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

Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

asteriskmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 504 posts

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#311

Post by bluecheese452 »

lapcat wrote: post #298
vixen99 wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially if a new one, pain is undoubtedly a 'warning signal from the body' which is a succinct metaphor we all understand and has a clear meaning. If you don't know why or from whence the pain, check it out. It may be one of those things or perhaps not.

The previous commenter appears to argue that you need to diagnose every headache, which sounds absurd to me. Occasionally I have a headache. Not frequently, and I don't necessarily know why. These things just happen. I take a painkiller, and problem solved. I've been seen by doctors over the years for physicals or other reasons, and there's no indication of any underlying medical condition. An occasional headache is…

Thank you, I share this sentiment but couldn’t quite put it into words. Sometimes it isn’t that deep.

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#312

Post by [deleted] »

petesergeant wrote: post #33
seemaze wrote: post #3

I grew up with the understanding that acetaminophen was the safe choice for fever or aches, and ibuprofen what the more potent compound for inflammation and severe pain. I recall casual anecdotes that "my doctor said 1.5x or 2x ibuprofen dose is ok when warranted" to address major incursions. I've never once thought about taking more than the recommended dosage of acetaminophen, largely because I had no expectation t…

I think most overdoses happen as a result of someone trying to hurt themselves, but I’ve also previously been in sufficient pain (always dental) that I’m counting the minutes down to when I can take more painkillers, so it’s easy to see how you could take double the expected dosage.

[deleted]

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#313

Post by nbaugh1 »

Insanity wrote: post #300
beAbU wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the amount of painkillers used and prescribed here seems much lower than what Americans tell me is normal in the US. Americans' relationship with painkillers is absolutely unhinged.

Might just be an artifact of the broken healthcare system. Painkillers are cheap and over the-counter. Going to a doctor is not. Additionally, in EU you can just take a sick day to rest and recover pretty much any time you need it. In the US you have limited “sick days”. E.g I now only have 6 “sick days” per year.. (and I’m fortunate to work in tech, I just WFH when I’m under the weather. But people who are less well…

Like I just mentioned in another comment, they're also a way to get you back to work ASAP. Just about everyone NOT working a comfy white collar office job needs to be working in order to make money. Time off is less income, people can't afford that so they do what they need to do to get back to work.

Sprained ankle? Injured back? Headache? Broken bone? All things that people work through everyday with some NSAIDs because calling out sick means losing income

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#314

Post by [deleted] »

jasperry wrote: post #5

This is some of the most useful information I've received in a while. Like the author, the low overdose threshold of acetaminophen made me avoid it, even though I always take low doses anyway and ibuprofen gives me acid reflux almost every time.

[deleted]

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#316

Post by hilbert42 »

Melatonic wrote: post #175
binoct wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As pointed out in the article, naproxen is an NSAID like Ibuprofen, though slightly more COX1 selective. It likely has a somewhat lower risk of serious renal and cardiovascular events, but higher risk of GI bleeds. There are some studies that show little to no increase cardiovascular risk, but most do show some or even comparable to ibuprofen. Convenience vs ibuprofen is a thing given the longer half life, but it sti…

I weirdly always found Naproxen much more effective than ibuprofen but also find Celebrex great which seems to further confuse the whole COX 1 vs 2 situation

Recently, I've had to take Celebrex (celecoxib) for a back injury and I've been taking it longer than is normally recommended—and that truly worries me (I've determined I have to come off it ASAP).

Where I am (Australia), most doctor's prescriptions that have to be taken long-term are issued as the first script plus five repeats. Not so with Celebrex, a script can only be dispensed three times (3 x pk of 30 200mg capsules — one per day, for 90 days max) and scripts can only be dispensed every 21 days. Reason: Celebrex is only recommended for short-term use because it's considered a dangerous drug with possible irreversible side effects if taken for too long.

This was not news to me even before taking Celebrex, way back in the 1990s I was prescribed its sister drug called Vioxx (rofecoxib) for back pain and it was much more effective than Celebrex (at least it was for me).

Anyway, sometime around 2000 I read an article in the journal Science about a significant statistical increase in deaths by heart attack, stroke etc. by those talking rofecoxib. At the time I said to myself it won't be long before Vioxx is banned. It took another three to four years for that to happen as Merck Pharmaceuticals fought the decision every inch of the way. It's worth reading the Wiki about this (when it's between a drug company and millions of dollars profit patients come off second best):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rofecoxib

What's relevant here is that the related drug Celebrex survived because its side effects—whilst manifestly similar—aren't quite as bad as Vioxx. In short, Celebrex's COX-2 selectivity versus other less selective NSAIDs like aspirin (which target both COX-1 and COX-2) was deemed sufficiently beneficial despite its potential serious side effects.

Note: I'm not offering medical advice here and you should always take that from your medical practitioner. I mention this because only several days ago I had a discussion with two younger doctors who'd never heard of Vioxx let alone the Vioxx/Celebrex controversy.

You may be interested in this YouTube video on Vioxx. Unfortunately it's over hyped and designed to alarm but it's essentially factually correct: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=K0GrFnOpJoU

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#318

Post by sumea »

petesergeant wrote: post #40
vasco wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or 10 slightly larger ones edit: https://www.24pharma.nl/paracetamol-eg-1000mg-120-tabletten

I’ve pretty much only ever seen them sold at 500mg; are you regularly seeing them where you are sold in 1g form?

They are widely sold at 1000 mg (1g) tablets in Europe, but in many countries they require doctor's prescription. There are also purchase limits to the number of pills you can buy at once.

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#319

Post by Gareth321 »

eru wrote: post #53
pugio wrote: post #17

Really lovely article. In paramedicine we usually treat 10g of acetaminophen in a 24-hour window as a potentially fatal overdose. That's also why the law in Australia was changed to require acetaminophen to come in blister packs (harder to get each pill out) of no more than 16. At 500 mg, that only gets you up to 8 g if you eat the whole thing, which is still hopefully non-fatal. I always thought a simple over-the-co…

Here in Singapore NAC is sold to make muckus more liquid to alleviate coughs. Apparently for some people it also helps with lessening tolerance for their ADHD meds, but I'm not so sure about that.

My anecdotal experience is that NAC makes me much more tolerant to alcohol. As in, I can drink a lot more without feeling the effects. Since I don't get the same buzz, I care less about reaching for a beer.

Re: Acetaminophen vs. ibuprofen

#320

Post by Gareth321 »

dgan wrote: post #135
pugio wrote: post #17

Really lovely article. In paramedicine we usually treat 10g of acetaminophen in a 24-hour window as a potentially fatal overdose. That's also why the law in Australia was changed to require acetaminophen to come in blister packs (harder to get each pill out) of no more than 16. At 500 mg, that only gets you up to 8 g if you eat the whole thing, which is still hopefully non-fatal. I always thought a simple over-the-co…

I randomly bought NAC just to try it. I dont know about the chemical interactions, but going out with collegues at that time taught me that it's basically impossible to get drunk. Usually a pint of beer is enough to make le feel at least a little dizzy, but when taking NAC, it was all like drinking water

Same! I thought I was going crazy but the effect is clear and reproducible. My hangovers are also less bad.
Post reply on HN