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

Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

paleonu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#31

Post by Alex3917 »

j_baker wrote: post #26
Alex3917 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From Wikipedia: "Paracetamol also modulates the endogenous cannabinoid system.[44] Paracetamol is metabolized to AM404, a compound with several actions; most importantly, it inhibits the uptake of the endogenous cannabinoid/vanilloid anandamide by neurons. Anandamide uptake would result in the activation of the main pain receptor (nociceptor) of the body, the TRPV1 (older name: vanilloid receptor). Furthermore, AM404…

> There is even some research suggesting that up to 50% of all infant mortality may be the result of marijuana deficiency. I was going to ask what you're smoking, but then I realized that was a dumb question. :-) I'm all for using pot for medicinal (and recreational) uses, but I think you've crossed the line from advocacy to cheerleading. Believe me when I say that if pot did all of the things you claim, I'd be in pe…

"Believe me when I say that if pot did all of the things you claim..."

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

"...I'd be in perfect health."

You get different benefits depending the quantity and method of consumption, so if you're just using it recreationally you're not going to see most (or any) of those benefits.

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#32

Post by [deleted] »

cynicalkane wrote: post #29
Alex3917 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is almost a Godwin, but much more silly." You want me to link to the obituaries? Almost 1 in 3 Americans die from drug use or drug-related causes, and I really don't find that silly at all. 500,000 from tobacco and second-hand smoke. 106,000 from adverse reactions to prescription drugs in hospitals. 85,000 from alcohol and alcohol-related fatalities. 17,000 from illicit drugs. 7,500 from NSAIDs. 4,000 from HIV…

You just said there was a government campaign to poison the elderly . Your words. Instead of trying to back up this ridiculous assertion--which you can't--you trot out all these statistics about drugs that are not Vicodin, as if you think that's relevant. Then you equate this with the Holocaust! The Holocaust, man! The fact that people die from tobacco smoke every year is comparable to the Holocaust! This doesn't eve…

[deleted]

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#33

Post by arn »

kennywinker wrote: post #27
sguelich wrote: post #25

Sad to see an HN thread full of conspiracy theories and so little actual science. Believe it or not, acetaminophen is an effective analgesic, and combined with hydrocodone it provides synergistic pain relief without any increase in side effects over the use of either agent alone. Here's a peer-reviewed 1980 study from the UK showing just that: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1430165/ Private drug companie…

Nobody is saying acetaminophen is ineffective, just that it's effects come with hepatotoxicity. A larger dosage of hydrocodone could have the same net analgesic effect without the huge negative effects.

"Nobody is saying acetaminophen is ineffective"

Actually, the linked article is saying exactly that:

"I remember being annoyed that in order to get narcotic pain relief I was being forced to take a hepatotoxin that added little to the pain relieving efficacy of the opiate."

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#34

Post by [deleted] »

Alex3917 wrote: post #30
threejay wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acetaminophen is not an NSAID and your claim that there is a "government campaign to poison the elderly and chronic pain patients" is laughably absurd.

"Acetaminophen is not an NSAID" It's considered an NSAID for the purposes of tracking drug-related mortality even though it's not really an anti-inflammatory. To quote Wikipedia: "It is classified as a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) by some sources,[12] and not as an NSAID by others,[13] while most sources implicitly distinguish them, for example by mentioning both NSAIDs and paracetamol in the same sent…

[deleted]

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#35

Post by threejay »

Alex3917 wrote: post #30
threejay wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Acetaminophen is not an NSAID and your claim that there is a "government campaign to poison the elderly and chronic pain patients" is laughably absurd.

"Acetaminophen is not an NSAID" It's considered an NSAID for the purposes of tracking drug-related mortality even though it's not really an anti-inflammatory. To quote Wikipedia: "It is classified as a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) by some sources,[12] and not as an NSAID by others,[13] while most sources implicitly distinguish them, for example by mentioning both NSAIDs and paracetamol in the same sent…

That is absolutely false. NSAID related morbidity and mortality does not include APAP, as it is in an entirely different class of drugs. I'd be interested in knowing what sort of training you have in pharmacology, as everything you have said throughout this thread displays a level of ignorance that I did not think existed on this site.

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#36

Post by code_duck »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #15
code_duck wrote: post #9

One alternative he doesn't mention is Vicoprofen, which contains ibuprofen rather than acetaminophen.

So you can strip the lining in your stomach and intestinal track instead of blowing your liver. The article is correct: there is no value in adding anything to the hydrocodone and many possible down-sides.

No, of course there isn't any value. But ibuprofen isn't as harmful as acetaminophen.

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#38

Post by jberryman »

He mentions denatured alcohol which has been around for a century and includes chemicals to make it toxic or foul tasting.

He doesn't mention that during prohibition, the government attempted to discourage the redistilling of industrial alcohol by adding poison or upping the concentration of toxic denaturing chemicals, killing thousands of Americans.

http://www.slate.com/id/2245188/

Edit: I'm not sure what the entire story is. It seems as though 10% methanol is standard for denatured alcohol. Not sure if that was the case before prohibition.

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#39

Post by tokenadult »

Alex3917 wrote: post #31
j_baker wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is even some research suggesting that up to 50% of all infant mortality may be the result of marijuana deficiency. I was going to ask what you're smoking, but then I realized that was a dumb question. :-) I'm all for using pot for medicinal (and recreational) uses, but I think you've crossed the line from advocacy to cheerleading. Believe me when I say that if pot did all of the things you claim, I'd be in pe…

"Believe me when I say that if pot did all of the things you claim..." Reality has a well known liberal bias. "...I'd be in perfect health." You get different benefits depending the quantity and method of consumption, so if you're just using it recreationally you're not going to see most (or any) of those benefits.

Citing Wikipedia for medical information on pot makes clear what kind of research process is necessary to conclude that pot is beneficial, which is not the conclusion of most people who have done the most careful research. (I'm a wikipedian, and I'm painfully aware of the research standards on the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.)

Re: Acetaminophen and the War on Drugs (2009)

#40

Post by MichaelGG »

sguelich wrote: post #25

Sad to see an HN thread full of conspiracy theories and so little actual science. Believe it or not, acetaminophen is an effective analgesic, and combined with hydrocodone it provides synergistic pain relief without any increase in side effects over the use of either agent alone. Here's a peer-reviewed 1980 study from the UK showing just that: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1430165/ Private drug companie…

The linked study backs what was said in the article. The addition of acetaminophen provides little to hydrocodone.

The side effects in this study are short term, with 1000mg of APAP. I don't think anyone is too upset about a single dose like that. However, taking it repeatedly throughout the day, or over extended periods of time, the APAP does cause liver damage. Hence the FDA review and possible ban on certain combinations.

However, the drug scheduling laws are real. Hydrocodone by itself is Schedule II, whereas hydrocodone with APAP is Schedule III. What other explanation is there for classifying the same drug in combo as a lower risk, other than that there's a damaging part to it?

Post reply on HN