Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Aderall Or Nothing: Anatomy of the Great Amphetamine Drought

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the subtractitall-oddly-much-less-popular dept.

Businesses 611

pigrabbitbear writes "To prevent hoarding of materials and their potential for theft and illicit use, the Drug Enforcement Agency sets quotas for the chemical precursors to drugs like Adderall. The DEA projects the need for amphetamine salts, then produces and distributes the materials to pharmaceutical companies so that they can produce their drugs. But with the number of prescriptions for Adderall jumping 13 percent in the past year, pharmaceutical companies claim that the quotas are no longer sufficient for supplying Americans with their Adderall. The DEA contends that their quotas do, in fact, meet demands, and that any shortages arise from pharmaceutical companies selectively producing only certain, typically name-brand and more expensive versions of ADHD medications."

cancel ×

611 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ah, central planning. (5, Insightful)

ravenshrike (808508) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063131)

Is there no enterprise you can't utterly fuck up?

Re:Ah, central planning. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063259)

Vote republican so you can win the war on adderall!

Re:Ah, central planning. (5, Insightful)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063299)

'Cuz it's not like the shortages "arise from pharmaceutical companies selectively producing only certain, typically name-brand and more expensive versions of ADHD medications."

No, that would never happen...*eye roll*

Re:Ah, central planning. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063487)

Yes, but that is only due to the artificial shortage. If rates of the precursor were not limited, then lower priced generic drugs would be produced destroying the advantage of overproducing the expensive medication. It is the artificial scarcity that allows for this strategy to be profitable.

Re:Ah, central planning. (4, Insightful)

Freddybear (1805256) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063603)

And why shouldn't they produce certain more expensive versions of ADHD medications? Oh, right, because it throws off that finely-tuned plan from the commissar of methamphetamine.

Re:Ah, central planning. (5, Insightful)

MSTCrow5429 (642744) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063847)

If the government was not interfering with the market, pharma companies would have no incentive and indeed be unable to produce more of the expensive versions and less of the less expensive versions in relation to demand; competition would force a larger supply of the less expensive versions relative to the expensive versions. If supply is constrained in relation to demand, prices will always go up. We've seen this most recently with hard drives and the Thailand floods; that was an act of god. The Adderall shortage is an act of government, and can be easily remedied.

Re:Ah, central planning. (4, Insightful)

doconnor (134648) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063371)

Most industries are centrally planned, except the planning is done by two or three large oligarchical companies.

Re:Ah, central planning. (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063699)

Imagine if you're the CEO of Porn Corp #1 and also serve on the board of Porn Corp #2...

Re:Ah, central planning. (4, Funny)

InterruptDescriptorT (531083) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063849)

Imagine if you're the CEO of Porn Corp #1 and also serve on the broad of Porn Corp #2...

FTFY.

Re:Ah, central planning. (5, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063433)

The problem here is that the planning doesn't have meeting demand with supply in mind. The planning is 100% for the failing war on some drugs because they want to make sure stimulant abusers get their fix from the dirtiest and most dangerous sources possible.

Re:Ah, central planning. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063649)

"... fix from the dirtiest and most dangerous sources possible"

You mean doctors and drug mega-corps?.

Re:Ah, central planning. (1)

offsides (1297547) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063819)

Actually, the planning does have meeting demand with supply in mind - the problem is that instead of meeting the existing demand with supply of what is being demanded, they are producing something similar (possibly even equivalent, at least medically speaking) that has a higher profit margin, and hoping that the demand will shift to what they're producing out of necessity on the part of the "buyers". Given that they have a practical monopoly on the market, this may work out well for the company, but only at the expense of the people who need the medication to begin with.

I have ADHD (diagnosed a little over 3 years ago), and the med I was put on didn't even have a generic at the time (there is one now, although it's still produced by the same company, and the generic pills are the same ones I got from the brand name). Now that there's a generic, the price has gone down, but I worry that something similar could happen to it. The one good thing relative to this story is that my med is not Adderall-based, and as such I'm not directly affected (yet)...

Re:Ah, central planning. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063891)

Well, hopefully they all die. That way demand will dry up.

Considering how often Adderall is abused... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063137)

I don't have a problem with this at all.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (3, Insightful)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063153)

Considering how those that are actually being prescribed Aderall and need it to function are the most likely to be affected by this, I do.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (4, Insightful)

Midnight_Falcon (2432802) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063307)

What did people do before Adderall then, simply not function? It's only been around for around 30 years.

Every single person I've met (which are dozens) that regularly takes Adderall clearly does not "need" it to function, but they may think they do and exhibit classic signs of addiction.

However, medicines like this fit into most medical/social science methodology in that, if someone starts taking Adderall, of course they are more productive and may even feel better (e.g. euphoria) etc, so measuring those effects usually produces positive results.

Interceding variables like having doctors prescribing amphetamine salts like candy seem to be ignored in these methodologies.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (5, Insightful)

TheSimkin (639033) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063399)

The dea and war on drugs has only been around for about 90 years and has caused nothing but problems. by your own reasoning we should go back to a state where the governents don't try to dictate what we should and should not consume. Seems reasonable to me, I would like ot have juridstiction over my own body! I mean seriously, next they'll be telling us we can't consume milk if it doesn't come from a farm that homogenizes the milk.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063685)

I mean seriously, next they'll be telling us we can't consume milk if it doesn't come from a farm that homogenizes the milk.

They do that too in some places.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063851)

Homogenize? You don't want creme on the top of your milk?
I think you might mean pasteurize?

Yeah, haven't we seen that when people are stupid or desperate they make poor decisions, and companies will be perfectly willing to step in and take advantage of those. Then after they have made those poor decision they are capable of making other people suffer the same consequences. That is why milk has to be pasteurized. This is what living in a society is all about.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (4, Informative)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063503)

In general, they were labeled "troublemakers", "bullies", "class clowns" or any other of a number of meaningless epithets that did nothing to help them get ahead and allowed them to just play their role in society before becoming some blue-collar laborer or small time criminal.

Yes, everyone you've met on Adderall (that you know of...) are addicted to it. Everyone I've met on Adderall can fly like Superman. What does anecdotal evidence (especially that which is uncited) have to do with it again?

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (1)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063505)

Before Adderall, there was straight amphetamine. Adderall is a combination of various amphetamine salts that has been shown to work better for the treatment of ADD. There was (and is) also Ritalin (Methylphenidate)

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (4, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063601)

Yes, they just didn't function. Kinda like before antibiotics, people with serious infections just died.

Sure, there are abuses, and it's over-prescribed. However, there are people who actually do need it to function well and they should be able to get it. The DEA needs to butt out of medical practice.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (4, Informative)

Hecubas (21451) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063771)

Your personal anecdotes may be well founded. However, I have a personal anecdote too. I have a child who is on Addreall and I can attest to how much better it makes him function. Since the last 2 years of taking it, he has made leaps and bounds in his ability to speak and articulate thoughts. Without the drug, he reverts to extremely erratic behavior, his speech suffers, and sometimes he unintentionally hurts himself. Recently, the Adderall shortage caught us off guard once, and we had a fairly wild weekend with him (not the only time actually). So yes, he is a clear case of where the drug works as intended.

That people abuse this drug upsets me to no end. I'm reminded of it every time I have to go through the prescription refill process.

For the record, I'm not one of the parents that would dose up their kid just to get him to sit still and be quiet. Far from it. I'm certain without it, he'd be held back or in a special needs school.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (3, Interesting)

roc97007 (608802) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063801)

Considering how those that are actually being prescribed Aderall and need it to function are the most likely to be affected by this, I do.

I read somewhere that only about two in an hundred need ADHD drugs to function (which is still arguably a significant number in a 300m population) but that it's way overprescribed, to upwards of one in five in US schools. (The report did not say how this statistic translates to the general population, so it could be misleading.)

So, just spitballing here, but maybe the shortage could be at least partially alleviated by prescribing the drugs less casually. For instance, I give you personal permission to take the drugs the school prescribed for my kid, which I declined. (The school looked at her and said she's ADHD and recommended drugs. The doctor agreed to prescribe with no testing, which made me suspicious. I had her formally tested, and she's not ADHD. She's severely dyslexic. I'd like to personally thank the school system and medical community for screwing that up.)

Note, I am not one of those loonies who believe the drugs are unnecessary. You say you need them to function, and I believe you. But clearly at least some are taking them who don't need to, and that has to negatively affect demand to some degree.

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (3, Insightful)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063551)

Truly spoken like someone who doesn't have a medical need for it. How very civic minded of you being so willing to let other people suffer so that you don't have to worry that people you don't know might take a drug they don't need.

I'm guessing you're also OK with people not being properly treated for their debillitating cluster headaches or chronic pain as well (as long as you don't have those conditions, naturally).

Re:Considering how often Adderall is abused... (2)

P-niiice (1703362) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063773)

That's the worst thing to me - we're depriving people who need it to prevent some folks from using it for fun/addiction/whatever. Never a worse reason to do that.

You know... (4, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063143)

...getting rid of the DEA seems like it would save the US a great deal of money, effort, red tape....and just plain PITA times.

Perhaps we should have this dept dissolved.

At the very least, can we start a movement to find constitutional justification for such a Federal Agency?

Re:You know... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063171)

Ron Paul supporter?

Re:You know... (5, Insightful)

characterZer0 (138196) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063223)

Ron Paul supporter?

Or just a person at an 8th grade reading level who read the US Constitution.

Re:You know... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063309)

And like and 8th grader, absolutely no thought of the down-the road consequences of losing an important regulatory agency.

Re:You know... (5, Funny)

king neckbeard (1801738) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063387)

Who said anything about an important regulatory agency? We're talking about the DEA.

Re:You know... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063541)

Don't they enforce drugs?

Woot!

Re:You know... (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063863)

Don't they enforce drugs?

Woot!

The DEA's racket is policing illegal drugs. The legal ones are handled by the FDA.

Re:You know... (5, Informative)

garrettg84 (1826802) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063593)

Please step down from your pedestal. We already have the FDA. We don't need the FDA *AND* the DEA regulating our drug use. We already have the FBI (if you want something federal) and the state police (if you want something state), and/or local police (if you want something county/city/unincorporated) to do the actual enforcement.
But what about stopping drugs before they enter our country?
We have boarder patrol, coast guard, and relationships with foreign governments.
get off my lawn?

Re:You know... (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063637)

Important for what? Do they actually accomplish anything? If so, is that something worth anything?

I see no justification for their existence at all.

Re:You know... (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063327)

Wait...Ron Paul supporters can read.....

Re:You know... (2)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063409)

They were all home-schooled.

Re:You know... (2)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063265)

Unfortunately, they are focused on the Departments of Energy and Education.

Libertarians: quite happy to keep a boot up your ass while telling you how much better off you are without education.

Re:You know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063435)

Because there was a severe lack of quality education in the US before 1979?

Re:You know... (3, Insightful)

TonyXL (33244) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063455)

Because there were no schools before the Dept of Education was created in 1979...

Re:You know... (3, Funny)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063769)

and we had no energy before Carter made the DOE. we had to lie around in the dark because we didn't even have enough energy to stand up.

Re:You know... (1)

Hittman (81760) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063683)

Yeah, because libertarians think the DEA is a great agency, and have never advocated dismantling it.

Sheesh. Go read something.

Re:You know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063753)

Ooh, straw men! Can I play?

Democrats: quite happy to keep a boot up your ass while telling you how much better off you are without most of your income.

Republicans: quite happy to keep a boot up your ass while telling you how much better off you are without civil liberties.

Re:You know... (5, Insightful)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063659)

DO you have any idea how much I don't want to be a Ron Paul Supporter. I mean... the gold standard? Seriously?

Or the whole not using the bathroom of homosexuals thing.... or his statements on abortion but... in the end... hes the only one saying anything sane on drug policy, which is a bigger issue than all of them. He is the only one who says anything sane about wars, and how silly it is that we keep having them.

I so don't want to support that crazy old coot but.... when he is the most sane one out there....

Well thats scary.... but it doesn't make him less right on this issue. The DEA makes no sense. We have ample evidence that amphetamine use is not terribly harmful and its addiction can be managed and even beneficial for many people. Similarly to coffee.

Look at all the problems with meth addiction and...please....show me them before its prohibition. Meth was around for a LONG TIME. Meth addiction in this climate of expensive drugs and addicts being driven underground sucks for the addicts, and sucks for everyone else who has to deal with the results. All problems that didn't exist before prohibition.... when it was mostly regulated by doctors and use was above board.

Congress and their DEA lap dogs made every problem that they touched worst. They made the lives of addicts worst, they made the supply more dangerous, they drove people to do business with violent criminals, and created an atmosphere for violent criminal gangs to thrive. Its THEIR FAULT WE ARE IN THIS MESS!

Re:You know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063267)

Commerce clause and national defense. Done.

Re:You know... (5, Informative)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063381)

The DEA does do a lot of important things. As a pharmacy tech, we often worked with the DEA to put a stop to both customers passing phoney prescriptions, and doctors giving massive prescriptions for controlled substances to anyone. However, forcing low stock doesn't help any of this. CII substances are kept under active inventory. Every supplier and every pharmacy must know--to the exact pill--how much stock they have. All CII prescriptions are double counted. If some stupid pharmacy tech starts swiping pills, it gets noticed, quickly. The only benefit for keeping stock low is financial. Since comparatively, generic adderall isn't even very expensive, I can see no reason why it, among so many other things should be the scape goat for this.

Re:You know... (5, Insightful)

TheCarp (96830) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063787)

Well if it wasn't for the DEA, those customers wouldn't need to pass phoney prescriptions, nor would doctors give out massive ones. In a climate where drug use can be above board and people can be honest, its not clear that any of the real problems with meth, or any other drugs, are actually major issues....and even less evidence that prohibition and regulation to stop drug use does anything positive.

Generally the DEA has created a climate where violent gangs thrive, legitimate patients are often under medicated for pain (do you have any idea how many people will spend the rest of their lives in daily chronic pain for no other reason than their doctor can't give them heroin? or high enough levels of other pain meds?) and desperate people are preyed upon.

The alternative? Some doctors give some drugs to addicts? Oh my god what a horror! Above board drug use? Where it can be monitored and people can seek out help without stigma? Oh no! How terrible!

Re:You know... (5, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063833)

The DEA does do a lot of important things

I know, right..

  1. Running one of the world's largest signals intelligence operations
  2. Sending paramilitary squads into civilian homes to seize property and imprison or kill people
  3. Using important military resources like NORAD for civilian law enforcement purposes
  4. Outlawing substances without any democratic process, then arresting people for possession of those substances
  5. Helping South American dictators kill people and spy on political opponents

Yes, this is one agency that America really needs to keep around.

Re:You know... (3, Insightful)

LateArthurDent (1403947) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063835)

The DEA does do a lot of important things. As a pharmacy tech, we often worked with the DEA to put a stop to both customers passing phoney prescriptions, and doctors giving massive prescriptions for controlled substances to anyone.

Whether that's an important thing is debatable. Some of us don't like the concept of "controlled substances" and believe that anyone who wants to take anything should have the right to take it. Yes, it might screw up their life, and even kill them. Personal responsibility is about being able to do something wrong and choosing not to do it. Alternatively, paying the consequence if you're too stupid to think ahead.

Re:You know... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063901)

The DEA does do a lot of important things. As a pharmacy tech, we often worked with the DEA to put a stop to both customers passing phoney prescriptions, and doctors giving massive prescriptions for controlled substances to anyone.

So, you say the DEA does a lot of important things... and then you list two things which are only problems in the first place because the DEA is controlling those substances...

Re:You know... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063413)

I couldn't agree with you more, the DEA is nothing more than red tape.

As a person who takes Adderall (20mg x 2 daily) daily, this shortage has made my life a living hell. Before refilling my prescription, I have to call around to all of the local drug stores to see who has Adderall in stock and if not, when it will be in. The negative part here is the doctor can't give me my monthly prescription until a few days before I am required a refill. So once I get my prescription, all I can do is hope that I can find a place that can get it filled before I run out.

Adderall is classified in the same drug schedule as Cocaine, Opium, Morphine, Oxycodone and Methadone. I've seen tons of crap online about people becoming addicted to Adderall which honestly I believe is all bullshit. I can take my Adderall during the week and stop over the weekend without craving it. The only negative effect of doing this is I end up playing xbox all weekend and nothing gets done around the house.

Re:You know... (1)

TonyXL (33244) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063501)

Drug shortages are also causing nice people to turn to the streets to get their medicine. Gee, that sounds safe. Thanks DEA!

Re:You know... (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063629)

So that they can get arrested and join the fastest growing slave class in america!

Next, profit.

Re:You know... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063591)

I couldn't agree with you more, the DEA is nothing more than red tape.

As a person who takes Adderall (20mg x 2 daily) daily, this shortage has made my life a living hell. Before refilling my prescription, I have to call around to all of the local drug stores to see who has Adderall in stock and if not, when it will be in. The negative part here is the doctor can't give me my monthly prescription until a few days before I am required a refill. So once I get my prescription, all I can do is hope that I can find a place that can get it filled before I run out.

Adderall is classified in the same drug schedule as Cocaine, Opium, Morphine, Oxycodone and Methadone. I've seen tons of crap online about people becoming addicted to Adderall which honestly I believe is all bullshit. I can take my Adderall during the week and stop over the weekend without craving it. The only negative effect of doing this is I end up playing xbox all weekend and nothing gets done around the house.

Some would say if you can concentrate enough to play XBox all weekend, that perhaps Adderall is not necessary...

Re:You know... (1)

spire3661 (1038968) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063701)

Xbox doesnt require concentration. Its an escape for most, not work.

Re:You know... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063533)

Perhaps? Using the present tense? That's quite an understatement.

Between the pro- civil liberties crowd on the left and the pro- fiscal conservatism on the right, many people have felt this for some time now. The WoD is an abject failure that has cost this country trillions of dollars...consider not only law enforcement costs, but also prison costs and the opportunity costs lost from not taxing drugs and from having a significant portion of the population (prisoners with drug-related offenses) not contributing to society. And that's not even counting the amount of money that gets shipped out of this country to drug producers that could be kept here if those drugs were legal to produce.

It's long since been time to start treating drug use as the health problem that it is rather than as a illicit activity.

Re:You know... (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063661)

Imprisoning the population is exactly what the elite want.

The fewer rabble rousers out there with free speech that can upset the congress critters driving the gravy train, the better.

Speaking from experience... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063159)

It would not be wise for the DEA to further piss off potentially millions of amphetamine addicts.

Coincidence? (4, Funny)

assertation (1255714) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063163)

Anyone notice that the shortage of adderall and the rise of the TEA party happened about the same time?

Coincidence? I think not ....

Re:Coincidence? (5, Funny)

DanTheStone (1212500) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063191)

Both are positively correlated with time! Obviously time is to blame, and if we can stop it, we will stop both problems.

Re:Coincidence? (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063669)

We need mandatory 6 month paid vacations so we can get more people killing time!

Re:Coincidence? (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063199)

So, what, you're saying that people started paying attention and the Tea Party was formed?

Re:Coincidence? (1, Funny)

assertation (1255714) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063289)

Um...no. The drug that would help people pay attention, be calm and think started running out when the TEA party ( people famous for not doing any of the three ) started appearing.

Dude, go get some caffeine :)

Re:Coincidence? (1)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063325)

Yeah, 'cause the Tea Party was formed by paying attention to reality.

Re:Coincidence? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063563)

No... I think it's more like people were unable to maintain their stupor with drugs, so they formed the Tea Party.

Finaly someone gets it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063175)

that corporations love to be "selective" to squeeze out what they can. I don't necessarily agree with the govt rational for rationing but at least someone in the DEA does have some understanding of business.

I can also hope that maybe ....just maybe some kids will just be kids for a bit longer because of this....

Re:Finaly someone gets it (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063429)

I don't necessarily agree with the govt rational for rationing but at least someone in the DEA does have some understanding of business.

Um..of COURSE the DEA understands business... They're in the business of funding black ops through the drug trade themselves... If we got rid of the DEA, I suspect we may even see an initial DROP in drug trafficking, simply due to the rug being pulled out from under the infrastructure of the business...

Home of the... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063183)

Can officially label America the "Home of the drugged" yet?

Ahh .. Citizen (1)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063187)

You are taking the wrong pills. Please only take the pills we want you to.

Re:Ahh .. Citizen (1)

Rob the Bold (788862) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063877)

You are taking the wrong pills. Please only take the pills we want you to.

So this is the point at which you draw the line?

Looks like Mexico might have a solution (1)

scottbomb (1290580) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063189)

15 TONS of crank turned up last week in what may be the largest bust ever.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/02/09/mexican-army-finds-15-tons-pure-methamphetamine/ [foxnews.com]

As a side note, Adderall is HIGHLY over-prescribed. Most kids are hyper and have short attention spans - it's part of being a kid.

Re:Looks like Mexico might have a solution (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063269)

I agree. When my son was in grade school, one of the teachers mentioned he should be tested for ADHD. My wife and I both agreed to take him to his doctor but we also agreed it was a load of crap. (Since been proven over time since he's at university and doing fine.)

Re:Looks like Mexico might have a solution (2)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063635)

At least in the US, teachers are not supposed to do this. Teachers should bring up issues with the counselors, and it is up to the counselors to decide whether or not to advise the parents. Many people are diagnosed with ADD and find ways to cope without meds. I think that's wonderful. Some try to cope without meds, and it just results in the school system wanting the kid expelled. If all that must be done to avoid expulsion, or increase performance, and improve one's own satisfaction with performance is to take a pill every day, then I think that's just wonderful too. I do agree that stimulant treatments for ADD/ADHD are overprescribed. Treatments should be considered very carefully on a case-by-case basis, and many times parents/doctors/insurance is not interested in putting forth the needed effort.

Re:Looks like Mexico might have a solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063355)

Most kids are just bored in school, had my teacher in second grade recommend I was tested, doctor said there was nothing wrong I was just bored.

Re:Looks like Mexico might have a solution (1)

james_van (2241758) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063687)

most kids are also not taught how to pay attention. its really not a naturally occurring thing in children. parents need to teach their children, especially at a very young age (2-3 yrs) to pay attention to things, but it doesnt happen much anymore

Don't screw around... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063193)

With our drugs...

You'll be sorry.

Pain (5, Informative)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063235)

This has been a huge pain for me personally. I've been on adderall for over a decade and have only had problems finding in stock in the last 8 months or so. Most recently, I had to get my doctor to write an additional prescription for a higher dose and split the pills in half since this was the only strength anyone in my area had in stock. So in trying to keep supplies low, I've now got permission from my doctor to get twice as much amphetamine as before. Where is the sense in this? Having to pick the prescription up in person, since it's a CII substance added extra pain.

FWIW, I was a pharmacy tech while working through HS and college, and the entire time, we never had such bad problems with backorders on any product (with the possible exception of when albuterol inhalers were required to switch to CFA free, another massive screwup).

Hmmm, lets sell 2,000 guns to criminals (3, Interesting)

cs668 (89484) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063237)

so that we can track their killing sprees, but not let enough medication be produced for law abiding citizens. Smart move.

Re:Hmmm, lets sell 2,000 guns to criminals (5, Informative)

i.r.id10t (595143) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063519)

The DEA had nothing to do with Fast-n-Furious - that was the BATFE (which should be a convienence store not a government agency)

Re:Hmmm, lets sell 2,000 guns to criminals (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063755)

Please don't pester right-wing reactionaries with facts. It only infuriates them.

So whose actually producing the precursor salts? (4, Interesting)

Mysticalfruit (533341) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063253)

I doubt the DEA has a lab somewhere that's creating this material... or maybe they do...

When did the DEA get into the chemical production business?

Probably both right (4, Insightful)

Maximum Prophet (716608) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063261)

The DEA imposes an artificial scarcity on a chemical, and the drug companies crank that though their models to maximize profit. What's the surprise here? That the DEA doesn't have any non-partisan economists on staff?

Yes, the total amount of the raw material might be enough for the demand, but people have been making fortunes profiting from local shortages since, like, forever.

Obligatory Airplane! (5, Funny)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063279)

It looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue.

Legalize and Tax (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063297)

Legalize and Tax. No more war on drugs.

I'm 48, and I don't use any recreational drugs (including alcohol). But I've long held that legalizing and simply taxing all drugs would eliminate far more problems than drugs currently cause.

Drug dealers? No need. Buy what you want at the local pharmacy. Made by real labs, with quality control standards. Warning label on the bottle: "This drug may kill you. Use at your own risk." No illegal pipeline if what you can buy at CVS is cheaper and better quality than from the guy on the street. How much of organized crime is based on the drug trade? From import to manufacturing to distribution to people stealing crap to feed their habit?

Dirty Needles? Nope. Buy those when you are picking up your consumer grade heroin. There go HIV and HEP-C transmission rates.

Drug addicts? Use the previously mentioned tax money on education and rehab programs. Even a hefty tax on the drugs would still leave them at a lower cost than street drugs.

Never happen. There are too many vested interests in keeping the "war on drugs" alive.

Re:Legalize and Tax (5, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063745)

Drug addicts? Use the previously mentioned tax money on education and rehab programs. Even a hefty tax on the drugs would still leave them at a lower cost than street drugs.

Even without taxes, the money now spent on the War and keeping users and small time dealers in prisions would probably more than pay for those programs.

"This drug may.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063873)

Do you far less damage than most government sanctioned recreational drugs and many medically sanction treatments.

How about you don't tax it, or tax it proportionally to social and personal harm.

How much suffering for a "drug-free" America? (5, Insightful)

swb (14022) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063351)

How much suffering is the DEA willing to inflict for the, pardon the metaphor, pipe dream of a drug-free America?

You can't swing a dead cat without hearing about under-medicating pain and how that one of the primary drivers of that is physician fear of a DEA investigation or worse, losing their license to prescribe.

Now it's this -- and while I'm sure there's some pharma holdback for brand-name drugs, that wouldn't matter if the DEA wasn't so restrictive of the chemistry.

So now we have another group of people at minimum inconvenienced at at maximum with negative health consequences because of the relentless pursuit of an unobtainable moral goal.

Thanks, DEA.

Re:How much suffering for a "drug-free" America? (4, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063553)

The cool thing about having a moral goal is that the harder you push it, the more moral you become... If anything, you even get to blame your opponents for the suffering that you inflict(after all, if it weren't for ruthless narcolumbians and potheads, granny could have her pain pills, never you mind that I'm the one who took them away...)

If the DEA were pursuing a pragmatic objective(or a pragmatic objective that isn't pragmatic exclusively because it's an excellent makework project for cops) they'd have hit the cost/benefit rocks bloody ages ago. Luckily for them, they aren't.

America has become insane (2)

WindBourne (631190) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063367)

We need to legalize ALL currently illegal recreational drugs in the USA, but put them under tight regs. In addition, we need to allow ZERO IMPORTS OR EXPORTS on these. Likewise, require that all of the precursors be manufactured here as well. Why? Because it destroys gangs and drug lords the world over. Once this is done, then illegal activities will stop. As to the drug use, it will remain. However, it will not be pushed.

Re:America has become insane (2)

NoNonAlphaCharsHere (2201864) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063621)

We already "allow ZERO IMPORTS OR EXPORTS" on illegal drugs, because, you know, they're illegal. Meanwhile, most precursors are organic (poppies, coca, marijuana) that don't necessarily grow very well in U.S. latitudes. I agree with your premise, just not with your bullet points.

Re:America has become insane (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063791)

We don't even need to restrict import/export. If CVS needs a big shipment, let them order it. They aren't going to be buying from Central American drug lords or the Mexican cartels. With them selling over the counter (perhaps with a signature) at reasonable market value, nobody else will buy from the black market either.

And this is why Command Economies Fail (1)

HiroProX (2502852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063439)

Command economies fail because they cannot respond effectively to unpredicted shifts in demand. You'd think people would know this by now ever since the command economy of the Soviet Union publicly imploded.

Equally lovable sides in this one... (1, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063441)

Wow, tough call who to side with on this one - The pharmaceutical companies that would rather let women miscarry and kids die of leukemia than leave any money on the table; Or the government agency that would rather watch cancer victims die in agony and puking their guts out than let them toke up.

Can we just line both sides up against the wall, as a lesson to whomever we allow to replace them?

Remember why Communism failed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39063457)

I find it humorous when the "government" does planning and tells us what is going on. It sounds like a weird form of centralized planning from the Soviet Union. Soon the FDA will regulate toilet paper! lol.

We are really in a fucked up country!

What are they Up! to? (0)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063515)

  • Dug: My master made me this Adderall. He is a good and smart master and he made me this Adderall so that I may be good and calm. Squirrel!
  • { You get where this is going - right? }
  • Dug: [cycling through languages and different voices] Hey would you - cuerdo con tigo - I use that Adderall - watashi wa hanashi ma - to be good and calm with. I would be happy if you stop.

{ See the movie Up! [wikipedia.org] if you're confused. }

Let's get meth off the streets of America . . . (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063747)

. . . and back into its children, where it belongs!

Are other countries in the world meth-ing up their children? Or is this like a US only type thing?

So people are becoming more Stupid! (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063749)

The next few generations will be a breed of zombies!

"Ritalin gone Wrong" (2, Insightful)

wytcld (179112) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063875)

There's good evidence that all these "attention-deficit" drugs are only of real benefit for a few weeks [nytimes.com] , after which continued use only makes sense for avoiding the sometimes-serious withdrawal symptoms. In other words, while use of aphetamines for ADD appeared to make medical sense once upon a time, more recent research shows that they whole thing is a bit of a fraud being run for the profit of the drug companies, with no net contribution at all to public well-being, or student performance, or anything else beyond maintaining a large, profitable population of addicts. Sure if you stop taking it you feel worse for a while, and if you start again you feel better. That's what addiction is.

If you're an adult taking them yourself, make your own judgment. If you're cooperating with a school in dosing your kid though, seriously consider setting a time and place for the kid to go cold turkey. You're doing nobody a real favor by keeping your kid on speed.

like 2012 Burning Man tickets (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 2 years ago | (#39063879)

This is the first year they are "rationed" with a lottery, because they having been reaching the BLM quotas the last two years. But no one seems to be able to get one. The scalper community went after them.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?