Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they're using it hyperbolically. As a parent (who also maybe has a high pain tolerance but I am a guy and we are famous for both thinking that and for not being pain tolerant) my daughter is currently like this including the earrings thing. It's more of a frustration but I know she will grow out of it as she's already gotten a lot better. I would imagine OP is in the same boat and is just letting off a little…
"I think they're using it hyperbolically." You'd think my comment's thesis that folks with lower tolerances should be respected and treated differently would have given the rhetorical device away.
The first non-opoid painkiller
201–210 of 235 posts
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#202Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#203Earlier quoted context omitted.
Worse in what ways? I think it's a pretty neat feature of the design. If you just need some, you don't get a lot, and you don't get to buy a lot "just in case". If you truly need a lot, you can go though the hassle of going to multiple stores. It's essentially just raising a barrier for (under normal circumstances) undesirable behavior.
I think being able to buy a lot of medicine just in case is an amazing feature that makes me less dependent on the supply chain.
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gabapentin is an anticonvulsants. Ibuprofen and paracetamol are anti-inflammatory. While they are effective at reducing pain, they are technically not "pain killers". The title is therefore correct.
Redescribing NSAIDs as "not technically painkillers", when that's one of their primary use cases, seems... Disingenuous at best.
More often used for neuropathy than epilepsy (though used for both, due to how gabapentoids work.)
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#205Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the rules the UK has for limiting paracetamol purchases to small amount per day are so fantastically stupid Worse than that: it is effectively per day per shop. In a very short space of time I can buy two packs in Boots, two in Tesco, two in Sainsbury, ooh look another small Tesco I'll get two there as well, two from Savers, two from SuperDrug, …
Worse in what ways? I think it's a pretty neat feature of the design. If you just need some, you don't get a lot, and you don't get to buy a lot "just in case". If you truly need a lot, you can go though the hassle of going to multiple stores. It's essentially just raising a barrier for (under normal circumstances) undesirable behavior.
It doesn't do what it is sold as doing¹ while causing a bit of faf.
The restriction is one of those put in place because someone somewhere want to be seen to be doing something.
> for (under normal circumstances) undesirable behavior.
Outside of a supply problem situation, which we don't have for that sort of thing and different at the time the change came in, why is it so undesirable?
--------
[1] Reducing accidental overdose rates², reducing people using out-dated-so-possibly-ineffective medicines, etc.
[2] Accidental overdose rates have fallen, but they have in many places without those restrictions, so I suspect that is a coincidence and probably more due to greater awareness³ of there being paracetamol or aspirin in other products and therefore the need to be careful what you take in combination.
[3] Due to better labelling?
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#206Earlier quoted context omitted.
My wife and I got colds while vacationing in Edinburgh and had a heck of a time before realizing to ask for paracetamol rather than acetaminophen. Also, the rules the UK has for limiting paracetamol purchases to small amount per day are so fantastically stupid.
> Also, the rules the UK has for limiting paracetamol purchases to small amount per day are so fantastically stupid. Yes, but: > Responsible for 56,000 emergency department visits and 2600 hospitalizations, acetaminophen poisoning causes 500 deaths annually in the United States. Notably, around 50% of these poisonings are unintentional, often resulting from patients misinterpreting dosing instructions or unknowingly…
350 million people in this country.
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think being able to buy a lot of medicine just in case is an amazing feature that makes me less dependent on the supply chain.
You can buy you entire year's supply of panadol by simply shop-hopping through the main street. What's the problem?
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many very simple things can badly hurt or kill someone who doesn't take a few minutes to not be stupid about using them properly. Legislating with absurdities applied to all anything that possibly leads to completely individual harm because a few people can't take normal responsibility for themselves emphatically isn't reasonable.
> a few Fifty thousand hospital visits per year > isn’t reasonable Fortunately this is not a popular opinion
There were over 50,000 hospital emergency room visits, yes. However, bear in mind that many thousands of people visit emergency rooms for all kinds of unfounded reasons every year anyhow. Of those 50,000+ paracetamol-related visits (speaking of the United States here), less than 5% resulted in any need for hospitalization and only 450 or so deaths were registered in 2023, as a recent example year. These numbers out of an estimated 60 million individual uses PER WEEK by Americans according to the NIH.
For some perspective, accidents caused by "Fall involving ice-skates, skis, roller-skates or skateboards" in the U.S cause an average of 1000+ deaths per year.
Paracetamol can, just like many drugs, be dangerous, but if your criteria for paranoid restriction of something so commonly necessary and used without problems in the extreme absolute vast majority of cases are the numbers above, you'd better start banning one enormous shit list of completely innocuous activities and things that normal adults have access to before you reach something like paracetamol.
There seems to be a sort of mental illness prevalent in the kind of logic that equates any evidence of self-harm with a given product or thing with a rabid need to treat people like children in their access to it.
The entire adult population should not have to be treated like drooling morons in their very most basic personal medical choices because a completely minuscule percentage of the population lacks the mental capacity to read a basic safety label for a common medicine, or control their childrens' access to something that's easy to keep away from them.
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#209Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many very simple things can badly hurt or kill someone who doesn't take a few minutes to not be stupid about using them properly. Legislating with absurdities applied to all anything that possibly leads to completely individual harm because a few people can't take normal responsibility for themselves emphatically isn't reasonable.
It’s not theoretical. On one side of the ledger we have people dying horrible deaths, on the other side we have people who can’t have vast quantities of paracetamol on hand for no particular reason. If you do in fact need vast quantities of paracetamol for some reason, it can be prescribed.
The vast majority of adults should be able to live in a world where they're not treated like 10-year-old children for seeking a bit of modest pain relief for very common ailments.
Re: The first non-opoid painkiller
#210Colloquially acetaminophen/paracetamol and ibuprofen are "painkillers" but this is in a different class, it's amazing to have something which performs like the opioid pain relief but without at least some of the side effects. It's the first non opioid painkiller applicable for situations like post operative use. I'd have loved this after my hernia op, the last thing you need with that is opioid induced constipation.
What kind of hernia ? In the US it seems like they prescribe opioids like candy. I've never heard of opioids post hernia surgery in Europe.