Brandeis Must Confront the Human Cost of Opioid Restrictions

By Arianne Grand-Gassaway

As a mother who lost my 35-year-old daughter, Desiree, to a counterfeit Xanax pill in the wake of restrictive prescribing policies, I am calling on Brandeis University to reckon with its role in a public health crisis.

The 2016 CDC Guideline on Opioid Prescribing, heavily influenced by Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP) and its founder, Dr. Andrew Kolodny— Co-Director of Opioid Policy Research at Brandeis -- has helped fuel a humanitarian disaster.

Tens of millions of Americans with chronic pain and mental health conditions face untreated suffering, forced tapers, and abandonment by providers terrified of prosecution for prescribing opioids and other controlled substances like Xanax.

I am one of those Americans. I suffer from intractable pain and was denied opioid medication for a decade, before I found a provider who is treating my pain now. That decade of no pain care did irreparable damage to my body though.

Jewish wisdom, a cornerstone of Brandeis’s identity, teaches that saving one life is akin to saving the world (Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5). Yet, these policies have done the opposite. My daughter, unable to access medically necessary medication for her panic disorder, turned to someone she thought she could trust—a desperate act that cost her life.

So many now are dehumanized by a system that prioritizes fear and suspicion over compassion. My family’s story is not unique. Despite a recent decline in overdoses, drug poisonings remain near record levels, with over 80,000 fatal overdoses in 2024.

Most of these deaths involve illicit fentanyl, while legitimate prescriptions remain out of reach for those who need them most: the sick, injured, and elderly.

On May 7, 2025, I wrote a letter to Brandeis Interim President Arthur Levine, urging dialogue that includes patient voices. Weeks later, after a follow-up call, I have received no response. This silence mirrors the broader dismissal of patients crying out for relief.

Brandeis, a self-proclaimed beacon of social justice, has a moral obligation to examine how Dr. Kolodny’s influence and advocacy have contributed to this crisis. Limiting prescriptions has not reduced addiction or overdoses — it has punished the vulnerable while illicit drugs continue to flood our streets.

By his own testimony, Dr. Kolodny only works part-time at Brandeis, which enables him to continue his work as an expert witness and consultant for plaintiff law firms involved in opioid litigation, for which he charges $780 per hour.

In 2022, Dr. Kolodny testified in West Virginia that “it’s been lucrative” work for him personally, although he declined to state the total amount of money he’s been paid by law firms over the years. Under questioning, he didn’t dispute estimates that it was a million dollars or more.   

I call on Brandeis to host a public forum with patients, providers, and policymakers to confront the harms caused by the CDC guideline and restore the doctor-patient relationship. Providers must be free to prescribe based on good faith and informed consent, without fear. We can prevent addiction and treat it compassionately without sacrificing those whose lives depend on these medications.

This is not just my story — it’s the story of many millions. If Brandeis and other organizations in positions of power to change the trajectory of this tragedy continue to remain silent, I will continue to speak, for Desiree and for all those suffering and dying. The time for action is now. 

Pain Research and Treatment Missing From 2026 HHS Budget

By Pat Anson

An estimated 60 million Americans suffer from chronic pain, costing the U.S. healthcare system about $77 billion a year.  According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), chronic pain affects more Americans than diabetes, heart disease, and cancer combined.

You’d never know it though by reading the proposed $94.7 billion budget for the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released on Friday by the Trump administration.

There are nearly 21,000 words in the 55-page budget for 2026, and not a single word or dollar is devoted to pain research, treatment, or how to help those 60 million Americans.   

The only reference to pain is a quote attributed to HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

“A healthy person has a thousand dreams. A sick person only has one, and right now, there’s 60% of the people in this country who have only one dream – that they can make it through the day without pain, with energy, without having to take medications, and we are going to change that for this country,” Kennedy is quoted as saying.

One can quibble about whether RFK Jr. actually said those exact words or if they were invented for the budget document. In either case, many Americans living with chronic pain already get through the day without taking an effective pain medication, although its not by choice.

Kennedy has previously used the line about “a healthy person has a thousand dreams,” which is paraphrased from Confucius. Kennedy used it without attribution in his Senate confirmation hearing in January and again when he was sworn in as HHS Secretary a month later, but didn’t mention pain in either instance.   

Perhaps it’s only fitting, given how the topic of pain is notably absent from the HHS budget. What we get instead are platitudes about “making Americans the healthiest in the world,” while at the same time reducing the HHS budget by 26 percent, and downsizing or eliminating dozens of federal health programs.

The NIH faces some of the steepest cuts, with its $27.5 billion budget cutback to $18 billion. The Trump administration has already gutted the NIH’s Office of Pain Policy and Planning (OPPP), which focused on pain research. The OPPP’s entire staff was fired in April.

“Even though chronic pain is one of the leading health issues in America, it has never had a true home at NIH with a dedicated institute. Many pain researchers have described the NIH as a place where ‘pain lives everywhere and nowhere,’ and now, with the dismantling of the OPPP, I fear that pain may literally have no home at all,” Dr. Juan Hincapie-Castillo, an assistant professor at UNC Chapel Hill, wrote in The Charlotte Observer. Hincapie-Castillo received funding from OPPP for his studies of trigeminal neuralgia.

‘Embrace Radical Change’

In all, HHS plans to consolidate 28 operating divisions into 15, close five of its regional offices, and end funding for 5,000 contracts – all in the name of saving money.

“This planned realignment will allow the Department to do more at a lower cost to taxpayers by increasing operational efficiency and cutting bureaucratic sprawl,” the budget document states.

“America spends nearly one-third of the federal budget on healthcare, only to rank last in terms of health among developed nations. Americans are seeing declines in life expectancy and facing the highest rates of chronic disease in the world. HHS is committed to making Americans healthy again, making the American health system the best in the world, and putting patients first. To accomplish this, we need to embrace radical change.”

HHS is planning to move several agencies — including the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) and some programs in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) -- into a new agency called the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA), which would be under Kennedy’s direct control. AHA will administer $14 billion in discretionary funding to combat the “chronic disease epidemic.”

“(AHA) will prioritize prevention — a missing piece in the American health system — primary care, maternal and child health, mental health, substance use prevention and treatment, environmental health, HIV/AIDS, workforce development, and policy, research, and oversight,” the HHS says.

Note the absence of pain prevention and treatment in that sentence.

Opioids are mentioned nearly half a dozen times in the budget, but only in the context of addiction treatment, not pain management. Many of the CDC programs that deal with opioid abuse and treatment are being moved to AHA, and $4 billion in block grants for mental health and substance abuse treatment is earmarked for states and rural communities.

“States and local communities best know the way to serve their populations – not the federal government,” HHS said.

When he was running for president, Kennedy had ambitious plans to create a series of “wellness farms” in rural areas, where people addicted to illicit or prescription drugs could get treatment, job training and grow their own organic food.

“I’m going to create these wellness farms where they can go to get off of illegal drugs, off of opiates, but also legal drugs, psychiatric drugs, if they want to, to get off of SSRIs, to get off of benzos, to get off of Adderall, and to spend time, as much time as they need — three or four years if they need it — to learn to get re-parented, to reconnect with communities, to understand how to talk to people,” Kennedy said in 2024.

There is no mention of wellness farms or anything like it in the HHS budget, or in the “Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Report,” which was also released by the Trump Administration last month.

Like the budget document, pain research and treatment are not discussed in the MAHA report, which has been widely criticized for its sloppy science and fake citations, including some that were apparently generated by artificial intelligence (AI).        

Eli Lilly Bet $1 Billion on Non-Opioids: Will Pain Patients Pay the Price?

By Crystal Lindell

Eli Lilly is investing heavily in new non-opioid pain treatments with its latest acquisition. The pharmaceutical company announced this week that it was acquiring SiteOne Therapeutics in a deal worth as much as $1 billion. 

SiteOne describes itself as “dedicated to the development of safe and effective pain therapeutics without the significant addiction potential and side effects of opioids.” 

The company has been working on a new class of non-opioid medication that targets sodium channels in the peripheral nervous system to treat pain and other nerve conditions. Blocking pain signals in peripheral nerves before they reach the brain means the drug is unlikely to lead to addiction or overdoses.

Its drug STC-004 is in Phase 2 of clinical trials. In a February 2025 press release about the medication, SiteOne said it's an oral medication that would likely be taken once a day “for acute and chronic peripheral pain.” 

Eli Lilly said it has high hopes that STC-004 “may represent a next-generation, non-opioid treatment for patients suffering from chronic pain.” 

It’s noteworthy that Lilly doesn’t even mention acute pain, which suggests the company sees the most potential for STC-004 as a chronic pain treatment.  

While any advancement in pain treatment is obviously welcome, it seems prudent to remain skeptical of any company touting a new medication because its a “non-opioid.”

Vertex Pharmaceuticals recently won FDA approval for Journavx (suzetrigine) a non-opioid that also blocks pain signals in the peripheral nervous system. The FDA approved Journavx for acute pain only, despite lackluster results in clinical trials showing that it works no better than a low dose of hydrocodone.

There’s been a gold rush over the last decade by Vertex, Lilly and other pharmaceutical companies hoping to cash in on the opioid-phobia that resulted from the 2016 CDC opioid guidelines. But it remains unclear if it will just result in fool’s gold for pain patients desperate for relief. 

Mark Mintun, VP of Neuroscience Research and Development for Lilly, admits that thus far “effective non-opioid treatment remains elusive.”

According to one estimate, the global chronic pain market was worth over $72 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow to $115 billion by 2031.

With so much money on the line for any company that even partially succeeds in developing new pain relievers, resources are going to keep pouring into these non-opioid alternatives, regardless of how effective they actually are. 

The sad fact is that there just isn’t as much money in reliable, well-researched generic opioid medications like morphine, which are vastly cheaper than the non-opioids being developed to replace them. 

For chronic pain patients, the $1 billion that Eli Lilly used to acquire SiteOne would be more beneficial if it was spent on lobbying the government and medical professionals to expand access to opioid pain relievers. 

While my hope is that these types of opioid alternatives will deliver on their promises — my fear is that patients will eventually be forced onto them, even if they don't work nearly as well as opioids.

Are ‘Addicts’ to Blame for Prescription Opioid Crackdowns?

By Crystal Lindell

It’s been nearly a decade since the CDC released its infamous 2016 opioid guideline. In the years since, millions of pain patients have endured immense suffering, as doctors significantly reduced the amount of opioid medication they prescribe.

But who is really responsible for all that pain?

It’s tempting to lay the blame for all the crackdowns on “addicts.” After all, if it wasn’t for them, the rest of us could still get opioids for pain relief, right?

Unfortunately, it’s not so simple. 

The real culprits are the DEA, CDC, and the medical community at large, all of which have worked together to criminalize pain and punish patients.

But blaming ‘addicts” for the crackdown on opioids is exactly what the people with real power are hoping you will do. First and foremost, it has the effect of pitting opioid users against each other, when in reality we’re already on the same team. And as the old saying warns: United we stand, divided we fall. 

Many people who use opioids illegally have chronic pain or other health issues that opioids help address. In a country that does not have guaranteed healthcare, much less guaranteed pain treatment, they are left to fend for themselves. So, it’s no wonder that some of them turn to illegal drugs for relief. 

Using opioids illegally will get you labeled as “an addict,” regardless of the circumstances. In fact, that’s a big part of the reason why I no longer use the word “addict” when talking about illegal users. It’s a murky diagnosis that's often given to deprive patients of a controversial but effective treatment. 

Furthermore, blaming people who use illegal opioids for the fact that many pain patients can’t get an opioid prescription only serves to let the true oppressors off the hook for their crimes. 

We have to remember, it’s not “legal users vs. illegal users.” It’s “all users vs. the DEA, CDC and the medical community.”

I understand where the desire to blame “addicts” comes from. After all, illegal users make a very tempting target. It’s much easier to hate them than to admit that maybe your doctor, who has a lot of power over your life, is actually the one causing you harm. 

It’s also human nature to want to identify yourself as “one of the good ones.” As in: Yes, I use opioids. But I’m different and have a legitimate medical need. 

I mean, obviously, it’s not that simple. But I get why pain patients want to tell themselves that it is. 

The thing is, there are real solutions to the lack of access to opioid pain medication. But we won’t achieve them unless we all work together. 

For example, we could advocate for selling hydrocodone the same way we sell nicotine, alcohol and caffeine: over-the-counter and without a prescription. Eliminating doctors from the equation would help countless pain patients finally get relief, whether they used opioids illegally or legally. And it would be a whole lot safer than the Russian Roulette of drugs on the black market. 

That’s the kind of solution that’s only possible if all opioid users unite in the fight against opioid restrictions. But it won’t happen as long as pain patients insist on telling themselves that there are “addicts” out there that aren’t as worthy as they are.

Because that’s the crux of the issue, isn’t it? Deep down, a lot of pain patients think that people using medications illegally are a separate class of people that need to be banned from accessing opioids “for their own good.” 

Here’s the secret that your doctors won’t tell you though: The medical community has already put you into that group as well. They already think you need to be kept away from opioids “for your own good.” 

In their eyes, both legal and illegal users are one group – so we might as well embrace it. After all, we’re all worthy of pain relief. And all of us should have the right and the ability to treat our own pain as we see fit. 

If we all work together, maybe one day we can make the right to pain treatment a reality. 

Are 1 in 10 Americans Really Using Illicit Opioids?

By Crystal Lindell

A new study claims to have found that nearly 11% of Americans reported using illicit opioids in 2024, with 7.5% of them using illicit fentanyl.

It's a startling claim, in large part because those numbers are significantly higher than what's been reported in previous research. When the National Survey on Drug Use and Health asked about illicit fentanyl use in 2022, they found that just 0.3% of American adults used it in the past year

The study by researchers at the RAND corporation and USC led to a number of splashy headlines, including one in U.S. News and World Report reading: "U.S. Illicit Opioid Use Could Be 20 Times Higher Than Previously Estimated"

That is indeed a pretty striking claim – which is a large reason I am so skeptical of the research.

How did the study authors arrive at those figures? They developed and fielded a survey with Respondi, an online platform often used in academic research. So essentially, they did an online survey of 1,515 adults.

Participants were asked about their use of nonprescription opioids within the past 12 months, with heroin and illicitly manufactured fentanyl given as examples.

Among the respondents, they found that 166 (10.96%) reported illicit opioid use and 114 (7.5%) said they used illicit fentanyl. 

While I understand that population data is often collected with a relatively small sample size, it feels rushed to claim that 7.5% of adults used illicit fentanyl based on responses from 114 people in an online survey.

It feels equally rushed to claim that because 166 people reported illicit opioid use, that must mean that 11% of the population did so. 

There are about 262 million adults in the United States. If those survey numbers are accurate, that would mean 19.7 million Americans are using illicit fentanyl. And 28.8 million are using illicit opioids. That’s a lot of people. 

Overdose Deaths Declining

Keep in mind that the CDC just reported that U.S. overdose deaths fell by nearly 27% in 2024, the largest annual decline since they started tracking overdoses 45 years ago. 

Of the 80,391 drug deaths reported in 2024, the CDC estimates that 48,422 of those deaths involved synthetic opioids, primarily fentanyl. That’s nearly 28,000 fewer fentanyl deaths than the year before.

How can fentanyl deaths be declining when so many Americans claim they used the potent and often deadly street drug?     

The numbers just don’t add up. They suggest that illicit fentanyl isn’t nearly as dangerous as we’ve been led to believe, although I doubt that that’s the point the study authors were hoping to make. 

The RAND and USC researchers say their findings add to evidence that the CDC may significantly underestimate illicit drug use and that new methods are necessary to keep better track of them.  

“Estimates of illicit opioid use are rare and typically are available only years after the information is collected, limiting our ability to monitor trends on a near-term basis,” says lead author David Powell, PhD, a senior economist and Professor of Policy Analysis at RAND. “Our study offers a method to quickly and repeatedly monitor illicit opioid prevalence at low cost.”

All of this matters because studies like this are often used to punish people who use any opioids – both legal and illegal. 

For example, if 11% of the population truly is using illicit opioids, then the medical community may use that statistic to claim that opioid prescribing is still too high and that too many prescription opioids are finding their way onto the black market. 

They might also claim more public funding is needed for the addiction treatment industry. Or that the overdose reversal drug naloxone should be required for anyone getting an opioid prescription. 

There’s also the prevailing myth that prescription opioids are what lead people to use fentanyl and other street drugs, a claim that the RAND/USC researchers believe is true.

“As the opioid crisis has evolved, attention to the role of prescription opioids has waned, even though overdose deaths from prescription opioids remain high and prescription opioids may operate as critical pathways to illicit opioid use,” they reported.  

That’s why it is so important for researchers to be more cautious in how they frame their results, and it’s also important for the media to be skeptical of research that shows extreme outlier data. 

Maybe 11% of people are using illicit opioids, and 7.5% are using illicit fentanyl. Both of those things could very well be true. But I think additional research replicating those results is needed before regulators and opioid prohibitionists act on them – especially if that means further restricting access to pain medication. 

Cancer Patients Were Supposed to Be Exempt From CDC Opioid Guideline. They’re Not.

By Crystal Lindell

Cancer patients needing pain treatment were always meant to be exempt from the recommendations of the 2016 CDC opioid guideline, including the updated guideline released in 2022:

“This clinical practice guideline does not apply to patients undergoing cancer-related pain treatment, palliative care, or end-of-life care because… for many persons at the end of life, serious potential long-term opioid-related harms such as opioid use disorder might not be relevant.” 

A new study reveals that many older cancer patients were deprived of opioids anyway, even though they often require opioids as a first-line pain treatment.

The study looked at nearly 12,000 older adults on Medicare who were being treated for cancer from 2010 to 2020, including about 1,300 with advanced cancer or cancer pain.

Researchers found a significant 24% decline in opioid prescribing to cancer patients after the 2016 guideline was released. What did they get instead for pain relief?

There was a 7.5% increase in tramadol prescribing for cancer pain, while gabapentinoid prescribing for cancer patients rose by 25%. Even patients with advanced cancer were switched to tramadol or gabapentinoids, a class of nerve medication originally developed to treat seizures, not pain. 

“These findings suggest the 2016 guideline may have led to pain management shifts from first-line opioids to less-safe tramadol and less-effective gabapentinoids for older adults with cancer,” wrote lead author Rebecca Rodin, MD, Assistant Professor of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine at the Icahn Mount School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

It’s great to see the study authors call out tramadol and gabapentinoids as being “less safe” and “less effective.” Pain patients have long known that to be true, but the medical community still seems resistant to this information. 

While tramadol is technically an opioid, the DEA classifies it as a weaker Schedule IV drug, unlike oxycodone, hydrocodone and other opioids classified as Schedule II. The differentiation means doctors face less restrictions for prescribing it and less risk of going to prison. 

Gapabentin (Neurontin), pregabalin (Lyrica) and other gabapentinoids are prescribed off-label for cancer pain and chemotherapy-induced neuropathy —  even though they are medical conditions the drugs are not approved for. Gabapentinoids are not only ineffective analgesics for cancer pain, they can cause sedation and confusion, particularly in older adults.

Opioids, on the other hand, are very effective for moderate-to-severe cancer pain, with a response rate of 75% and a 50% average reduction in pain intensity.

Studies like this validate what the pain community has been trying to warn about for almost a decade: opioid-phobia has gone too far. It has reached a point where even cancer patients can’t get the pain relief they need.

Part of why this persists is that most people don’t think opioid restrictions are a problem until they or a loved one needs them. But if you wait until you’re dying from cancer to oppose opioid restrictions, it will be far, far too late. 

Of course, the other problem is, cancer is not the only thing that can cause debilitating pain. And people with other types of pain also deserve effective relief.

Another recent study by Dr. Rodin found that seriously ill patients in palliative and hospice care also have trouble getting opioids, due to inadequate supplies in pharmacies and insurance obstacles.

“The reality is that hundreds of thousands of seriously ill patients in the U.S. rely on opioids as a first-line treatment for pain. For people with advanced cancer, chronic organ failure, or other life-limiting conditions, opioids are often the only medications that can effectively control pain and allow them to function, Rodin wrote in a recent op/ed in STAT .  

Opioids have been used for centuries to treat pain for a reason: They work very well, and the risks of opioid addiction and.overdose are far less than what the public has been led to believe. 

Now we just need to convince doctors and the CDC of that. 

Forced Tapering: Only Chronic Pain Patients Are Treated This Way

By Neen Monty

Imagine this: A patient, let’s call her Sue, has severe depression. Her GP prescribes an anti-depressant and refers her to a psychologist. Sue is advised to come back in four weeks. Which she does.

She’s not doing better, so the dose is increased. Sue is reviewed two more times over the next eight weeks, and each time her dose is increased.

Sue starts feeling better. The medication is working. The darkness has lifted, the black dog has been banished. She is grateful to her GP.

The GP is also happy. It has taken many weeks, but the GP raised the dose to find the minimum effective dose that controls Sue’s depression.

Sue comes back in another four weeks. She is happy, back at work, and socialising again. Life is good!

That’s when the GP tells her that it’s time to taper the anti-depressants.

Wait, what?

Or how about this: Sue has high blood pressure. She is at her GP for her yearly physical and the hypertension is discovered. The doctor prescribes a blood pressure medication and advises Sue to return in two weeks. At this review, her blood pressure is still too high, so the dose is increased.

Sue has two more dose increases, and her blood pressure falls into the normal range. She is experiencing no side effects and is very happy with the treatment.

When Sue sees her GP again with perfect blood pressure, he is pleased. Then he tells her it’s time to taper off the medication.

What if Sue had high cholesterol? Or high blood sugar? Or asthma? Epilepsy maybe?

I think you see where I am going with this.

The tapering would never happen, because it’s ludicrous and makes no sense, medically or otherwise. In these situations, people like Sue are often advised that they need to be on a medication for rest of their lives.

Where in medicine do doctors increase the dose of a medication until the symptoms are well managed and the patient is doing better -- and then gets tapered?

Only when the patient has chronic pain and is on opioid therapy. Doctors will prescribe a trial of opioids, which prove to be effective. The patient reports well-controlled pain, no significant side effects, and they are back at work, socialising, and living life again.

And then the doctor starts tapering the opioids. Against the patient’s wishes.

Utter insanity.

That’s not “evidence-based medicine.” There is no evidence to support this practice. I know what the theory is, and what doctors have been taught. But it’s not realistic. Yet many doctors don’t question it.

The theory is that once a patient gets pain relief, they will learn how to manage it without opioids. They’ll start to exercise and meditate, see a psychologist, work on their sleep hygiene, and get proper nutrition.

Except these other modalities will do nothing for severe, disabling pain.

Please point me to one study that shows that improving sleep will reduce the pain of multiple sclerosis, chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy, or Parkinson’s disease. Or one study that shows cognitive behavioral therapy or mindfulness will reduce the pain of rheumatoid arthritis and lupus.

Those treatments may be helpful in very small ways. But their effect has been vastly overstated for chronic secondary pain -- pain that is caused by an injury, tissue damage, or disease.

Lifestyle modification can have an impact on a person who has mild to moderate primary pain -- chronic pain that does not have a known pathological cause. That pain is sometimes driven by emotional or psychological causes, so psychological treatments might be effective.

But they are ineffective for chronic secondary pain.

People will feel better on opioids, but its not “euphoria.” It’s because they can start exercising again, restart their hobbies, and return to work. They’ll feel happy again. Those positive things happen because their pain is now being treated.

Take away the pain medication, and the pain will return. The career grinds to a halt, the social life disappears, depression returns. Exercise is impossible while in severe pain. Everything returns to terrible.

There is no magic trick that can replace opioids. There is nothing else that will touch severe pain, be it acute or chronic.

And so, for doctors to provide a trial of opioids for secondary pain with the goal of eventually tapering patients is insanity. The only reason opioids should be tapered is if there are intolerable side effects, if they are not effective for the pain, or the patient wants to taper.

No one should be forcibly tapered. Ever. Forced tapering leads to a pain crisis, suicidal ideation, overdose and death. That’s what the science says.

Opioids are safe and effective when taken long term by a select minority of people – those who live with severe, disabling pain due to an incurable disease or injury.

Think about how cruel it is to provide them with a solution to their pain, to give them their life back, and then take it away.

Its abhorrent.

Its barbaric.

It’s not medicine. It’s not science. It’s not human.

Neen Monty is a writer and patient advocate in Australia who is dedicated to challenging misinformation about pain management. Drawing on lived experience and scientific research, Neen has created a website for Pain Patient Advocacy Australia that is full of evidence that opioids can be safe and effective, even when taken long term. You can also subscribe to her free newsletter on Substack, “Arthritic Chick on Chronic Pain.”

Safer Opioid Supply Helps Reduce Overdoses

By Pat Anson

Should people at high risk of an overdose be prescribed opioids like hydromorphone or should they get methadone to help them cope with opioid addiction?

It’s a controversial question in Canada, where harm reduction programs are being used to give high-risk drug users a “safer supply” of legal pain medications as an alternative to increasingly more toxic and deadly street drugs. Critics say safer opioid supply (SOS) programs don’t reduce overdoses and are a risky alternative to more traditional addiction treatment drugs like methadone.

A new study, however, found that SOS programs are just as effective as methadone and may even be safer in the long run. Researchers in Ontario followed the health outcomes of over 900 people newly enrolled in SOS programs, comparing them with a similar number of drug users who started methadone treatment.  

Their findings, published in The Lancet Public Health, show that people in both the SOS and methadone groups had significant declines in overdoses, emergency department (ED) visits, hospitalizations, severe infections, and health care costs in the year after they started treatment. In both groups, deaths related to opioids or any other cause were uncommon.

ED Visits Fell After High-Risk Drug Users Enrolled in SOS or Methadone Programs

THE LANCET PUBLIC HEALTH

"This is the first population-based study to compare SOS programs with opioid agonist treatment, and to explore how people's outcomes change in the year after initiation," said lead author Tara Gomes, PhD, an epidemiologist and Principal Investigator at the Ontario Drug Policy Research Network (ODPRN).

Gomes and her colleagues found that people on methadone had a slightly lower risk of an overdose or being admitted to hospital, but they were also more likely to discontinue treatment and be at risk of a relapse. The higher dropout rate outweighed most of the benefits of methadone over SOS.

"Neither methadone nor safer supply programs are a one-size-fits-all solution, but our findings show that both are effective at reducing overdose and improving health outcomes," said Gomes. "They are complementary to each other, and for many people who haven't found success with traditional treatments like methadone, safer supply programs offer a lifeline. Our findings show that when safer supply programs are implemented, we see fewer hospital visits, fewer infections, and fewer overdoses."

SOS programs were launched in Ontario and British Columbia to combat a rising tide of overdoses linked to illicit fentanyl. A decade ago, Vancouver was the first major North American city to be hit by a wave of fentanyl overdoses, which led Vancouver to become a laboratory for harm reduction and safe injection sites that provided heroin or prescription opioids to drug users.  

The results have been somewhat mixed. An investigation by the National Post found that hydromorphone pills given to drug users in Vancouver were being sold on the black market, with the sellers then using the money to buy street drugs. Complaints about people selling their safe supply drugs led to British Columbia’s Health Minister recently changing the rules so that the SOS drugs are consumed while under the supervision of a pharmacists or healthcare provider.

A 2024 study in JAMA Internal Medicine found that opioid-related hospitalizations rose sharply in British Columbia after harm reduction programs were launched there, although there was no significant change in overdose deaths. The spike in hospitalizations may have been due to more toxic street drugs and counterfeit pills on the black market.

The Silent Opioid Crisis: Seriously Ill Patients Face Frequent Delays in Pain Treatment

By Pat Anson

Shortages of opioid pain medication and insurance obstacles are causing frequent delays and suboptimal treatment for seriously ill patients, according to a new study by researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

In a survey of 52 palliative care clinicians in Mount Sinai’s New York-based medical system, nearly nine out of ten (88%) reported frequent obstacles in getting opioids for their patients. On average, clinicians spent over an hour each day on the phone with insurance companies and pharmacies trying to gain access to limited opioid supplies. Nearly a third (31%) said this resulted in suboptimal care for their patients.

The survey findings were recently published in NEJM Catalyst Innovations In Care Delivery.

“Prescriptions are written, but patient is not able to get the correct dose or quantity at their pharmacy,” one clinician reported.

“I once had to send an oxycodone prescription to eight pharmacies,” said another.

“I spent the better part of 2 days... trying to figure out a pharmacy that would [fill] the oxycodone. Sometimes I spend more time handling access issues than actually talking to and thinking about the patient,” another palliative care clinician reported.

Patients in palliative or hospice care often have severe pain from cancer, major surgery, or a sudden emergency like a sickle cell crisis. Although they are usually exempt from opioid guidelines that limit the dose or amount, seriously ill or dying patients face many of the same obstacles getting opioids as patients with more moderate pain. Researchers say this “silent opioid crisis” has largely been ignored.

“Taken together, these findings raise alarms about a new crisis in opioid access for people with serious illness, for whom opioids are often essential pain relief medicines,” wrote lead author Rebecca Rodin, MD, Assistant Professor of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn Mount School of Medicine at Mount Sinai.

“Our clinicians reported that the numerous challenges in opioid access led to significant adverse effects on patient outcomes, such as uncontrolled pain, rehospitalization, and opioid withdrawal, and on clinician administrative burden. That burden included time spent contacting pharmacies and insurance companies rather than on direct patient care, which adversely affected clinician job satisfaction.”

In some cases, Rodin said clinicians changed their prescriptions to “less-than-ideal” opioid formulations and doses, a change based on the drugs’ availability rather than what is appropriate for their patients.

To improve patient access, Mount Sinai clinicians started collaborating more closely with pharmacies, finding out which opioids were in stock and improving their documentation to show why a prescription is medically necessary. Outpatient pharmacies also started delivering opioids to oncology patients before they were discharged, which helps ensure there is no disruption in pain care when they go home.  

Knowing which pharmacies have opioids in stock proved to be a critical time-saver for doctors and helped Mount Sinai develop a list of preferred pharmacies that is updated in real time.  

“Our strategies have been effective within the Mount Sinai ecosystem, but they do not address root causes of barriers which can include a number of factors, such as much broader supply chain shortages at the regional and national level, public and private coverage policies, and pharmacy stocking and dispensing practices. We need to do more to address these barriers,” said Rodin.

Alarming Study Tries to Automate Labeling of Patients with Opioid Use Disorder

By Crystal Lindell

An alarming new study attempts to automate the process of labeling chronic pain patients with Opioid Use Disorder (OUD), by using a computer to scan doctors’ clinical notes. 

A team of researchers analyzed medical records for over 8,000 patients with chronic pain, and then used an automated process to scan clinical notes from doctors, patient demographics, and diagnostic codes. The automated process was then compared to whether patients had already been given a diagnostic code for OUD. 

The researchers claim that their automated approach out-performed diagnostic codes when it came to finding patients with OUD. The codes are a key part of healthcare and are used by doctors not only to make a diagnosis, but to get reimbursed by insurers for treating patients.  

The authors say the diagnostic codes are “unreliable and underused,” and claim that their automated approach will do a better job predicting which patients are at risk for OUD and which once already have it.

“This automated data extraction technique may facilitate earlier identification of people at risk for and who are experiencing problematic opioid use, and create new opportunities for studying long-term sequelae of opioid pain management,” wrote lead author Alvin Jeffery, PhD, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Biomedical Informatics at Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

Jefferey and his colleagues say chronic pain patients treated with opioids are “at high risk of developing an opioid use disorder,” and cite a single study estimating the risk is as high as 18%. Most research puts the probability much lower, at about 1%.  

There are a number of other alarming things about this research. 

First and foremost, using any sort of automated process to label patients as having opioid use disorder is incredibly dangerous. Especially if that automated process applies the label to more patients than doctors already are. 

Also, the researchers used the “Addictions Behaviors Checklist” to determine if patients have OUD. Unfortunately, that checklist is known for lumping in a lot of patients who simply have untreated or under-treated pain. 

For example, one of the items on the checklist is “patient running out of medications early” – which means anyone who isn’t being prescribed enough pain medication could qualify as having OUD. 

Another criteria on the list is “patient expressing concern about future availability of narcotics” – a normal thing to be worried about when opioid shortages are widespread and opioid-phobia is rampant in the medical community. 

Other red flag terms they search for in doctors’ notes are “hoard,” “stash,” “left over” and “storing.” This also overlooks the fact that prescription opioids can be difficult to get, causing  many patients to keep leftover ones, just in case they needed them in the future. A recent PNN survey found that 32% of patients hoarded unused opioids. 

Once a patient gets labeled with OUD, it can quite literally ruin their lives by making it more difficult for them to get their pain adequately treated. That doesn’t just apply to patients with chronic pain. If a surgical patient experiencing post-op pain (as nearly all do) has “possible OUD” in their chart, doctors are much less likely to prescribe opioid pain medication. 

I genuinely worry that we are reaching a point where computers and artificial intelligence will be used en masse to label patients with damaging mental health diagnoses like OUD. And if that takes root, there won’t be any way for patients to counter the diagnosis. 

In fact, one of the biggest problems in healthcare is that there is no right to due process. Once you are given a medical verdict, so to speak, you are often stuck with it. 

We should all be worried that these types of automated diagnostic tools will also be expanded beyond opioid users to label other patients with stigmatizing mental health conditions that impact the quality of the medical care they receive going forward.

At this point, I’m not sure what patients can even do to stop this from happening, but my hope is that bringing more awareness to the issue will at least slow its progression. 

I personally would judge any doctors who would rely on any sort of automated process to give a patient a dangerous label like OUD, even if such a process is mandated by the hospital they work for, or even the government. 

I hope that doctors will have the moral fortitude to fight back on these types of things. Although if the medical community’s recent history with opioids is an indication, I’m not convinced most of them will stand up for their patients. 

Mindfulness and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Reduce Chronic Low Back Pain  

By Pat Anson

Have you tried cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) or mindfulness? Did they help relieve your pain?

Chronic pain sufferers have been telling us for years that neither form of psychotherapy worked for them. Yet many physicians continue to recommend CBT and/or mindfulness as a safer alternative to opioids and other pain medications.

Does either therapy actually work? And, if so, which one works better?

In the largest head-to-head study of its kind, a team of researchers compared the effectiveness of CBT with mindfulness in 770 patients with chronic low back pain. Unlike previous studies, these patients had fairly high pain levels (an average of 6.1 on a zero to 10 pain scale) and they were taking opioids for at least three months.

The study wasn’t short-term either. Participants were regularly surveyed about their pain levels, physical function, quality of life, and opioid use for up to a year.     

“The people in this study had quite severe back pain that interfered with their life and was bad enough to need opioid medication. Usually, in that condition, people don’t really get better over time on their own,” said co-lead author Bruce Barrett, MD, a Professor of Family Medicine and Community Health at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Participants were divided into two groups and trained by experienced therapists in either mindfulness or CBT, before being told to practice them at home daily for at least 30 minutes. Patients trained in mindfulness learned how to “deconstruct” their pain to make it seem less important, while those trained in CBT learned coping, behavioral and relaxation skills.

The study findings, published in JAMA Network Open, show that CBT and mindfulness were equally effective, leading to modest improvements in pain, function and quality of life. The benefits persisted and grew stronger over 12 months, with most participants reducing or even stopping their opioid use.

After a year, the average pain level in the mindfulness group fell to 5.4, while those in the CBT group were reduced to 5.5 on the zero to 10 scale. That’s about a 10% improvement.

“Both mindfulness and cognitive behavioral therapy were shown to be safe, effective treatments, providing lasting benefits for people with opioid-treated chronic back pain. These evidence-based behavioral therapies should be standard of care available to our patients,” wrote lead author Aleksandra Zgierska, MD, a Professor of Family and Community Medicine at Penn State College of Medicine.

Although participants were not explicitly encouraged to reduce their use of opioids, patients in both groups did. Researchers say that was a direct result of their training, which taught them how to cope better with pain and decrease their opioid use on their own.

“These therapies aren’t a total cure, but they teach people how to develop the inner resources they need to cope with chronic pain and to live a better life,” said co-author Eric Garland, PhD, a Psychiatry Professor at the University of California San Diego. “Mindfulness is a self-regulated tool that comes from within, unlike surgery or medication where something is being done to you from the outside. By learning these techniques, patients continue to experience lasting benefit,”

A recent study at UC San Diego using advanced brain imaging found some of the first physical evidence that mindfulness lowers pain intensity by reducing neural activity in parts of the brain associated with pain and negative emotions.

My Use of Opioids Is None of Your Business

By Neen Monty

It seems like everyone these days has an unsolicited opinion about my pain management. Physical therapists, pharmacists, even my dentist has decided they need to weigh in on my opioid use.

Why do health care professionals who do not specialise in pain management feel entitled to comment on the way I manage my severe, long-standing pain? They clearly know nothing about opioids, have not read the studies, and are getting their knowledge from media headlines. If they actually read the studies, they wouldn’t be expressing these ignorant opinions.

But even so, it’s none of their business. If they are not treating my pain, why do they feel entitled to lecture me on a treatment plan that is well outside their expertise?

My rheumatologist doesn’t comment on my gastroenterologist’s treatment plan. My neurologist has zero interest in the way my immunologist is managing my symptoms. So why do health care professionals feel the need to comment on my use of opioids for pain relief?

For years, my pain was well controlled under the guidance of my GP — whom, I might add, is more than capable of managing pain. I never needed a pain specialist. I never needed to jump through ridiculous hoops or prove that my pain was “real enough” to deserve relief. And yet, thanks to the manufactured opioid crisis here in Australia, I was forced into a system that treats pain patients like criminals.

Let’s be clear: I am not an addict. I am a person with severe, incurable and excruciatingly painful diseases. Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) is a progressive neurological disease that attacks my nerves. Refractory rheumatoid arthritis means my immune system is at war with my joints – all of them - and it’s winning.

These are not minor aches and pains. This is not pain that comes and goes. This is constant, severe pain. Pain when I’m at rest and even more pain when I move.  

These are not conditions that can be fixed with a little physio, deep breathing, or positive thinking. They are devastating, life-altering diseases, and pain relief is essential to my ability to function.

And yet, here we are. Every healthcare professional I encounter suddenly thinks my pain medication is their business.

My dentist, who is supposed to focus on my teeth, thinks it’s appropriate to lecture me on opioids.

My physiotherapist, whose job is to help me maintain muscle strength and mass, feels the need to moralise about my use of opioids. He is an expert in physiology and movement science, but knows nothing about pharmacology. Yet he believes that he does. And he's happy to tell me so.

Pharmacists, who definitely should know better, jump on the bandwagon with their judgmental takes. Yes, I have a supply of naloxone, even though it’s the biggest waste of money the government has ever been conned into spending by addiction researchers. I am at zero risk of needing it.

And no, I do not want information about how to taper my pain medicine. I actually need my pain medicine. I take it because I live with neuropathic and nociceptive chronic pain. You should try it sometime. I don’t think you’d enjoy it, but you’d be a better clinician. And person.

All of this unsolicited advice amounts to little more than bullying. Just the mention of an opioid turns some health care professionals into the high school bully. Do you want my lunch money as well?

What is this obsession with controlling other people’s pain relief? Why do you even have an opinion, when it is far outside of your area of practice? How can you possibly think it’s appropriate for you to judge how I treat my disease or my pain, when you met me two minutes ago?

Most of all, where is your empathy? Your compassion? Your human decency?

Lecturing and hectoring me is not compassionate, person-centred care.

Do you have an opinion on whether I take methotrexate or baricitinib for my rheumatoid arthritis? Does it matter, to you, which cDMARD or bDMARD I am taking? You’ve never heard of them, have you? They rarely make media headlines. Yet they are both riskier medications than opioids, and are more likely to cause serious adverse events. Yet you don’t care about those at all.

Do you care about my IVIG infusions? It’s extremely expensive medication. Unlike opioids, which are very cheap.

What about my steroid dose? You should care about that. All health care professionals know that high dose steroids, taken long term, are very dangerous. They often end up killing people. But because ignorant medical practitioners have taken my opioids away, I have been forced to live on high dose steroids. And all the side effects they bring.

But that’s fine with you. You don’t care about my steroid use. Only my poor endocrinologist does. Lovely gentleman. I can tell he truly cares about me as a patient. It shows in the way he treats me. With calm, gentle respect. He also stays in his lane. The only comment he has made about my opioid use is something akin to “I’m sorry you’re in so much pain.”

That’s a good doctor. After my first appointment with him, I went to my car and cried for 15 minutes straight. I’m not used to receiving that kind of compassion and empathy.

I normally get lectures. Unsolicited advice. And scare tactics: “Those drugs will kill you, you know!”

Or disgusted disbelief: “The pain can’t be that bad!”

Or, very commonly, abandonment: “You’re just going to have to learn to live with it.”

But why should I learn to live with pain that is easily treatable? Because you refuse to read the science? Because you like to get your medical knowledge from politicians, corrupt psychiatrists on the take, and researchers who misreport their own data to keep the grant money flowing?

Yeah, I know. At first, I thought all that was a conspiracy theory – no one would be so evil as to harm people who live with horrifically painful diseases just to further their own career, right? Of course not. No one would do… oh wait. Yes, they would.

Opioids are not for everyone. And thankfully, most people will never experience the kind of pain that requires around-the-clock opioids.

But when opioids are the only thing that reduces pain enough so that a person can survive and have a life, then opioids should be given. And in doses that actually relieve the pain, not a dose that some regulator or politician decided would be enough for everyone. Severe pain is a medical emergency. It does not matter if that pain is acute or chronic.

But let’s go back a step. I am in constant, severe pain. My nerves are being destroyed by my immune system, as are my joints. This is a documented and very painful disease process. Yet there is not an ounce of empathy. Not anymore, anyway.

Back in 2011, I went to a GP in absolute distress. I could not cope with the pain anymore and was crawling along the floor to get to the bathroom. The GP was compassionate. He knew that severe RA is a horrifically painful disease. He prescribed oxycodone and I got my life back.

And now? Health care professionals only have one thing to say: “Stop taking those opioids!”

It’s clear that these clinicians do not believe my pain is severe. It’s clear they don’t believe anything warrants long term opioid use. It’s clear that some think I only want opioids to get high.

Most clear of all is that they feel an entitlement to lecture me about it. When they know nothing about my pain.

The stigma created by the manufactured opioid crisis has turned us into the type of patients no doctor wants to treat. We are seen as liabilities. Nuisances. Whiners. Complainers. Time wasters. We’re seen as problems to be managed, rather than human beings in desperate need of help.

“Heartsink patients.” Are you familiar with that term? Google it. Heartsink patients are said to “exasperate, defeat, and overwhelm their doctors.”

I don’t fit that profile. Not even close. Very few people do. The profile was created so that doctors can feel they have the right to save the patient from themselves. Every single healthcare professional seems to think they have the right to weigh in, to judge and to lecture pain patients.

Here’s a radical idea: Mind your own business. Even better, educate yourself.

Read some recent science. Some peer reviewed science. Even read the studies that are referenced in the opioid prescribing guidelines. I promise you, they don’t say what you think they say.

Unless you are my GP or the prescribing doctor actively involved in my pain management, my opioid pain medication is not your concern. Yes, I need to tell you about it, in case you want to prescribe something that interacts with opioids. But that does not give you the right to judge me.

Pain is not a moral failing.

Taking opioids to manage pain is not a character flaw.

And it is none of your business.

Neen Monty is a writer and patient advocate in Australia who is dedicated to challenging misinformation and promoting access to safe, effective pain relief. Drawing on lived experience and scientific research, Neen has created a website for Pain Patient Advocacy Australia that is full of evidence that opioids can be safe and effective, even when taken long term. You can also subscribe to her free newsletter on Substack, “Arthritic Chick on Chronic Pain.”

A Pharmacist’s Oath: ‘The Relief of Suffering’

By Carol Levy

The words “First do no harm” are actually not in the Hippocratic Oath, at least not directly:

"I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous."

But the meaning is clear: Do no harm to patients.

I expect that from doctors, although many of us have been disappointed by their adherence to the Hippocratic Oath. What never occurred to me was that pharmacists also have an oath, which includes these pledges:

“I promise to devote myself to a lifetime of service to others through the profession of pharmacy. In fulfilling this vow: I will consider the welfare of humanity and relief of suffering my primary concerns.

“I will apply my knowledge, experience, and skills to the best of my ability to assure optimal outcomes for all patients. I will respect and protect all personal and health information entrusted to me.”  

The DEA has given pharmacists the freedom to ignore their oath, and has coerced some pharmacy chains into handing over our personal health information without a warrant.

Every time a pharmacist refuses to fill a prescription, questions why you need a medication, or asks personal questions, they are not using the “Oath of a Pharmacist.” They are instead exercising a “corresponding responsibility” under DEA regulations, which requires them to make sure a prescription for opioids and other controlled substances is valid and needed.

As far as the DEA is concerned, pharmacists have the same legal obligation as a physician to ensure that a medication has a “legitimate medical purpose.”   

The DEA essentially allows pharmacists to substitute their opinion for that of the doctor, even if it runs counter to their pledge about “the relief of suffering.” Refusing to dispense opioid medication to a pain patient who is dependent on them basically ensures suffering.

I can see some pharmacists saying, “Well, I think that opioids are dangerous. Not filling the prescription is absolutely for the welfare of the patient.”

That argument sounds legitimate. But is it?

The pharmacist has not examined the patient. He/she does not know their medical history or the effect on them when their pain goes untreated. They haven't seen the patient’s x-rays, imaging, and other tests that confirm an injury or disorder that’s causing their pain.

Pharmacists may see us as their “patient" but we are really their customers. They have a product that we want. We come to them with the legally required paperwork to make a purchase. If they have the medication, there should be no issue. They should hand it over and we should pay for it.

If you know little or nothing about a customer, where do you get the right to decide what medication they can get? That decision should be left to our doctors, not to pharmacists or the DEA. 

Those of us in chronic pain have a desperate need for doctors we can trust.  The next step is pharmacists we can trust. Pharmacists who honor their oath to relieve suffering. Not pharmacists who are so fearful of the DEA that they think their best option is to ensure our suffering.

Carol Jay Levy has lived with trigeminal neuralgia, a chronic facial pain disorder, for over 30 years. She is the author of “A Pained Life, A Chronic Pain Journey.”  Carol is the moderator of the Facebook support group “Women in Pain Awareness.” Her blog “The Pained Life” can be found here. 

Experts Divided About Benefits and Harms of Opioid Tapering

By Crystal Lindell

The first time I tried to do a full taper to go off morphine – after having been on it for years – I got hit with days-long withdrawal symptoms. Restless legs, diarrhea, cold sweats, extreme anxiety, insomnia, and more. It was horrible. 

So I called my doctor and asked for advice. He was not helpful, to say the least. He basically said that none of his other patients had ever had any withdrawal symptoms from morphine, so he didn’t know what to tell me. The implication was that this was a “me” problem. 

Looking back, I’m pretty sure that his other patients had just never told him about their withdrawal symptoms, so he assumed that they didn’t have any. That’s when I first realized that doctors were not a great resource for how to taper patients off opioids. 

A new study in the journal Pain Practice confirms many of my suspicions. It explored the  attitudes of healthcare professionals about the benefits and harms of maintaining, tapering or discontinuing long-term opioid therapy. 

The researchers analyzed the opinions of 28 “opioid safety experts.” Of those, 19 were prescribing physicians, while the rest were psychologists, researchers, or healthcare administrators. 

What they found is that there is little consistent advice or help from the “experts” about tapering. If you asked one medical professional for their opinion, you may get a completely different answer from another one. 

For example, over a third of the participants (36%) believe that long-term opioid therapy should be continued, while an equal percentage think opioids should be discontinued. 

More than half (57%) believe that patients can be harmed by tapering and/or discontinuation. But 18% think tapering to a lower dose is not harmful, and 29% think patients won’t be harmed by discontinuation. There were also quite a few “experts” who were neutral on the issue.   

Some recommended slow tapers (even when a prior taper was unsuccessful) and some advocated switching patients to buprenorphine, an opioid sometimes used to treat pain but is more widely used to treat opioid use disorder.

Some would try switching patients to non-opioid pain medications and therapies (even if they were unhelpful in the past), while others favor shared decision-making with patients to give them a role in deciding treatment.

Interestingly, few of the experts said they would assess patients for opioid use disorder or overdose risk.

The bottom line is that there’s little consensus about the right treatment path for patients on long-term opioids. The researchers said medical guidelines that might address these issues “may be difficult to utilize,” leaving doctors on their own to make decisions about professional liability, changing opioid regulations, patient preferences and treatment.

“In the meantime, individual care decisions that involve weighing relative harms should draw on longstanding norms of ethical medical care that call for informed consent and patient-provider conversations grounded in mutual respect,” the authors write.

I’m glad to see them specifically mention "mutual respect” between patients and providers, because there’s an obvious answer to many of these questions: Talk to patients and then believe them. 

I can guarantee you that I, as a longtime pain patient, would have more practical advice about tapering and withdrawal than many doctors or medical experts. There’s a certain amount of insight and empathy that comes from firsthand experience with withdrawal. 

I do give credit to co-author Kurt Kroenke, MD, of the Regenstrief Institute, for warning in a press release that taking patients off opioids “may result in return or worsening of chronic pain, mental health issues, drug seeking and potentially overdose and death.” 

Kroenke also notes that opioids help patients have a family life, hold a job, participate in social activities, and improve their quality of life. 

Indeed, that’s exactly the point: Opioids do help patients in a variety of ways. And in many cases, they are the only effective pain treatment. 

My hope is that future studies like this will include more direct input from patients about their experiences. If researchers really want to figure out the best guidelines for when and how to taper successfully, they should reach out to long-term opioid patients. 

Next time, instead of talking to 28 “experts,” researchers should talk to 28 patients.

Gretchen’s Journey Into Chronic Pain and Death  

By Maria Higginbotham

I write this on behalf of one of my dearest friends, Gretchen Lont, a fellow pain warrior whose spirit I cherished deeply. I made a promise to her to ensure her pain story is told. Gretchen’s last hope was that by sharing her experience, we might alleviate the needless suffering of others grappling with untreated or undertreated pain.

We call ourselves pain warriors, having fought tirelessly since 2016 for the rights of those struggling with painful conditions to receive adequate pain treatment. According to the CDC, over 24% of U.S. adults — 60 million people — suffer from chronic pain, surpassing the combined numbers of Americans afflicted by heart disease, diabetes, and cancer.

Tragically, Gretchen passed away on January 19, 2025 at the age of 59, after enduring years of unbearable undertreated pain. Despite persistent pleas to her doctors, Gretchen’s words fell on deaf ears. Just days before her death, she received a devastating diagnosis: ALS, also known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease.

This story in no way reflects all the beauty and individuality that was Gretchen. It defines her struggles with untreated pain, but there was an entire life in which she lived and loved. Her children and her family were her world.

I only ask that you respect her family’s privacy during this difficult time. She was a bright light that will never be erased from our hearts. I am heartbroken at the loss of a beautiful soul and dear friend.

Before her disability, Gretchen lived life vibrantly. She adored her three sons — Zach, Jordan and Nathan — and cherished every moment with her family, including her father John, her sisters Stacy and Kristen, and brother Michael.

She worked tirelessly to provide for her children and always carved out time for joy and laughter. She lived life to the fullest.

GRETCHEN LONT IN 2019

Gretchen embodied the belief that giving is a greater blessing than receiving. Her generosity knew no bounds, and her radiant smile could light up any room. With a feisty spirit, she was a fierce protector of her loved ones. She found solace in crafting — painting and making jewelry — each piece a testament to her incredible talent.

Animals had a special place in her heart. Gretchen’s social media was filled with adorable animal pictures. She often fed the squirrels and birds in her yard and adopted a special needs cat named Cleo saying, “We’re two damaged bodies just trying to survive, and we’ll do it together.”

Gretchen's journey into pain began with an accident at an upscale restaurant in Tacoma, WA. A spill that had gone uncleaned caused her to slip and fall, resulting in a severe back injury which later required surgery. This injury ushered in years of excruciating pain, followed by joint pain, more surgeries, and a possible diagnosis of Rheumatoid Arthritis at the age of 57.

Desperate for relief, Gretchen explored every alternative pain treatment available, yet none eased her suffering. Living with chronic pain is akin to living with a chronic illness: you feel invisible. On the outside, you might appear fine, but inside your body is screaming in agony.

Eventually, she found a compassionate pain management doctor who, for many years, treated her as an individual. With the help of opioid pain medication, she managed to regain a semblance of life — spending time with her family, painting and crafting, celebrating holidays, and enjoying the beauty of nature. Her passion for art blossomed, allowing her to create stunning jewelry and amazing paintings.

A Wasteland for Pain Patients

Sadly, Gretchen’s doctor, after years of facing scrutiny from medical agencies, decided to retire, joining many other physicians who closed their doors due to the hostile environment surrounding pain management. In 2021, she gave her patients a year’s notice about her plans, in the hope it would be enough time to find new care.

Unfortunately, the state of Washington proved to be a wasteland for chronic pain patients. Most physicians here are unwilling to take on new patients who are on opioid therapy, and those who do will often refuse to continue the opioids and force the patients to try previously failed methods.

Gretchen’s only option was to have an invasive surgery for a pain pump. To qualify, she had to undergo extensive psychological and physical evaluations, which she passed. However, she was then told she had to reduce her opioid dosage by 75%. This drastic cut left her bedridden, trapped in a cycle of agonizing pain.

After months of suffering, the pain specialist told her that her insurance, Medicaid, would not cover the cost of the pain pump or surgery. In desperation, Gretchen asked if her opioid medication could be increased to a dose that would provide some relief from the agonizing pain. Unfortunately, she only received a minimal increase, leaving her to continue suffering in unbearable agony.

On October 3, 2023, Gretchen felt a deep despair settle over her. Bedridden and in relentless pain, she questioned why a person should be forced to suffer this way. There was always a battle to fight -- like finding a doctor willing to provide adequate pain treatment, dealing with pharmacists who were choosing whether or not to fill a valid prescription for medication, and insurance companies not covering prescribed pain treatment.

She felt like a burden, unable to spend time with her family or do any of the things that brought pleasure in life. The pain specialist seemed indifferent to her deteriorating condition. Gretchen made the heartbreaking decision to take all her medications in an attempt to end her suffering. Fear gripped her and she confided in her son, who immediately called 911.

Resuscitated through CPR, the ER team noted that this tragic episode could have been avoided had her pain been managed appropriately. They had seen this happen many times. Gretchen was discharged with the recommendation to consult her pain specialist about increasing her medication.

The following day, during a virtual visit, her pain specialist expressed sympathy and promised to improve her pain management. Yet, hope quickly faded the next day at an in-person meeting. The doctor declined to increase her dosage, and Gretchen continued her downward spiral.

A friend referred her to a new doctor who specialized in both primary care and pain management. This physician was willing to help, but insisted on a cautious approach. They tried various medications, which provided minimal relief, but Gretchen’s health continued to decline.

The years of untreated pain had caused irreparable damage. She was losing 5-8 pounds weekly, struggled with swallowing, and faced increasingly severe breathing difficulties. She was a mere shadow of the vibrant person she had been two years prior.

A New Diagnosis

By late December 2024, Gretchen's breathing worsened, leading her doctor to recommend a visit to the Emergency Department at UW Medical Center for treatment of suspected pneumonia and a neurology consult.

That’s when Gretchen was diagnosed with ALS and learned that the suffering she endured for so many years stemmed from that incurable, painful, and deadly disease.

gretchen 3 days before she passed

It should be known that chronic pain patients often go decades struggling with intractable pain without a definitive diagnosis. Like Gretchen, many of us are diagnosed with a rare disease or medical condition when it’s too late to do anything. 

Admitted to the hospital on January 1, 2025, Gretchen was discharged to home hospice on January 17. Just an hour after returning home, she suffered a coughing fit and anxiety attack. Gretchen had realized she was dying.

I happened to call her at that moment and the only 2 words I could make out were “hospice” and “dying.” She was immediately sent to a nearby hospital, her body frozen in fear; her eyes and mouth wide open, arms outstretched. She stayed like that for just over 24 hours before she stopped breathing.

Long before she passed, Gretchen shared these words with me:

“Please help patients like me who have no options. We did not choose to have medical conditions that cause pain. No doctors will take you if you’re a chronic pain patient. It’s devastating to be in such a vulnerable position and feel abandoned. Our medical system is supposed to provide us with compassionate care and treat us as unique individuals. Instead, pain patients have become pariahs.

I share my story because I want those in power to understand that we are not just individuals suffering in pain. We are family members with loved ones who care for us and have loved ones that we care for. We deserve to live our lives filled with laughter and joy, not confined to a bed, incapacitated, and suffering in agonizing pain. There is an easy answer: treat our pain!

Please stop punishing those who suffer in pain. Our lives matter.”

Gretchen has her angel wings now, flying free from pain — a bright light in our lives whose flame will never be extinguished

Maria Higginbotham is a patient advocate and chronic pain sufferer who has an aggressive form of degenerative disc disease. Multiple surgeries not only failed to relieve her pain, but left her with adhesive arachnoiditis, a chronic inflammation of spinal nerves. Maria has also been diagnosed with Ehlers-Danlos disease and Scleroderma.