Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Should DayQuil Be Legal?

theargumentmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 322 posts

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#71

Post by rhdunn »

Hasz wrote: post #43

> So the only ingredient that’s doing anything in that bottle of DayQuil makes up just 2% of the bottle: the roughly 8 grams of acetaminophen this argument makes very little sense. Plenty of very potent drugs are in the single digit mg range in a tablet that weights hundreds of mg. More importantly, as always, it is a problem of incentives. There is no strong, commercial entity focused on removing ineffective drugs f…

The other ingredients would be doing other things: making the pill/drug easer to swallow/consume, extending shelf-life, etc. You need enough of the drug for it to be effective, but not too much to overdose or exhibit side-effects.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#72

Post by asveikau »

robmccoll wrote: post #65
Aurornis wrote: post #35

This article uses the trick where you pick studies that support your argument and ignore all of the studies that disagree with it. There are other studies where Dextromethorphan improves both objective and subjective measures of coughing: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37232330/ They also picked a study that shows honey outperforming Dextromethorphan but ignored all the studies that show honey performing similarly o…

DXM may or may not suppress coughing relative to placebo - the study cited here appears to be have been written entirely by authors from drug companies, so perhaps there is some bias. Here's a meta analysis that favors honey over DXM https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32817011/ , the original study that kicked off this idea that also favors honey https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18056558/ , and a different meta analysis…

It's funny that TFA seems to use the comparison to honey as disparagement, rather than interpret the same information as an endorsement of the helpfulness of honey.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#73

Post by jollyllama »

They wouldn't be selling the placebos if the real stuff were accessible. That's the real answer. The article mentions this but just accepts the inaccessiblity of the real thing as a given.

You used to be able to get Nyquil with real sudafed in it. That was the gold standard. It's not even available behind the counter anymore, presumably because they can make more money from morons buying the placebos.

As an aside:

> In January 2011, the FDA set a maximum amount of acetaminophen that could be packaged in combination opioids like Vicodin or Percocet. The odds of hospitalization due to opioid-related acetaminophen toxicity plummeted.

Yeah, the acetaminophen was there to PREVENT abuse of the Vics and Percs 'cause you'd overdose on the acetaminophen first. Sure, there was an easy workaround, but that was it's intent.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#74

Post by tptacek »

Aurornis wrote: post #35

This article uses the trick where you pick studies that support your argument and ignore all of the studies that disagree with it. There are other studies where Dextromethorphan improves both objective and subjective measures of coughing: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37232330/ They also picked a study that shows honey outperforming Dextromethorphan but ignored all the studies that show honey performing similarly o…

Are you sure you posted the right paper? That paper appears to present a clinically insignificant outcome for DXM in children.

I think it's perfectly reasonable to contest the research summary this article is providing. All science-based articles on interesting topics are going to be like that. But you're writing your comment as if they took a flyer on DXM, and the research consensus is in fact that DXM is not effective. It's not as bad as phenylephrine (it has detectable, if immaterial, impact in adults), but it's pretty bad.

The point of the article, of course, isn't that Dayquil should be illegal because it's dangerous; it's that it doesn't work. Having spent an unreasonable amount of time in HN pseudoephedrine threads, I think the broad consensus of this site is that phenylephrine should be taken off the shelves.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#75

Post by andy99 »

In Canada if you go to a drug store, the shelves are literally filled with literal homeopathic medicine. You have to carefully confirm that what you’re buying isn’t water, and there is no signage or other differentiation between actual medicine and magic.

Completely unrelated, I noticed recently that tire detailing spray that makes your tires look black, and the recommended lubricant for my garage door weather stripping, which both cost $15 or more for a little bottle, are just silicon oil that costs pennies for that amount. I have no moral problem with charging higher prices for convenience plus clarity of what the use is. I do think it’s amoral, obviously, to be involved in snake oil sales and unbelievable that the government allows it.

Edit: this is the first result from a Canadian pharmacy searching for cough medicine. Worse it’s for kids: https://well.ca/products/homeocan-kids-0-9-cough-cold-day_88...

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#76

Post by tptacek »

Hasz wrote: post #43

> So the only ingredient that’s doing anything in that bottle of DayQuil makes up just 2% of the bottle: the roughly 8 grams of acetaminophen this argument makes very little sense. Plenty of very potent drugs are in the single digit mg range in a tablet that weights hundreds of mg. More importantly, as always, it is a problem of incentives. There is no strong, commercial entity focused on removing ineffective drugs f…

The mass of the acetominophen isn't really important, it's just vivid writing. The point is that 8g is obtainable for orders of magnitude less when it isn't wrapped in misleading marketing.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#77

Post by tclancy »

asveikau wrote: post #72
robmccoll wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DXM may or may not suppress coughing relative to placebo - the study cited here appears to be have been written entirely by authors from drug companies, so perhaps there is some bias. Here's a meta analysis that favors honey over DXM https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32817011/ , the original study that kicked off this idea that also favors honey https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18056558/ , and a different meta analysis…

It's funny that TFA seems to use the comparison to honey as disparagement, rather than interpret the same information as an endorsement of the helpfulness of honey.

I think the point is honey is known as a home remedy, may already be in your house and is available at a much lower price (farmer’s markets and woo merchants possibly excepted).

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#78

Post by geraldcombs »

bgirard wrote: post #70
bityard wrote: post #39

I just can't get super upset about this. Sure, OTC companies are duping customers with marketing, but what's new about that? As the person holding the money, it's my job to look at what is effective and what the active ingredients are in any given product. Or ask my doctor/nurse/pharmacist what to do, if I can't be bothered to make the effort myself. When I want to get irrationally angry about something in a departme…

> As the person holding the money, it's my job to look at what is effective and what the active ingredients are in any given product. But I don't have time to do that. I would rather have a retailer do that curation for me and provide me with effective high value products, and stand behind returns when they miss the mark. Then as a customer I can reward them for that value added work. That's why Costco is great most…

Additionally, if I'm buying cold medicine there's a really good chance I have a cold, and my ability and inclination to carefully analyze the ingredient list on a box of medicine smear-printed in 3pt sans will likely be diminished.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#79

Post by stronglikedan »

jollyllama wrote: post #73

They wouldn't be selling the placebos if the real stuff were accessible. That's the real answer. The article mentions this but just accepts the inaccessiblity of the real thing as a given. You used to be able to get Nyquil with real sudafed in it. That was the gold standard. It's not even available behind the counter anymore, presumably because they can make more money from morons buying the placebos. As an aside: >…

> you'd overdose on the acetaminophen first

which is a much, much worse way to go, apparently

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#80

Post by triceratops »

bityard wrote: post #39

I just can't get super upset about this. Sure, OTC companies are duping customers with marketing, but what's new about that? As the person holding the money, it's my job to look at what is effective and what the active ingredients are in any given product. Or ask my doctor/nurse/pharmacist what to do, if I can't be bothered to make the effort myself. When I want to get irrationally angry about something in a departme…

> As the person holding the money, it's my job to look at what is effective and what the active ingredients are in any given product

That ignores over a century of law regarding drug safety and efficacy, and false advertising.

Post reply on HN