This is the unintended consequence of making pharmacies liable for filling prescriptions to people who were addicted. Now the pharmacy says well, if we're liable for drugs being misused even if they were legitimately prescribed, we're not going to fill the prescriptions unless we have some strong assurance that the providers wont give out "too many" prescriptions.
We put more non-health bureaucrats between the patient and their treatment -- in this case, whether you get your drugs isn't about whether you need them, but whether the liability the pharmacy takes is higher or lower than the profit on the drugs.
I tried for three years to a prescription for Low Dose Naltrexone (LDN). As all the support forums swear at how much better it was then plaquenil. But I could not find a doctor that had heard of it.
Finally found an online pill factor, had a little back and forth with questions and concerns. Got my pills. Dramatic quality of life improvement.
I could not get a single doctor to do 10 minutes of research on what the pill was.
Unfortunately, the system simply doesn't support situations where the situation requires digging deeper. There's no billing code for digging into a complex issue or medical mystery, thus it basically doesn't happen.
> This is the unintended consequence of making pharmacies liable for filling prescriptions to people who were addicted.
Indeed. CVS, Walgreens and other pharma companies recently settled a $860 million lawsuit with Florida for their role in the opioid epidemic. Florida alleged that CVS and others failed to heed warning signs and filled an unreasonable number of dodgy prescriptions. It seems CVS is taking things more seriously now.
> The company distributed 2.2 million opioid tablets from its store in Hudson, a Tampa-area town of 12,000, and in one unidentified town of 3,000, sold 285,000 pills in a month, the lawsuit says. In some stores, its opioid sales jumped six-fold in two years.
Cerebral is a telehealth startup heavily promoted by influencers on TikTok and other social media platforms, and has been criticized as being a pill mill. Earlier this month they announced they would suspend prescriptions for Adderall for new customers, but would continue for existing customers.
Cool to see some validation that these two services are either pill mills or skirting proper procedure to get diagnosed and treated. Funny to say that only a couple weeks ago people here on HN were praising these companies for making ADHD medication "accessible" and not seeing that this is a problem just like opioids and other commercially advertised drugs. You can't just pass on the liability to the distributor here. It seems rather odd that someone can get diagnosed over a 30 minute tele-health call for a schedule II substance.
> Adderall, which is most commonly prescribed to treat attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), is a Schedule II controlled substance, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This means it is considered to be a drug that has "high abuse potential" but is still accepted for medical use. The FDA advises that amphetamines, such as Adderall, should be "prescribed or dispensed sparingly."
> "Administration of amphetamines for prolonged periods of time may lead to drug dependence and must be avoided," the agency says. "Misuse of amphetamine may cause sudden death and serious cardiovascular adverse events."
There's gotta be a balance though. This is basically fucking me out of being able to be on my meds, which dramatically improves my quality of life. Finding a new doctor to treat my ADHD is nearly impossible. I've done and continue to do therapy, so I have tools that help, but my medication is my mind. Without it, tools only work for so long, with it it, I rarely even need the tools I've built in therapy.
But because of these 'crackdowns', it's becoming impossible to find any provider that will prescribe them, and nothing else has worked for me. I don't know what to do, because once I can't get my meds anymore, I'll likely fall back into months or years of 'putting off' getting back on them.
We put more non-health bureaucrats between the patient and their treatment -- in this case, whether you get your drugs isn't about whether you need them, but whether the liability the pharmacy takes is higher or lower than the profit on the drugs.