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

281–290 of 322 posts

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#281

Post by ikr678 »

toss1 wrote: post #260
Lich wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn’t know this until recently either. I grew up on a family where if there was pain, you just take tylenol to deal with it. We always followed the dosage timing and never had issues. So recently when my wife had some chronic pain I suggested taking tylenol but even after two days the pain would not go away and she went to ER. They did a blood check to see if they could find anything. They didn’t find the cause, j…

Yup, did some digging on Tylenol/acetaminophen before I had some surgery, and it's a real danger. Oddly enough, it seems downing a whole bottle won't (usually) end your life as it gets mostly directly eliminated rather than metabolized, but taking just around 2-3X the high-strength dose sustained over 3-4 days can destroy your liver — at that point, you have about six weeks unless they find a new liver for you (obvio…

Common advice where i am from is to alternate between acetaminaphen/paracetamol and ibuprofen based otc painkillers. One, it reduces your opporunity to overdose, but also some evidence they work better together.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#282

Post by looptylou »

jambalaya8 wrote: post #167
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to chastise you or your wife, there is an actual "Liver Warning" on Tylenol Product labels. They warn against 4000mg/day or with alcohol consumption. It's not an on/off switch, the damage occurs on a ramp that achieves a critical point after so much consumption. Saying this to encourage label reading and to refute those who might try to characterize your wife's experience as anecdotal. And for those who stop read…

It appears his wife took under that threshold and only for a few days. 4000mg is roughly 8-10 otc painkillers in a day (depending on the brand). That said, everyone's physical ability to metabolise drugs is different. I might worry something else was wrong, or at least get a followup test done later, if her liver tox screen showed that, just to rule out another cause.

You're right: metabolisms vary. This is why I don't dance with the 4 gram limit, even though (insanely) post-op instructions regularly advise you to.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#283

Post by inigyou »

looptylou wrote: post #282
jambalaya8 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It appears his wife took under that threshold and only for a few days. 4000mg is roughly 8-10 otc painkillers in a day (depending on the brand). That said, everyone's physical ability to metabolise drugs is different. I might worry something else was wrong, or at least get a followup test done later, if her liver tox screen showed that, just to rule out another cause.

You're right: metabolisms vary. This is why I don't dance with the 4 gram limit, even though (insanely) post-op instructions regularly advise you to.

Out of context on the /comments page, one might think you are talking about completely different substances, heh.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#284

Post by alistairSH »

no-name-here wrote: post #273
Nifty3929 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's one of the important reasons - I thought - that we have the FDA in the first place. But these days I'm really not so sure. So many promising treatments rejected (or just stalled forever) while pointless placebos and worse get or remain approved. So - why again does the FDA exist?

> why again does the FDA exist? Is the argument that because the FDA may not be perfect, the public would be better off if it didn’t exist? The FDA handles many thousands of product categories , tens of thousands of prescription drugs, etc. Which items (and how many total) are you referring to? For many of them might there be a reason available as to why they didn’t end up as you recommended? Is there any country on…

Sunscreen is the first thing that pops to mind. Until last week(?) we hadn't had a new sunscreen ingredient in decades, despite the RoW getting newer/better stuff for years. It was to the point that tourists to Korea and the EU would stock up on product to bring back.

Yes, that (roughly) happened because the FDA regulates sunscreen like a drug and RoW mostly treats it as a cosmetic. And FDA drug approval is expensive, so nobody was bothering.

Regardless, for those of us with pasty white skin, it kinda blows not being able to get a good daily sunscreen that doesn't make us look even more ghostly.

EDIT - Yes, the FDA needs to exist, it's WAY better than nothing. But, it's probably due for some reform.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#285

Post by xtiansimon »

MichaelDickens wrote: post #118
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: >…

> It's not even available behind the counter anymore, presumably because they can make more money from morons buying the placebos. What do you mean "morons"? Say I'm a normal person who doesn't habitually read magazine articles about drug effectiveness. How am I supposed to know that phenylephrine doesn't work? It's in the drug store and they're selling it as a decongestant; I have good reason to believe it will deco…

> “Say I'm a normal person… How am I supposed to know that phenylephrine doesn't work?”

After using it and you experience zero relief, unfortunately. Sniffle. It’s infuriating when you’re ill.

I wonder how anyone learns of the good stuff if they didn’t grow up prior to Sudafed being moved behind the counter.

When I’m sick and standing in that isle I long for the day when there were just two on the market: Sudafed during the day, and Actifed at night.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#286

Post by tsoukase »

Placebo is a multi trillion market. Not only in the form of vitamin, dietary supplement or other non-active pill but also of shopping, psycho-boosting or feel-good behaviour. Even religion is a form of placebo!

I am fed up with various "products" that come to my door: mix of vitamins, a-lipoic acid and ashwagada. I can imagine among the billions of physically healthy adults, there are many that choose them. While regulation for drugs is strict, for these products it is less that potato chips. The FDA goes like, as soon as they sell snake oil that doesn't hurt anyone, let the market loose.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#288

Post by casey2 »

ryandrake wrote: post #28
robertpateii wrote: post #8

Yeah, intentionally misleading consumers should always be at least somewhat illegal. Sure caveat emptor, but consumers having accurate information is implied and a cornerstone of a competitive market.

"Caveat Emptor" and "Do your own research" is not a basis for a functional society. Providing reading material is not a sufficient substitute for regulation in a country like the USA where 54% of adults read below a sixth-grade level. And letting marketing decide what counts as "accurate information" is just letting the fox guard the henhouse.

It worked for thousands of years, but I guess believe whatever propaganda you want.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#289

Post by arevno »

annzabelle wrote: post #239
Scroll_Swe wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ibuprofen is hard on the kidneys and stomach too. And bleeding/clotting issues. Sooo ya :) Better just stay off the beer hubby. Remember, beer makes you fat also.

Wow, that's a really weird tone for a hackernews comment.

It's really not. HN turns into the most scolding, puritanical Mormon when it comes to the topic of alcohol.

Re: Should DayQuil Be Legal?

#290

Post by fl4regun »

xtiansimon wrote: post #285
MichaelDickens wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not even available behind the counter anymore, presumably because they can make more money from morons buying the placebos. What do you mean "morons"? Say I'm a normal person who doesn't habitually read magazine articles about drug effectiveness. How am I supposed to know that phenylephrine doesn't work? It's in the drug store and they're selling it as a decongestant; I have good reason to believe it will deco…

> “Say I'm a normal person… How am I supposed to know that phenylephrine doesn't work?” After using it and you experience zero relief, unfortunately. Sniffle. It’s infuriating when you’re ill. I wonder how anyone learns of the good stuff if they didn’t grow up prior to Sudafed being moved behind the counter. When I’m sick and standing in that isle I long for the day when there were just two on the market: Sudafed dur…

I've bought allergy medication at the drug store before and they don't work for me. Is this the same thing as phenylephrine, which literally doesn't do anything? or is it different because my particular allergies did not respond to this medication? I don't think these two are the same thing, and it makes far more sense that if there is a medication added to a drug, being sold in a drug store, for treating a particular symptom, it should have actual clinical evidence it treats that symptom.

Or am I just suppose to try the dozen different gobbledegook ingredients on the shelf before figuring which one isn't bullshit while wasting my time on half of them?

Post reply on HN