Lammy wrote:
               | > It makes me wonder if it'd be quicker and easier to
               | just buy meth and reintroduce the hydroxyl group to get
               | my cold medicine.
               | 
               | Relevant: "A Simple and Convenient Synthesis of
               | Pseudoephedrine from Meth"
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33444852
               | https://maggiemcneill.com/wp-
               | content/uploads/2012/03/synthes...
        
             | wormius wrote:
             | It's still a pain in the ass you can't just go to the gas
             | station and get some, etc... There shouldn't be a need to
             | go to a pharmacy for what should be an over the counter
             | drug that's far more effective than synephrine ever was.
             | The difference between the 2 is night and day, probably
             | because one actually works and the other maybe kinda sorta
             | barely does.
        
             | devilbunny wrote:
             | Depends on the state; at least some have made it
             | prescription-only.
             | 
             | It's much less convenient than going to the nearest 24-hour
             | store and grabbing it off the shelf. And I'm a doctor
             | married to a doctor; I don't have to get an appointment to
             | get a prescription for a non-scheduled drug, but I do have
             | to go during pharmacy hours and wait to pick it up.
        
             | standardUser wrote:
             | It's a huge pain if the pharmacy is closed or has a long
             | line. A pointless, purposeless pain. Another sacrifice the
             | the always-ineffective yet never underfunded drug war gods.
        
             | fullspectrumdev wrote:
             | The downstream effects in other countries are pretty
             | annoying.
             | 
             | Because of US restrictions on pseudo, bizarrely other
             | countries have followed suit - it's next to impossible to
             | find a decongestant with pseudo here in Ireland, they will
             | sell you the useless phenylephrine shit instead, and the
             | packaging is almost indistinguishable unless you spend a
             | while looking and arguing with a pharmacist who is
             | convinced phenylephrine works just as good.
        
               | abraae wrote:
               | > Because of US restrictions on pseudo, bizarrely other
               | countries have followed suit
               | 
               | Replace pseudo with cannabis and the statement remains
               | true.
        
             | jrockway wrote:
             | It's a big pain. The prescription line at my pharmacy is
             | never shorter than 15 minutes. Thus the drug is $11/month
             | but costs me $60 in time to wait in that line. Meanwhile,
             | other drugs are just mailed to me, including my
             | prescriptions.
             | 
             | The prescription line is always fun. I remember some dude
             | coughing on everyone, picking up his cell phone, "oh it was
             | positive? great, I'm in line to get the medication"
             | referring to COVID. In my opinion, the easiest place to get
             | sick is waiting in the prescription line. Yet another tax
             | on congestion sufferers.
             | 
             | Having said all that, your doctor can write you a
             | prescription and all the restrictions go away, including
             | the ID check. It has always delayed my fills even further
             | so we don't bother anymore.
             | 
             | The most positive outcome from buying pseudoephedrine in
             | line was being told "hey, your ID expires tomorrow" which
             | was a good catch. I wasn't paying any attention to that. (I
             | don't drive, so it's just a piece of plastic with my name.
             | But necessary for paying taxes online in NYS.)
        
               | woodruffw wrote:
               | This is a complete tangent, but FWIW: you can pay taxes
               | in NY with an expired license.
               | 
               | Source: I've been paying taxes in NY with a _learner 's
               | permit_ that's been expired for well over a decade.
               | 
               | Edit: I've also used said expired permit to buy
               | pseudoephedrine. In my experience, they get frustrated
               | and put random garbage into the tracking system when the
               | card doesn't verify, demonstrating that it's all theater.
               | It did take a while, though, so your point about this
               | being a waste of time holds.
        
               | Alupis wrote:
               | > Thus the drug is $11/month but costs me $60 in time to
               | wait in that line
               | 
               | In what reality? You were not being paid $60 to grocery
               | shop or whatever else you might have done with that 15
               | minutes. Nor did it actually reduce your bank account by
               | $60 to wait 15 minutes. If you applied this logic to
               | everything in life, reading this very comment probably
               | "cost" you a dozen bucks too. What a fun way to live?
               | 
               | > Meanwhile, other drugs are just mailed to me, including
               | my prescriptions.
               | 
               | How often are your anticipating needing pseudoephedrine?
               | For most people it's a once a year, _at most_ , thing.
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | I take it every day; deviated septum and allergic to
               | everything even after decades of immunotherapy. Maybe I
               | should get surgery. But this is easier.
        
               | Alupis wrote:
               | You can't take pseudoephedrine every day. Nor is
               | pseudoephedrine used for allergies - it is a
               | decongestant, not an antihistamine. Nor does
               | immunotherapy "solve" allergies.
               | 
               | A simple google search before posting would have made
               | your fictitious scenario a little bit more believable.
        
               | jrockway wrote:
               | Guess what happens when allergens irritate the inside of
               | your nose? You get congested.
        
             | jjtheblunt wrote:
             | have to produce a government id also
        
             | jmcclell wrote:
             | I suffer from seasonal allergies that last anywhere from
             | 2-4 months out of the year. During the height of allergy
             | season, I take Claritin-D - a mixture of loratadine and
             | pseudoephedrine.
             | 
             | Claritin-D 24-hour caplets come in boxes of 10. You need 3
             | boxes to get a full month's supply. Each caplet has 240mg
             | of pseudoephedrine - 2.4g per box.
             | 
             | In my state, individuals can purchase up to 9g of
             | pseduoephedrine per month, but only up to 3.6g per day.
             | 
             | So, while I can technically purchase a full month's supply
             | of Claritin-D, I can't buy more than one box at a time.
             | 
             | These sorts of rules are minor inconveniences for an
             | individual compared to the rest of life's challenges, but
             | they exist in a special category of stupid that make them
             | all the more frustrating.
             | 
             | But, here's a thought: what if I had children who needed
             | the same medication? Who's going without?
        
               | withinrafael wrote:
               | Tangent; you reminded me about the Robitussin liquid
               | (Dextromethorphan) in my pantry. It prescribes 20 mL
               | doses but the bottle contains 118 mL total. Really grinds
               | my gears this is legal.
        
             | jfk13 wrote:
             | Some years ago I was very frustrated, as a UK citizen
             | visiting the States and suffering from congestion, that I
             | was completely unable to buy it because I wasn't carrying
             | suitable ID that the pharmacy would recognize.
        
             | cogman10 wrote:
             | I did not know that pseudeophendrine could be bought
             | without a prescription until last year I think. I was
             | deterred from buying it not because I fear putting my name
             | down, but because I wrongly assumed I needed a prescription
             | and thus a doctors visit to go purchase it.
             | 
             | There aren't exactly signs that say "Hey, the good stuff is
             | behind the counter and you don't need a prescription to get
             | it".
        
             | diebeforei485 wrote:
             | You can't get it delivered using standard delivery apps
             | (you can get phenylephrine, or medications containing it
             | such as DayQuil, delivered using uber eats or doordash).
             | That is an issue when you're sick.
        
             | buildsjets wrote:
             | I was refused purchase because I had an out of state
             | driver's license. Despite very visibly and audibly
             | suffering from severe nasal congestion.
        
             | BurningFrog wrote:
             | According to my friend who suffers when there is
             | pollen/smoke in the air, it is typically sold out when he
             | needs it, because other people breathe the same
             | contaminated air.
             | 
             | So he has to drive around to ~5 pharmacies to occasionally
             | score a a box.
             | 
             | He does try to stock up during low season, but it's hard to
             | do.
        
           | ibejoeb wrote:
           | It was a real win/win. Tens of millions of people lost access
           | to an effective drug in order to penalize maybe a few
           | thousand that were using it as a precursor to making mamp.
           | 
           | But, hey, we beat street meth, right?
        
             | CrazyStat wrote:
             | > Tens of millions of people lost access
             | 
             | This is a bit hyperbolic. You just have to ask for it at
             | the counter and show ID.
        
               | ibejoeb wrote:
               | Only certain documents are accepted: photo documents
               | issued by a US state and certain federal documents. There
               | are some exceptions in the initial act text, but in
               | practice, nobody is going to accept your nursery school
               | record.
               | 
               | There are certainly 10s of millions of people who don't
               | have direct access to this drug.
        
         | hinkley wrote:
         | I've had two doctors and two NPs tell me to stop using sudafed.
         | It dries out the mucus membranes and allows infections to
         | start. If you've had sinus infections before, they suck and you
         | don't want them again. Give the Sudafed away.
         | 
         | (It also gives me horrible insomnia if I take it at night so it
         | wasn't a huge hardship).
         | 
         | Guaifenesin thins the mucus instead, makes it more watery so it
         | drains down the throat with no further complications like sore
         | throat and coughing. And the extra volume helps flush bacteria
         | out of the sinuses.
        
           | Dr_Birdbrain wrote:
           | The insomnia effect is no joke! It's an amphetamine.
           | 
           | I used to take 24-hour allergy medicine with pseudoephedrine,
           | and it took me years to realize it was the thing that was
           | giving me insomnia during allergy season--for years I thought
           | I just had periodic bouts of intense insomnia.
        
             | hinkley wrote:
             | In college I told the clinic I wanted anything but Sudafed
             | (joke on campus was they'd give you Sudafed for a broken
             | arm). Gave me Sudafed anyway.
             | 
             | First 100% sleepless night in college. And the only
             | sleepless night that wasn't having too much fun or
             | stressing over a final exam. Trash can.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | I forgot the worst part: Still had a sniffle the entire
               | night. So mad.
        
           | SoftTalker wrote:
           | I stopped taking pretty much any OTC meds about 10 years ago.
           | My sinuses seem much healthier. I hardly ever get congestion
           | or runny nose anymore. Not sure there's a correlation here
           | but for me, they don't seem to have any benefit.
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | In general, things like medicine/drugs (even caffeine!)
             | should be used as sparingly as possible, so they're
             | maximally powerful when you do need them.
             | 
             | If you pop OTC meds at the first sign of anything, your
             | body gets used to it and it becomes a baseline; whereas
             | before it would blow all the symptoms away, now you need it
             | just not to get significantly worse.
        
               | marcosdumay wrote:
               | > your body gets used to it and it becomes a baseline
               | 
               | That doesn't happen for every drug. But side-effects
               | still exist for them all, so yeah, there are several
               | reasons to limit how much you use them.
        
           | kube-system wrote:
           | Everyone's body and ailments are different. For some people
           | in some situations, the benefits of pseudoephedrine outweigh
           | the side effects. For others, it doesn't. Drugs should be
           | used on an individualized basis.
        
           | alexjplant wrote:
           | The two aren't mutually exclusive. I take pseudophedrine
           | whenever I have a serious sinus infection or blocked
           | eustachian tubes because it's the only thing that promotes
           | drainage. I also take guaifenesin for its mucosal thinning
           | effects as a matter of course. I supplement these with nasal
           | irrigation, DXM (if the cough is impacting my sleep), and
           | diphenhydramine in lieu of the pseudo (again for sleep).
           | 
           | These drugs all have different mechanisms of action and
           | specialties and should be used only as needed, i.e. if a
           | symptom abates then you should stop taking whatever it is
           | that treats it. The problem is that people are too used to
           | combination formulations or, even worse, treating all of
           | these drugs interchangeably. A chest cold has a different OTC
           | treatment regimen than a sinus infection.
        
         | Dr_Birdbrain wrote:
         | Additional context on why phenylephrine was ever approved to
         | begin with--apparently it is effective if you use it as a
         | spray, but apparently nobody bothered to check what happens
         | when consumed orally, and it turns out your digestive system
         | degrades it quickly and it doesn't even make it into the
         | bloodstream.
        
         | freealf wrote:
         | An interesting tidbit to add, for working in the industry:
         | 
         | The restricted process around buying pseudoephedrine is imposed
         | by state governments and not the federal government. A number
         | of the states coordinate their policies, so it looks like
         | nation-wide action but really isn't (in a legal sense).
         | 
         | FDA doesn't have the legal authority to put medications "behind
         | the counter" like you would see in Europe or Canada. So
         | untangled this is a weird mess of overlapping jurisdictions.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > The restricted process around buying pseudoephedrine is
           | imposed by state governments and not the federal government.
           | [...] FDA doesn't have the legal authority to put medications
           | "behind the counter" like you would see in Europe or Canada.
           | 
           | Someone should tell the FDA, because they seem to think that
           | the "locked cabinet or behind the counter" rule, the per
           | person per month quantitative limit, the photo ID
           | requirement, and the requirement for retailers to track
           | personal information of buyers are all federal rules either
           | directly in or imposed by the FDA under the authority of the
           | Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act of 2005.
           | 
           | https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-drug-class/legal-
           | requi...
        
         | fuzzfactor wrote:
         | It comes full circle if you go back far enough.
         | 
         | Before Sudafed was common in pills, they had the small
         | disposable inhalers where the pseudoephedrine was not in
         | crystal form but was dissolved in vaporous liquids like
         | menthol. Inside the inhaler there is a cotton piece soaked with
         | the pleasant-smelling liquid. The aroma vapors are drawn right
         | up into the sinuses along with the active ingredient.
         | 
         | The inhaler itself was first marketed during World War II by
         | the well-established 19th century Vicks company, already very
         | successful for decades with it's earlier VapoRub aromatic
         | topical OTC formulations. People are probably aware that this
         | is one of the companies that is older than the US FDA. Older
         | than the Fed & income taxes too, for those who are keeping
         | score ;)
         | 
         | Natural products like ephedrine have long been the inspiration
         | for medicinal chemists to synthesize similar compounds for
         | potential screening as new drugs, so a number of new
         | experimental relatives such as pseudoephedrine were produced
         | eventually.
         | 
         | As the name implies, people did not always know what the real
         | difference was between ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, since
         | both molecules have the same molecular weight, naturally
         | because both have the same number of carbons, hydrogens,
         | oxygen, and nitrogen content.
         | 
         | Only a slight difference in chemical structure between the two,
         | which got figured out soon enough.
         | 
         | Some of the less-similar new drug candidates were ordinary
         | amphetamines. They are the ones that really got popular fast,
         | especially in wartime :\
         | 
         | Now when the unique inhalers were born, it was a bit of the new
         | synthetic ingredient along with the traditional aromatic
         | mixture that Vicks was famous for, and the Vicks Inhaler was
         | deemed safe & effective as recommended for OTC use. People
         | loved it. Nobody had ever had anything as effective as that.
         | 
         | IIRC it was 50 milligrams per inhaler soaked into a few hundred
         | milligrams of aromatic essential oil mixture. As expected they
         | were a lot stronger when you first started smelling one.
         | 
         | That's because it was 50 mg of _meth_ -amphetamine in the Vicks
         | inhalers.
         | 
         | Parents would buy them for their kids, because they were so
         | "safe", for self medication naturally, even at times when they
         | would not consider dosing them up with cough syrup.
         | 
         | There was never any FDA-approved prescription for
         | methamphetamine in any other form, only this one OTC product.
         | 
         | I would think the inhalers themselves were patent encumbered
         | until the 1960's (remind you of an Epipen?) and by the 1970's
         | other companies like Sudafed offered their own version, only
         | not containing meth, give me a break.
         | 
         | The meth version of amphetamine became recognized as a
         | dangerous drug in the after-war years when the negative effects
         | became apparent with soldiers who had been given it in pill
         | form habitually as stimulants, often when facing the most
         | serious combat.
         | 
         | No other company ever was able to put meth in their inhalers,
         | but Vicks slipped in under the wire and couldn't even be
         | stopped for decades until some time after the DEA came into
         | being. Everybody else was using pseudoephedrine from the start.
         | By this time crystal meth was just beginning to emerge, which
         | people were trying to avoid when they saw what it was like, at
         | the same time different people started seeking meth more
         | intently. Orders of magnitude more out-of-hand now.
         | 
         | The way Vicks stayed under the radar the whole time with meth
         | in it, was hiding in plain sight.
         | 
         | Right there on the inhaler in fine print where it always was,
         | active ingredient desoxyephedrine 50 mg.
         | 
         | Simply a less-common alternative chemical name for meth, and
         | desoxyephedrine had become a very uncommon rapidly deprecated
         | name quite early. Way before any amphetamines were
         | commercialized, they were instead marketed using the well-known
         | convention based on the _Alpha_ -MethylPHenylEThylAMINE type
         | nomenclature.
         | 
         | Anyway, back in the 1970's when it was first becoming known
         | that shady operators were cooking meth by starting with
         | inhalers, I looked at one of them and sure enough, 50 mg meth
         | per Vicks inhaler. Who knew?
         | 
         | For a while there I figured they must be starting with way over
         | 20 inhalers and probably would not extract nearly a gram of
         | meth but it sounded feasible. I wasn't going to be the one to
         | do it, my first job out of college was working for a company
         | that was a real pharmaceutical manufacturer. So I wasn't going
         | to tell anybody either. There was already talk among law
         | enforcement about cracking down on this kind of thing.
         | Suspicion of inhalers was beginning to barely arise, it was
         | thin but widespread among anybody who had heard anything about
         | this.
         | 
         | Eventually I figured out that the clandestine cookers were
         | _synthesizing_ their meth by using the _pseudoephedrine_ in
         | _non-Vicks_ inhalers as starting material for their reactions !
         | Well, what do you know? Was I wrong the whole time?
         | 
         | I "guessed" so.
         | 
         | With not-so-blurry 20/20 hindsight, I would estimate that
         | before I got around to figuring this out, a clandestine chemist
         | had come along way before I knew a thing and had started out
         | extracting grams of meth directly from Vicks inhalers. And the
         | meth heads loved it, found out it was coming from inhalers and
         | the word got around among them.
         | 
         | Some other chemist picks up the inexact word-of-mouth and by
         | this time Vicks inhalers are outnumbered, sharing shelf space
         | with numerous alternative brands, all of them containing
         | pseudoephedrine as expected, and cheaper too. If they look at
         | Vicks, it's the odd ball out, that doesn't look like the same
         | kind of "ephedrine" as everything else. So they figured out how
         | to do some home made reactions starting with Sudafed. And this
         | is what was just starting to go through the roof.
         | 
         | This was before the Sudafed pills really took over, once they
         | showed up they flew off the shelf way faster than the inhalers
         | because there were more milligrams.
         | 
         | One day in the '70's I was in Walgreens and there was somebody
         | buying over a dozen Sudafed inhalers so I knew what they were
         | up to.
         | 
         | I went over to the aisle and looked at the then-current Vicks
         | Inhaler, which I hadn't checked in a while, sure enough 50 mg
         | of desoxyephedrine, active ingredient, same as ever.
         | 
         | The poor Sudafed buyer wasn't the least bit aware that real
         | meth was right there on the shelf next to it.
         | 
         | And I wasn't going to say a thing :)
         | 
         | Most doctors _and pharmacists_ didn 't even have a clue.
         | 
         | Within a few years Vicks stated putting in pseudoephedrine
         | themselves instead of meth.
         | 
         | Until it got way too far out of hand and the pseudoephedrine
         | became tightly controlled, much more tightly than the meth was,
         | as can be seen.
         | 
         | Edit:
         | 
         | "And now you know the rest of the story" - Paul Harvey
        
         | rscho wrote:
         | Well, phenylephrine is ineffective when used incorrectly.
         | You're supposed to grind the pill and snort it. Works much
         | better ;-D
        
           | adastra22 wrote:
           | You joke, but that would actually work.
        
             | rscho wrote:
             | I don't joke. I'm a serious doctor :-D
        
         | EricDeb wrote:
         | I swear phenylephrine works... so I'm just falling for placebo?
        
           | j0hnyl wrote:
           | Maybe you're feeling relief from the other ingredients like
           | if there's also an inflammatory or caffeine, etc. bundled
           | with the pill.
        
         | sigzero wrote:
         | I went to the doctor recently. I usually take what I am taking
         | so they can see it. I was taking Sudafed and had just purchased
         | it. She took it out of my hand and told me basically all that
         | and threw it in the trash.
        
         | letmeinhere wrote:
         | Only thing I'd quibble with is the reason most consumers
         | switched off of pseudoephedrine. The manufacturers knew that
         | the inconvenience of having to go to the counter would reduce
         | sales so they just replaced it in the aisle with an identically
         | branded product with a different active ingredient. Most people
         | made no affirmative choice at all; they're just buying
         | "Sudafed", but now it's a placebo.
        
         | nonameiguess wrote:
         | It's not the only drug treated this way. You can go to any
         | pharmacy and see a ton of things on the shelves that are just
         | cards you have to take to the counter, and then see what's
         | actually behind the counter. Insulin needles, for instance,
         | even though you can also just buy those in bulk on Amazon. I'm
         | not sure what does and does not get tracked in a statewide
         | database, but at minimum, regular Ephedrine, typically sold
         | under the brand name Bronkaid, is tracked this way, because it
         | can also be used to manufacture meth. I don't even think in
         | this case there is an alternative formulation like there is
         | with Sudafed and generic equivalents.
         | 
         | The monthly purchase limits on these tend to be ludicrously
         | high, though. I think they're state by state, but in Texas, you
         | can purchase up to 9 grams a month.
        
           | 0x457 wrote:
           | Lots of what you described is very location-store specific.
           | That's why you can buy a lifetime supply of clean needles on
           | amazon, but buying any in CVS is requires waiting in line
           | longer than it take for amazon to deliver.
        
         | devilbunny wrote:
         | FWIW phenylephrine wasn't a new drug; it was and still is used
         | all the time in IV form to increase blood pressure in
         | anesthesia and critical care.
         | 
         | But it's useless as an oral decongestant.
        
         | tptacek wrote:
         | This is a perennial topic on HN, which is generally
         | inhospitable to drug prohibition to begin with; it's possible
         | to lay out the schematics of the counterargument:
         | 
         | * While there can't be any defense for the marketing of
         | phenylephrine as a pseudoephedrine replacement, restrictions on
         | pseudoephedrine are not irrational (that doesn't make them
         | right, though I think they are).
         | 
         | * Pseudoephedrine by itself practically is methamphetamine,
         | just in an unproductive chemical configuration. It is
         | extraordinarily simple (though: not safe) to convert
         | pseudoephedrine into meth.
         | 
         | * Pseudoephedrine is widely, practically universally available
         | in the US without a prescription. It's a "behind the counter"
         | drug, and, because of rampant abuse, access requires ID, like
         | alcohol. Further, because the point of restricting
         | pseudoephedrine is effectively a "rate limit" (to prevent
         | people from acquiring enough Sudafed to make meth production
         | practicable), Sudafed purchases are tracked.
         | 
         | * We've hashed out on HN the argument about whether that
         | tracking results in spurious prosecutions. The one case I've
         | seen us come up with, the arrest and prosecution of William
         | Fousse, concerned someone who had a pseudoephedrine addiction
         | (he was using it to come up from habitual alcohol benders).
         | 
         | * Restriction of pseudoephedrine does basically zero to staunch
         | the flow of high-quality methamphetamine, which is produced at
         | industrial scale with more sophisticated chemistry in Mexico
         | and Asia.
         | 
         | * But restriction of pseudoephedrine _might_ reduce the
         | incidence of garage meth labs, which pose their own distinctive
         | dangers to communities.
         | 
         | The argument in favor of continued pseudoephedrine restriction
         | would be that the cost of the policy is relatively low (it
         | inconveniences allergy sufferers, but most of those sufferers
         | only marginally) vs. the public safety benefit (which is also
         | probably low, but also probably nonzero).
        
           | Zak wrote:
           | This issue is symptomatic of an underlying problem for me: we
           | do not regularly re-evaluate laws to see if they are having
           | the intended effect.
           | 
           | American politics might have bigger problems at the moment,
           | but under normal circumstances, I consider this pretty
           | important. I'm not sure what the solution is, but an
           | expiration date on nearly all laws comes to mind as a start
           | to an interesting discussion on the matter.
        
             | ryandrake wrote:
             | It would be great if laws worked like software deployments:
             | 
             | 1. Roll out law to 2%, look for any obvious unintended
             | effects (like we check for crashes)
             | 
             | 2. Roll out law to 50%, study for effectiveness. Is the
             | intended positive effect happening in the experiment
             | population? Any effect on the control population?
             | 
             | 3. Finally, roll out law to 100% and keep monitoring.
             | 
             | 4. Be ready to roll back to 0% if failures seen at any
             | stage.
             | 
             | 5. Be ready to apply a zero day patch after it's at 100% if
             | edge cases are found.
             | 
             | But, we don't do any of this! Lawmakers make a law and yolo
             | it into production on a fixed date, and it's often
             | impossible to roll it back or modify it.
        
               | justinpombrio wrote:
               | We do sort of do that, with state laws. Different states
               | try out different laws, and copy laws from other states.
               | Ideally a state will repeal laws that don't work well,
               | and copy laws from other states when they work well. In
               | practice it's all a mess of course.
               | 
               | California is the experimental group.
        
             | FireBeyond wrote:
             | > This issue is symptomatic of an underlying problem for
             | me: we do not regularly re-evaluate laws to see if they are
             | having the intended effect.
             | 
             | Even the Constitution. It was intended to be revisited for
             | appropriateness and currency every 20 years.
             | 
             | Instead, a significant number of people, including some on
             | the Supreme Court, believe that the Founding Fathers[1]
             | could speak no wrong words and that the Constitution is the
             | perfect document, to be taken at its word, with no
             | deviation, until the end of time.
             | 
             | [1] Pop Quiz: "How old were the Founding Fathers when they
             | signed the Declaration of Independence and crafted the
             | Constitution?" You'd be forgiven for thinking they were
             | world-weary, wizened old men. In fact, the majority were
             | under forty. Indeed, it was also signed by a sixteen-year-
             | old, a 21-year-old, two 26-year-olds, a 27-year-old, and a
             | 29-year-old.
        
               | tptacek wrote:
               | Yes but the life expectancy was only 35 so in relative
               | terms they were all senior.
        
               | bloopernova wrote:
               | _Average_ life expectancy.
               | 
               | Once past your childhood, you had a good chance of making
               | it to 60 at least.
        
           | ibejoeb wrote:
           | > access requires ID, like alcohol.
           | 
           | Not like alcohol. I know you know, but to spell it out for
           | those that dont: there is a universal registry. Each purchase
           | is tracked and tallied by name and residential address. Best
           | case scenario is you are denied access, but you could also be
           | raided.
           | 
           | It doesn't just require any old ID. Many, if not most, will
           | not accept military ID. No foreign ID is accepted.
           | Essentially, if your ID isn't a recent scannable ID issued by
           | a US state, you don't get it. And I can't go a week without
           | hearing that ID is a kind of ism.
        
             | tptacek wrote:
             | Do we have stories about people being raided?
        
               | ibejoeb wrote:
               | None that I have on hand, no. Not in the US, at least.
               | But do you agree that it's possible? The registry afford
               | that capability. There are raids for far less.
               | 
               | I'm not trying to needle you. It's just nothing like
               | alcohol, tobacco, etc. It's not even really like opioids.
               | 
               | Anyway, I think your conclusion is reasonable, even if we
               | come to different conclusions. Mine is based on common
               | benefit. I think the benefit that comes from the drug far
               | surpasses the detriment.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | I'd hope people get raided or at least some police
               | investigation. Much of the process seems pointless
               | otherwise.
        
         | sharpshadow wrote:
         | This reminds me when EU banned some eye drops with the product
         | name Proculin which have been very effective. The replacement
         | Berberil is useless, literally no effect.
         | 
         | Proculin made your eyes white white constricting the blood
         | vessels for hours. All the stoners had it in their pockets.
         | 
         | Since it constricted blood vessels one could use it also to
         | reduce the local inflammation on pimples, which was a neat off
         | label usage.
        
         | clarkdale wrote:
         | Only the second to last paragraph was necessary.
        
         | politician wrote:
         | PSA: Kroger and Kroger-owned supermarkets require ID to
         | purchase any "cold medication" including those only containing
         | phenylephrine. It's a stupid policy.
         | 
         | Buy your cold medication at Walgreens. Good luck finding a non-
         | Kroger grocer.
        
       | snvzz wrote:
       | Just take N-A-C instead. Actually works and your liver will be
       | happy as well.
        
       | adrianmonk wrote:
       | As long as we're giving decongestant advice, in my experience a
       | neti pot (sinus rinse) really helps.
       | 
       | I also take pseudoephedrine when things get bad. I'm not trying
       | to push a natural stuff only approach.
       | 
       | The neti pot really seems to reduce the odds that sinus
       | congestion will spiral into a terrible sinus headache.
       | 
       | Do be aware of the need to use sterilized water to avoid a
       | possible dangerous infection, though. Distilled water is the
       | easiest way.
        
         | iscrewyou wrote:
         | It works wonders on me and family members. Except we just
         | always go for the Neil Med bottles from Costco or Target. They
         | are also easy to disinfect in the microwave.
         | 
         | Always distilled water, though. It's not worth waiting to boil
         | the water, let it cool down, and then manage the dish used
         | after. It's also easy to get just the right temperature using
         | distilled water in the microwave.
        
         | radicality wrote:
         | I tried this once when I was a teenager. As far as I remember,
         | I took the precautions of sterilized water, getting the right
         | salt, etc.
         | 
         | Guess I didn't know how to properly use it, since I gave myself
         | an awful sinus infection and was bedridden for next two weeks.
         | To this day it's the worst I've ever felt. Never touching a
         | neti pot since then :/
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | The infection may have happened despite the neti pot, not
           | because of it
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | I would strongly advise against broadly recommending this
         | across the board, because while rinsing your sinuses can help
         | with some infections, it can make the situation considerably
         | worse if you're working with e.g. inflammation instead. For a
         | lot of people the difference isn't easy to tell and they end up
         | making their own situation worse. As always, ask a medical
         | professional, even your pharmacist can tell you what to do or
         | not to do once you describe the symptoms.
        
         | wiether wrote:
         | > Do be aware of the need to use sterilized water to avoid a
         | possible dangerous infection, though. Distilled water is the
         | easiest way.
         | 
         | It must be noted that the infection is incredibly rare and
         | requires multiple conditions (like dysfunction of the immune
         | system, unsafe tap water...)
         | 
         | -
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naegleria_fowleri#Pathogenicit...
         | 
         | -
         | https://charlotte.floridahealth.gov/newsroom/2023/03/DOHChar...
         | 
         | For example here in France tap water is disinfected with
         | chlorine and hot water must be heated to at least 50degC which
         | is enough to kill the microorganism.
         | 
         | On the other hand, depending how the distilled water is sourced
         | (container bought in a supermarket...) & used (opened/closed
         | daily...), it can actually create a much riskier source of
         | infection.
        
           | margalabargala wrote:
           | Infection with Naegleria fowleri is incredibly rare.
           | 
           | A run-of-the-mill bacterial infection is much more common.
           | There's more than one type of infection you can give yourself
           | by putting water into your sinuses.
           | 
           | You're correct that it does require a source of the pathogen,
           | be it the water, a poorly cleaned neti pot, or the interior
           | of your nostril.
        
         | bradyd wrote:
         | If you're worried about the possible infection or don't want to
         | mix it yourself, check out Arm & Hammer Simply Saline. It can
         | be used like a neti pot for sinus rinse.
        
       | DidYaWipe wrote:
       | Way overdue. I wonder if the purveyors of this fraud have ever
       | been sued.
       | 
       | One refrain I got tired of hearing was that it "wasn't a safety
       | issue." WRONG. Anyone who has ever had a ruptured eardrum can
       | tell you that it is 100% a safety issue.
       | 
       | If you're about to take a flight with any congestion, you're
       | relying on decongestant to save your ears. I've had ruptured
       | eardrums; it's probably the worst pain I've experienced. I had to
       | take a flight a couple years ago with only this crap, and must
       | have come extremely close to rupturing them again. It was
       | EXCRUCIATING.
        
       | JumpCrisscross wrote:
       | Do we know the story around the people who pushed this? (EDIT: By
       | "this" I mean phenylephrine.)
       | 
       | Had they never had a stuffy nose?
        
         | gambiting wrote:
         | Phenylephrine doesn't work though. It never did. It was
         | "pushed" as an alternative to pseudoephedrine which _can_ be
         | used to synthesize meth, but afaik every single study done on
         | this shows that phenylephrine does absolutely nothing, it 's a
         | placebo drug. The faster it's phased out the better.
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | How it was approved in the first place should have been
           | reviewed
        
             | Suppafly wrote:
             | It was approved back in the 70s after there being some
             | studies that showed it was somewhat effective against
             | congestion. I suspect it was no better than a placebo, but
             | once it gets over the hurdle of being shown to be safe to
             | use it probably didn't take much to get it approved. I
             | don't think it was ever a popular product until the
             | government starting making pseudoephedrine, which is highly
             | effective, hard to buy.
        
           | riahi wrote:
           | Strictly speaking, phenylphrine works when it's injected. It
           | is approved and used every day for this indication in the
           | service of general anesthesia.
           | 
           | However, the oral bioavailability is zero.
           | 
           | This is an example of using something off label that's
           | approved for something else. Sometimes it's fine. And
           | sometimes, it's dumb.
        
             | gambiting wrote:
             | That's cool to know - I had no idea! I assumed that it
             | literally did nothing in every scenario.
        
         | Cthulhu_ wrote:
         | People bought sudafed / they earned a lot of money from it, and
         | they wanted to continue to earn money off of it. That's
         | basically it. But they will point the blame at legislation I'm
         | sure, both for making the effective stuff more difficult to
         | get, and for being OK with the ineffective stuff being sold.
        
       | User23 wrote:
       | It's rather annoying that the only actually effective nasal
       | decongestants are amphetamines or otherwise closely related
       | compounds. Sudafed is great for daytime relief, but there really
       | is no good sleep time decongestant. Sure Nyquil is a thing, but
       | it just relies on the antihistamine to produce drowsiness without
       | any actual decongestant effect. And Dextromethorphan is arguably
       | even more useless than Phenylephrine since at least the latter
       | could conceivably be effective if you shot it up.
        
         | rustcleaner wrote:
         | Time to hand rifles to everyone (including felons) and ban the
         | State.
        
           | User23 wrote:
           | I do find it amusing reading hundred year old stories where
           | characters walk into a pharmacy to buy a pint of whiskey, a
           | sandwich, and a vial of cocaine and it's just an everyday
           | normal thing.
        
       | mrbonner wrote:
       | I can't pronounce either one of the Sudafed substances. One time,
       | an old lady asked me which Sudafed work for her as she pointed to
       | a shelf full of Sudafed plus other decongestant drugs. I told her
       | just buy the one that you need to take the flyer and bring it to
       | the pharmacist to get it. Others are just scam. The real one is
       | used to make meth so they put it behind the counter.
       | 
       | She was surprised that the US gov would allow fake decongestant
       | to be sold.
        
       | modeless wrote:
       | Really hard to trust the FDA when they let this obvious scam go
       | on for so long.
        
       | CodeWriter23 wrote:
       | Junk Science invalidates effective medication. I'm calling this
       | right now, in 5-10 years we'll be discussing how it counteracts
       | the spike protein.
        
       | phtrivier wrote:
       | Cue:
       | 
       | - the entry of trolls everywhere demanding that they can keep the
       | medecine they've been using for ages
       | 
       | - the new administration's agreeing with "popular demand" and
       | disagreeing with the FDA, because that's their thing
       | 
       | - and the companies selling the drug be like "uh, ok, fine".
       | 
       | At least it will be an interesting distraction from trying to fix
       | the opioids epidemic ?
        
       | tigen wrote:
       | The brands who have continued to sell this ingredient should be
       | considered untrustworthy. It's basically fraud.
        
         | whamlastxmas wrote:
         | Also the stores that stock it, honestly
        
       | tonymet wrote:
       | So a useless drug has made billions and took 30 years to be taken
       | off the market . And who knows what damage it's done ? Can we go
       | back to being suspicious of pharmaceutical companies and the fda
       | ?
        
         | relistan wrote:
         | It was on the market more like fifty years.
        
           | tonymet wrote:
           | Wow that's even more alarming
        
         | Suppafly wrote:
         | I don't think it's done any damage, it's just not effective.
        
           | mrob wrote:
           | Wasting people's money is damage.
        
             | whamlastxmas wrote:
             | Preventing people from getting real medical care due to
             | fraud is absolutely damage.
        
               | rustcleaner wrote:
               | This is why sovereign immunity needs to be rescinded: bad
               | law should get politicians incarcerated for long periods
               | of time and their assets stripped to help pay back the
               | treasury for the piles of money it should be printing and
               | handing its victims. It should also be legal to lie to
               | police while they're barred from lying to you (again, at
               | threat of incarceration). We are supposed to be
               | sovereign, not them!
        
               | Suppafly wrote:
               | >Preventing people from getting real medical care due to
               | fraud is absolutely damage.
               | 
               | Sure, but I don't think you could reliably charge that,
               | at least in the US, where homeopathic medicines with
               | absolutely no effect are allowed to be sold. We're
               | talking about over the counter remedies for temporary
               | sinus congestion often caused by pollen allergies, not
               | prescription medicines that treat actual serious
               | conditions.
        
           | tonymet wrote:
           | Every treatment has ill effects . Look at the number of liver
           | failures from Tylenol
        
             | Suppafly wrote:
             | >Every treatment has ill effects
             | 
             | Not necessarily.
        
         | briandear wrote:
         | Some of us were suspicious all along. Especially of Pfizer.
         | 
         | But such suspicions became socially dangerous right around the
         | time that Pfizer stood to make multiple billions selling a
         | novel treatment for a recent pandemic.
         | 
         | (Pfizer testing drugs on Nigerian children)
         | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1471980/
         | 
         | (Pfizer pleads guilty to criminal charges over Neurontin)
         | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC416587/
        
           | rustcleaner wrote:
           | I found a dirty nurse, he was willing to miss my arm and
           | accidentally vaccinate the sink, for a short stack of
           | benjamins.
        
           | immibis wrote:
           | Let's be honest about this: the reasons people were skeptical
           | of COVID-19 vaccines had nothing to do with the actual
           | corruption in the pharmaceutical industry, and everything to
           | do with the corruption stories told by people who profit when
           | more people die.
        
             | tonymet wrote:
             | I still don't get it . Is the corruption there or not ?
        
         | aucisson_masque wrote:
         | No you're believing in conspiracies.
         | 
         | It would require the whole scientist communities and the
         | sanctioning organisations to work together in order to validate
         | a drug that is basically infective. Because you see before a
         | drug is out on the market there are a lot of testing on
         | animals, then humans and they have control group to measure how
         | effective (or not) it is.
         | 
         | Things like that CANT happen.
         | 
         | Obviously I'm being sarcastic, that's the usual argument: you
         | can't possibly have all scientist and federal organisation work
         | together on malicious drugs.
         | 
         | The truth is that it happens, see that drug or the oxycontin.
         | It just requires some shity people and the rest of scientist
         | community to not care.
        
           | whamlastxmas wrote:
           | You had me going, I was like Jesus this person is gullible
        
       | thegrizzlyking wrote:
       | Meanwhile generic decongestants like Ambroxol that actually work
       | are too expensive to go through FDA approval.
       | 
       | https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2024/05/th...
       | 
       | Maybe a shorter duration(<5yrs) patent(for lack of better word)
       | for unapproved generics might do the trick.
        
         | refurb wrote:
         | > Maybe a shorter duration(<5yrs) patent(for lack of better
         | word) for unapproved generics might do the trick.
         | 
         | There already is something similar - the NDA exclusivity
         | period. You get 3-5 years where the FDA won't approve any other
         | versions of the product.
         | 
         | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.4155/ppa.14.30
         | 
         | But ambroxol isn't a decongestant - it supposed to help with
         | phlegm.
        
         | Aurornis wrote:
         | Ambroxol is not a decongestant, it's an expectorant. If you
         | take Ambroxol expecting to clear your sinus pressure like
         | pseudoephedrine, you're going to be disappointed.
         | 
         | I've used it. I thought it was going to be better than
         | guaifenesin (equivalent available in the US). In my experience,
         | it was not.
         | 
         | That entire blog post appears to be based on a second-hand
         | report from someone who went on vacation in France and was told
         | something by the person at the pharmacist selling them
         | Ambroxol. I don't understand why rationalist bloggers are so
         | keen to rely on anecdotes and hearsay when it supports a point
         | they're trying to make.
        
       | noneeeed wrote:
       | I've noticed that in the UK all phenylephrine based OTC
       | medications also contain paracetamol (acetaminophen) and often
       | caffine. They are just an expensive way to buy two very cheap
       | compounds with an added bit of placebo effect from the flashy
       | packaging.
       | 
       | I can't take pseudoephedrine due to high blood pressure and I've
       | found that the most effective thing for me, especially at night,
       | is paracetamol, a blast from a nasal spray, and one of those
       | nasal strips that help keep your nostrels open a bit more. It's
       | not quite up there with the real Sudafed, but it's generally
       | enough to get me a good night's sleep.
        
         | Suppafly wrote:
         | >I can't take pseudoephedrine due to high blood pressure
         | 
         | I really miss being able to take pseudoephedrine. I mentioned
         | to my doctor that it seemed to affect my blood pressure and he
         | looked scandalized and told me I should never take it again.
         | Apparently someone should have told me when I was diagnosed
         | with high blood pressure. The only real information I got was a
         | handout for a DASH diet.
        
           | noneeeed wrote:
           | Yeah, I don't think it was mentioned when I was diagnosed,
           | but the pharmacist asked about it when I next went to buy
           | some more. That was a very sad day.
           | 
           | I miss being able to take Night Nurse and then sleep like a
           | baby.
        
           | astura wrote:
           | I just checked the package for a random pseudoephedrine
           | product
           | 
           | https://www.cvs.com/shop/sudafed-sinus-congestion-maximum-
           | st...
           | 
           | It says consult your doctor before use if you have high blood
           | pressure or heart disease.
        
             | Suppafly wrote:
             | How often do you consult your doctor about over the counter
             | medicines that you've taken for years?
        
               | astura wrote:
               | Every time I have a new diagnosis or a new medication I
               | absolutely double check any OTC medications.
        
         | radicalbyte wrote:
         | Cough medicine in the UK is sugar + paracetamol.
         | 
         | My wife's a pharmacists so always laughs at it (and the
         | decongestants) when we visit the UK.
        
           | noneeeed wrote:
           | Yep! OTC medicines here are really limited. Although you can
           | always get something stronger from the pharmacist.
           | 
           | I remember being ill in Switzerland and getting something for
           | a nasty cold. I have no idea what it was other than magic in
           | pill form.
        
             | rootusrootus wrote:
             | > OTC medicines here are really limited
             | 
             | But you can get scopolamine there OTC. In chewables for
             | kids, even! We can only get it as a patch, and only by
             | prescription.
             | 
             | Makes me want to find an importer I feel like I can trust,
             | because I don't get over there often enough to bring it
             | back myself.
        
       | thecupisblue wrote:
       | Not sure if it's still possible, but in eastern europe back in
       | 2010s you could buy bottles of liquid ephedrine nose drops
       | without a prescription. The pharmacists would get raw ephedrine
       | and mix it in the back, filling the generic nose drop bottles.
       | Tho they'd only give you 1 a month or so, looking at you
       | suspiciously if you came multiple times in a row.
       | 
       | Back when I was obsessed with sports and being the peak athlete I
       | can be, I'd go to the different pharmacies around town and buy a
       | bunch of nose drops. These would get mixed in with coffee to get
       | a dumb version of EC stack. Not sure if it was worth it, but it
       | definitely had me wired to the gills.
        
         | teekert wrote:
         | I had a student once from Sofia (capital and largest city of
         | Bulgaria), she told me her mother mailed her all sort of
         | antibiotics because they were not available here (western
         | Europe) and "what if she'd catch a cold or the flu?" (Both are
         | viruses so antibiotics don't even do anything other than kill
         | the useful bacteria in your body!)
        
       | EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote:
       | I have tried many nasal sprays, but what is really effective is a
       | salt in water solution (slightly salty to taste) and a 10 ml
       | syringe. Simply inject it into each nostril so that the water
       | comes out through the mouth, a couple of times a day. Cleans out
       | all the garbage really well.
       | 
       | Among the medications, Flonase spray is effective, but saltwater
       | is enough most of the time.
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | Make sure you're using sterile water for this.
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naegleria_fowleri?wprov=sfti1
         | 
         | The saline wash is also known as a Neti pot here.
        
         | marcosdumay wrote:
         | It's 0.9% by mass. You can buy it easily in large bottles so
         | you don't need to learn to disinfect and filter your water
         | correctly.
        
       | wink wrote:
       | Wonder how many people "fell" for it though.
       | 
       | I remember, many years ago, that I got some Antihistamine tables
       | with Pseudoephedrine to take in 'light' emergencies for my
       | allergies, cat hair in my case. I wasn't going to fall over like
       | other people but have trouble breathing and a runny nose, so
       | every time I visited people with cats, I could take one and
       | everything was fine. When they banned it and my supply was used
       | up, I got something with Phenylephrine and it just did...
       | nothing. Then 5min of online research told me just as much.
        
       | TomMasz wrote:
       | It doesn't relieve nasal congestion and it never did. While it's
       | certainly safe, it's not even slightly effective.
        
       | Molitor5901 wrote:
       | Thanks to the Administrative Procedures Act, and per the release
       | from the FDA, the proposal will take some time. Comments are
       | accepted until May 7, 2025. If the government moved with all
       | legal alacrity, the order might get finalized by this time next
       | year, that's if there are no lawsuits, petitions, etc.
       | 
       | I mention this because I can't help but feel the APA takes _too_
       | long when an agency is doing something proactive for the public
       | good. This should take sixty days, not years, because it 's not a
       | removal of a product for safety reasons, that's often done via
       | the FTC.
       | 
       | There is a hole between FDA's authority to create and amend
       | regulations, order the removal of products due to safety, and
       | what should be a more routine streamlining of the FDA cleaning
       | up..
       | 
       | APA - 5 U.S.C. SSSS 551-559
        
       | viggity wrote:
       | For most of my adult life, I was "addicted" to sudafed
       | (pseudoephedrine, not phenylephrine). I had absolutely horrific
       | sinus problems. Could never breathe, tons of sinus infections,
       | etc etc. Things like sinus rinses (not a netipot which is gravity
       | driven, but a positive pressure squeeze bottle) helped, but it
       | was still a major inhibitor in life.
       | 
       | I got a new ENT, and I started getting a quarterly "chemical
       | nasal cautery". It has ABSOLUTELY changed my life. I can breathe
       | sooo much easier, and I couldn't recommend it enough to anyone
       | with persistent sinus issues. It is super easy. It doesn't even
       | kind of hurt, the most mild of stings if anything at all. Doc
       | will spray a lot of afrin up your nose, then lidocaine, then
       | carbolic acid which kills a bunch of your immune cells (so they
       | can't overreact to tree pollen and make you miserable). You get
       | it done once a month for three months, then once every 3 months
       | thereafter.
        
       | daft_pink wrote:
       | The outrageous thing about this is that people are getting
       | accused of a crime for trying to buy the effective drug.
        
       | pbhjpbhj wrote:
       | You can still get pseudoephedrine containing Sudafed in UK
       | sometimes, I've had difficulties finding it, but they package it
       | almost identically to the phenylephrine containing placebo.
       | 
       | To me this has always seemed like obvious fraud.
       | 
       | We don't have class actions in the UK, but perhaps in USA there's
       | a chance of punishing this sort of behaviour going forward?
       | 
       | Basically they took the active ingredient out, added a similarly
       | sounding chemical, continued to sell the new known-ineffective
       | chemical in the virtually the same packet, under the same trade
       | dress and branding...
       | 
       | Pseudo was really effective for me. When I first bought Sudafed
       | after they took the active ingredient out (of the easy to find
       | product) I thought I'd misremembered, took a couple of illnesses
       | before I twigged, then some very careful analysis of packaging to
       | make sure to get the actual medicine.
        
         | jfengel wrote:
         | Interesting. I was just in the UK (Scotland), and picked up a
         | cold on the plane. I was unable to locate any pseudoephedrine.
         | 
         | My search was far from comprehensive, so it might merely have
         | required looking harder. But I gave up early, on the assumption
         | that the UK was similarly restrictive to the US.
        
         | EasyMark wrote:
         | In the US everywhere has it, but it's behind the counter and
         | you have to show ID so they can track how much buy. It's
         | ridiculous, but it's not hard to get, and has never stopped an
         | illegal drug chemist from making crystal meth, but regular
         | folks pay the price in inconvenience
        
       | dang wrote:
       | There's also https://arstechnica.com/health/2024/11/fda-proposes-
       | ditching...
       | 
       | (via https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42083559, but we merged
       | the comments hither)
        
       | Aurornis wrote:
       | I'm sure this will be unpopular, but I think the real problem
       | with Phenylephrine is that it isn't dosed appropriately in
       | standard formulations.
       | 
       | The standard 10mg dose is too low. Decongestants work by
       | constricting blood vessels, which inherently increases blood
       | pressure as a side effect.
       | 
       | Pseudoephedrine at standard doses is known to raise blood
       | pressure slightly. Phenylephrine at standard doses (10mg) shows
       | no such effect (Source
       | https://journals.lww.com/ebp/abstract/2018/03000/how_much_do... )
       | 
       | Phenylephrine does increase blood pressure when delivered by IV
       | at doses that work. The oral 10mg dose just isn't enough to get
       | absorbed and do anything.
       | 
       | It's not that phenylephrine is ineffective, it's that it's
       | underdosed in the oral formulation.
        
         | abbefaria27 wrote:
         | There was some article about it on HN a while ago. If I
         | remember right the problem was that its bioavailability is
         | super low. You can take all you want, but only a tiny percent
         | makes it through to get absorbed. In theory you could increase
         | the the dose a lot but I imagine that might have other issues.
        
       | steveBK123 wrote:
       | It was obvious to consumers very quickly that it didn't actually
       | do anything. Astonishing this charade went on so long.
        
       | chankstein38 wrote:
       | Clearly placebo for me, I guess? It's wild how many people are
       | saying phenylephrine is completely ineffective. It saved my ass
       | during a really long COVID stint. It was impossible to find by
       | itself but when we finally found it we bought 2 boxes because we
       | use it and, for us, it works wonders... Hope they release
       | something else better I guess.
        
         | ziml77 wrote:
         | The better thing is the original: psuedoephedrine. It was never
         | impossible to buy, it just required going to the pharmacy
         | counter and showing ID. I knew about this when it happened in
         | the 2000's because my dad needed Sudafed often, but the
         | changeover was almost certainly invisible to most people given
         | that the packaging is essentially identical between the two
         | versions of the product.
        
       | stronglikedan wrote:
       | Good. I get food poisoning symptoms from it, but it's so popular
       | that my other options are limited.
        
       | mullingitover wrote:
       | Everyone in the pharma and regulatory world has known this stuff
       | is worthless for years. I feel like the pharma industry should be
       | severely fined for knowingly perpetrating a fraud on the public.
       | Sadly, they would likely be able to defend themselves on the
       | grounds that the FDA allowed it.
        
         | ahi wrote:
         | A faculty member clued me in when I worked for a college of
         | pharmacy 20 years ago! FDA should be embarrassed. This
         | shouldn't even have been hard. How many drugs have been
         | p-hacked into efficacy and would need expensive trials to
         | disprove? Oral PE is metabolized too quickly make it to the
         | bloodstream and can't be more than a placebo.
        
       | sanex wrote:
       | I find the Sudafed PE is useless but the Alka Seltzer with
       | phenylephrine works and works really fast.
        
         | horsawlarway wrote:
         | Which is actually supported and documented here:
         | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26097788/
         | 
         | Lots of versions of Alka Seltzer use aspirin instead of
         | acetaminophen, and aspirin in combination with phenylephrine is
         | documented to reduce congestion more than either alone.
         | 
         | Note - avoid the cold & flu versions (the ones with orange
         | bottoms) and the day & night versions (orange and green
         | bottoms), because they're not aspirin, they're acetaminophen.
         | The traditional blue bottom "Alka Seltzer Severe Cold" is the
         | one with aspirin and phenylephrine.
        
       | jonahbenton wrote:
       | Looking forward to the FDA recommending ivermectin to take its
       | place in late January 2025.
        
       | SeanLuke wrote:
       | It's been definitiely shown since at least 2010 that
       | phenylephrine is useless for this purpose. How in the world did
       | the FDA let the decongestant industry push this drug for 15 years
       | before coming down on it?
        
       | cryptonector wrote:
       | Make pseudoephedrine great again.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-11-08 23:00 UTC)