March 01, 2019

3 Advances in Hormonal Pain Care

March 01, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Forest Tennant, MD, Guest Columnist

There are three new discoveries or innovations in hormonal pain care that I dearly love. I believe they are real trend-setters, but keep in mind that the “next big thing” may not endure. Nevertheless, I’m so excited about these three newcomers to the hormone and pain care movement, that I wish to share them.

Hormone Derivative Treatment

Some really smart scientists know how to make derivatives or analogues out of the “real McCoy.” Why do this? Because the derivative can boost the potency of the basic hormone several fold.

There are two hormonal derivatives that, in my hands, have been extremely beneficial to sub-groups of chronic pain patients. The first is medroxyprogesterone, which is a derivative of progesterone. In my experience, medroxyprogesterone is far more potent in treating intractable pain patients than is plain progesterone.

I have administered medroxyprogesterone to intractable pain patients and most found that it reduced their pain and their need for opioids. The causes of intractable pain in these patients were multiple and included Lyme disease, post-traumatic headache, post-stroke and arachnoiditis. We have often made a topical medroxyprogesterone (skin massage) cream for use over arthritic joints and over the lumbar spine of adhesive arachnoiditis patients.

The second hormone is nandrolone, which is a derivative of testosterone. When a derivative is made from testosterone, it is often called an “anabolic steroid” because it grows tissue.

Anabolic steroids have a generally pejorative or negative view since they have been used to grow the muscles and nerves in athletes that wish to gain athletic advantage. Don’t be too offended by the term. After all, the pain patient needs to grow some nerves and muscle to relieve pain.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved nandrolone for use in “wasting” or “catabolic” conditions that cause tissue degeneration. Many severe pain patients qualify. A big problem today in pain practice is the Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS) patient whose nerves, muscles and connective tissue genetically and progressively degenerate. Nandrolone is proving to be a Godsend to some of these suffering individuals.

One really good thing about the derivatives medroxyprogesterone and nandrolone is that patients can safely try these hormonal agents for only a month to see if they get a positive response.

Medrol Test

Medrol is the commercial and best-known name for the cortisone derivative methylprednisolone. It’s an old drug, but ranks as a top-notch newbie because it is the cortisone derivative that best crosses the blood brain barrier and suppresses neuroinflammation.

To date, we don’t yet have a reliable blood test to determine if there is neuroinflammation in the brain or spinal cord, but it is essential to know if active neuroinflammation is in the central nervous system (CNS).

Step one on the mending road is to suppress and hopefully eliminate neuroinflammation. A Medrol test is, in my experience, your best bet to know if you have active neuroinflammation. There are 2 ways to take the Medrol test. One is to take an injection of Medrol for 2 consecutive days. The other is to obtain what is a 6-day dose pack. You take a declining dose of Medrol over a 6-day period. All MD’s, nurse practitioners and physician assistants are familiar with the Medrol dose pack. So ask for it.

Here’s the payoff. If you feel better with less pain and better physical function, appetite and sleep, you have just determined that you have active neuroinflammation that is not only causing pain today but will worsen your condition in future days.

If you have active neuroinflammation, you will need to start medicinal agents that are known to suppress neuroinflammation. If your Medrol test is negative -- meaning it didn’t reduce your pain or improve other symptoms -- it means you don’t have much neuroinflammation and that your pain is due to nerve damage and scarring. In this case you will have to rely on symptomatic pain relievers and perhaps try some long-term neuro-regenerative anabolic hormones to hopefully regrow or revitalize some nerve tissue.

Hormonal Extracts

Years ago, including the days of the medicine man and shaman, extracts of whole glands, particularly the adrenals, gonads, pancreas and thyroid, were given to the sick. In the early part of the last century, this practice was known as “glandular medicine” and whole gland extracts were administered by practicing physicians. Many a person today still finds that an extract of thyroid (made by the Armour Company) is superior to a single component of the thyroid gland or a synthetic thyroid.

Some commercial companies have brought back whole adrenal and gonadal extracts. These extracts are non-prescription and are starting to be used by chronic pain patients. To date, they appear to be essentially void of complications or side-effects. Some chronic pain patients are reporting positive results for pain reduction and improvement in energy, appetite and sleep. They are a safe, inexpensive way for patients and physicians who don’t like steroids or cortisone.

Hormonal treatments for chronic pain patients are fundamentally essential if a chronic pain patient wants some curative effects.

Although hormones are a great advance, with more progress to come, they will never be a total replacement for symptomatic care with opioids, neuropathic agents and medical devices. Many long-term intractable pain patients have damaged and scarred nervous systems that neither hormones nor other known treatment can cure.

“Hormone treatments should be initiated as early as possible if a person develops chronic pain. I recommend hormone blood testing at least twice a year.”

— Dr. Forest Tennant

Hormone treatments should be initiated as early as possible if a person develops chronic pain. I recommend hormone blood testing at least twice a year with a six-hormone panel. You should replenish any hormone that is low in the blood stream.

The hormone oxytocin has, as one of its natural functions, pain relief. It is an excellent short-term pain reliever that can be taken with other symptomatic pain relievers to avoid an opioid. There are other hormones made in the CNS that protect nerve cells by suppressing neuroinflammation and then regenerating them. To download a full copy of my latest report on hormones and pain care, click here.

Hormones and their derivatives are beginning to be used by chronic pain patients. All chronic pain patients can and should ask their medical practitioners for a short-term therapeutic trial to find one that fits them. While one size doesn’t fit all, all can find one size that does fit. It’s the way forward.

Forest Tennant, MD, MPH, DrPH, recently retired from clinical practice but continues his groundbreaking research on the treatment of intractable pain and arachnoiditis.

The Tennant Foundation has updated its free handbook for patients and families living with adhesive arachnoiditis and intractable pain. The handbook features the latest groundbreaking research on hormones and pain care. To see and download a copy, click here.

This report is provided as a public service by the Arachnoiditis Research and Education Project of the Tennant Foundation and is republished with permission. Correspondence should be sent to veractinc@msn.com

February 28, 2019

Future Pain Pills

February 28, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

The Food and Drug Administration announced this week that it would require drug makers to conduct new studies on the effectiveness of opioid pain medication and whether long-term use of the drugs lead to addiction. The FDA’s unprecedented action was due in no small part to a 60 Minutes report that said the agency “opened the floodgates” to the opioid crisis by approving the use of opioids for chronic pain.

With opioid medication coming under scrutiny again – and perhaps more regulatory action – this is a good time to assess where we stand with development of newer and safer painkillers.

Many analgesics already on the market have too many risks or too few benefits. A recent meta-analysis in JAMA concluded that opioids “may provide benefit for chronic noncancer pain, but the magnitude is likely to be small.”

And a new Cochrane review on acetaminophen (Tylenol) for hip or knee osteoarthritis found “only minimal improvements in pain and function.”

So new analgesics, whether safer opioids or non-opioid drugs, are urgently needed. Fortunately, there has been significant progress.

NKTR-181, from Nektar Therapeutics, is a new kind of opioid under “fast track” FDA review. It was designed with safety in mind, because it enters the nervous system slowly as a result of its unique chemical structure. NKTR-181 is the only abuse-deterrent opioid in the drug development pipeline designed to reduce the “high” and “drug liking” that can lead to addiction. Practical Pain Management recently gave it four out of five stars as a future analgesic.

Desmetramadol, from Syntrix Pharmaceuticals, is another opioid in early testing. Developed with support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, desmetramadol is designed as a safer version of tramadol, a Schedule IV opioid. Researchers are looking at the results of a recent clinical trial to see whether the new drug “provides the safety and pain relief of tramadol without its metabolic issues.”

VX-150, from Vertex Pharmaceuticals, is a sodium channel inhibitor that late last year finished a “proof-of-concept” Phase II trial successfully. It acts specifically on sodium channels to block the pain caused by small fiber neuropathy. Because these channels are not expressed in the brain, VX-150 should have few if any cognitive side effects. Phase III clinical trials are expected to start later this year.

Tanezumab, from Pfizer and Eli Lilly, just completed a Phase III clinical study for chronic low back pain. The results showed that tanezumab injections were associated with a statistically significant improvement in low back pain compared with placebo. Tanezumab is also being studied as a treatment for osteoarthritis, although there are some lingering concerns about its side-effects.

Finally, the novel compound AT-121 from Astraea Therapeutics is showing promise as a non-addictive opioid analgesic. Researchers created AT-121 to bind to both the mu opioid receptor and the FQ peptide receptor, a combination that blocks the unwanted side effects of current opioid analgesics. Preclinical testing of AT-121 in animals found that it was more potent than morphine, but did not produce physical dependence or tolerance at high doses. The National Institute on Drug Abuse recently called AT-121 a “promising alternative to opioid pain medications.”

Improved understanding of the nervous system and of chronic painful disorders is also contributing to drug development. A recent review in Frontiers in Pharmacology looks at emerging “safer opioids” that provide effective pain relief with fewer side effects. The review explains that the new goal of drug developers is to target opioid receptors in injured or diseased tissues, while avoiding the brain to reduce cognitive side effects and minimize risk of abuse, addiction and overdose.

And new genetic research is identifying genes involved in painful neuropathies. For instance, a recent case report found that a variant in the gene PMP22 is linked to painful peripheral neuropathy in Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease.

With the prevalence of chronic pain increasing as the population ages, the development of safer, more effective analgesics is critical. Advances in drug development techniques and better understanding of painful disorders should accelerate the process.

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

February 23, 2019

The Impact of Chronic Pain on Family

February 23, 2019/ Pat Anson

By David Hanscom, MD, PNN Columnist

I have long asked the spouses and partners of my chronic pain patients to participate in the “Direct Your Own Care” project — my step-by-step method that allows patients to take control of their treatment plan.

One reason is that partners of chronic pain patients also experience suffering. They have their own broken dreams, disappointments and often just feel bad -- because their partner is feeling bad. This is not primarily psychological. The human brain has “mirror neurons” that are stimulated by others’ behavior. If one partner is having a bad day, there is a good chance that the other’s day is not going to be great, either.

So, when the patient’s partner is snippy, critical or hostile, the patient tends to feel worse, too. The region of the brain that elicits a bad mood is stimulated. Conversely, if one partner is in a great mood, the other tends to be happier.

That is why— indirectly for my patients’ sake and directly for that of their partners — I believe it is vital that both partners learn tools such as expressive writing and adding more play into their lives to restore a joyful life.

Unfortunately, it is often remarkably difficult to convince other members of the household to engage in these tools. If you care for your family member, why would you not try to do as much as possible to help him or her heal?

I ran across a study in the journal Pain that partially explains why. Researchers had 105 patients with chronic back pain and their spouses keep an electronic diary for two weeks on their interaction with each other. Spouses were asked to observe and record the patient’s pain behavior (such as complaining or grimacing), while patients were asked about any criticism or hostility they received from their spouse.

The following observations were made:

Patient’s pain increased for over three hours when they felt hostility or were criticized
Patient’s pain behavior consistently created a negative reaction from their partner
These interactions were consistent. The conclusion was that long-term negative interactions not only cause more pain, they erode relationships and quality of life

This finding is similar to what has been found in depression research. Depressed patients act in ways that cause rejection from others, which in turn exacerbates the depression.

There is no question that chronic pain is a family issue. The couples’ study doesn’t even take into account the damage an angry person in chronic pain can inflict on his close relationships. The family unit can become a living hell and seem like a hopeless situation.

Fortunately, like the patient’s condition, the family dynamic can get better with the right tools. It did with me.

Anger and Relationships

In addition to stimulating the nervous systems of those close to you through the mirror neuron effect, there are additional problems created by chronic pain in the household. Most of them stem from the understandable problem that when someone is trapped by pain, he or she is chronically angry and upset. Members of the family become targets in many ways.

First, there is often a lot of complaining about the pain, medical care and the frequent mistreatment that patients in pain experience. We have found that many, if not most patients in pain, discuss their problems daily. Family members become worn-down by this, but the patient usually doesn’t understand the depth of their despair. Although the family is concerned and upset that their loved one is suffering, they are frustrated by their inability to help. In medicine, the term we use for this is “compassion fatigue.”

Secondly, peace, love and joy are crushed and replaced with an angry energy. Family members are often targets of sharp orders and criticism. The patient may demand that their physical needs be met by the family. At the same time, the person in pain may emotionally withdraw and become isolated even while being in the middle of a lot of bustling activity. Family life just isn’t as much fun.

Third, the essence of successful relationships is being aware of the needs of those around you. This is true in any arena, but especially critical in the family. Lack of awareness is the essence of abuse and anger is the ultimate manifestation of it. You can’t see the needs of others because you are blinded by your own angry energy.

So, instead of the home being a place of safety, it can become dangerous. When a family member is triggered by an angry patient and becomes hostile or critical, then the patient becomes more upset and it all becomes like a giant ping-pong game. This the opposite of what you would want, where a happy person creates the opposite contagious reaction. And where is the end point?

Since anxiety and anger are unconscious survival reactions that are much stronger than the conscious brain, they aren’t subject to rational control. How many of us have ever solved a disagreement in the middle of an argument? It never happens.

Healing Energy

We have discovered that family dynamics are such a powerful force in keeping people in pain, that medical interventions may have a limited effect. Conversely, we have also found out that the family can be a remarkably healing energy for everyone involved – and it happens quickly.

The path to this healing energy is the topic for another article. But the starting point goes like this:

The first thing I ask is that every adult family member living at home immerse themselves in the healing process. That means actively engaging in the exercises that calm down the nervous system. You can see them outlined on my website.

Second, I tell patients never to discuss their pain – ever -- except with their medical team. Talking about pain reinforces the pain circuits and is frustrating to those who care about you, but can’t help. I also tell patients that they can’t complain about anything.

Third, I want the family to reminisce about the most enjoyable times in their relationships. What were the fun times? Discuss them in detail and stick with the conversation. Try to feel it.

The final and most challenging step is not bringing the pain home with you. I tell patients, “When you walk through the door, you’ll make a commitment to never bring pain back into the house.”

The intention is not to ignore pain or pretend it doesn’t exist, but to create a safe haven in your living space. I want patients to take the positive energy generated by the conversation about the best times in their relationship into the home and keep it there.

If you have to argue or fight – take it outside. Every person in the household has the right to relax and feel safe in the confines of their home.

Dr. David Hanscom is a spinal surgeon who has helped hundreds of back pain sufferers by teaching them how to calm their central nervous systems without the use of drugs or surgery.

In his book Back in Control, Hanscom shares the latest developments in neuroscience research and his own personal history with pain.

February 20, 2019

A New Psychological Treatment for Chronic Pain

February 20, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Ann Marie Gaudon, PNN Columnist

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) has dominated the field of psychological treatment for chronic pain for the last three decades. Studies have shown that it is effective, yet some researchers say CBT also has its limits and could be improved upon.

As CBT treatment approaches continue to evolve, what is noteworthy is a departure from the logic of everyday thinking. “Suffering” is not seen as pathology, but rather as inherent in the human condition. We don’t want it and we don’t like it, but suffering is inescapable.

Following this principle, the utility of “normal thinking, analyzing, and problem-solving” is called into question. Our brains have evolved into powerful problem-solvers that serve very well with things are external to us. For example:

Problem: your car malfunctions and no longer starts. If you have the knowledge and skills, you find the problem and repair the car. Problem solved. If you do not have the skills, you find someone who does and repairs it for you. Problem solved.

But chronic pain is an internal problem that cannot be easily solved. No matter the effort from our powerful problem-solving brains, doctors and patients often cannot work it out. For a sufferer to spend a lifetime attempting to analyze and logically think their way to being pain-free can be a lifetime spent in futility.

Acceptance and Commitment Therapy

Newer psychological approaches such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) are guided by the premise that we cannot change the pain we’re left with, so let’s change our response to that pain. ACT was outlined in a 2014 article in the journal American Psychologist.

ACT differs notably from traditional CBT in method. Rather than challenging and changing thoughts, ACT seeks to reduce their influence over our behaviour. This core treatment process is called “psychological flexibility,” which is the ability to contact the present moment fully and consciously, based on what the situation affords.

In other words, we act on our long-term values rather than short term impulses, thoughts and feelings. I have a personal example of this:

“Knowing that I love to dine out and see live theatre, my partner reserved an evening of these as a surprise birthday present for me. After the reservations were made, I endured a serious back injury, which makes sitting for long periods particularly painful. He offered to cancel immediately, but I stopped him.

My thoughts told me, ‘Don’t go! You’ll be in more pain. Stay home and protect yourself!’

I applied a few of the many skills I have learned through ACT and was able to hold these thoughts lightly, and essentially not buy into them. I committed to continue with the dinner and theatre plans, and accept the pain in the service of my value of nurturing a social life. Result: my pain was not in charge -- I was.”

Why would one choose these strategies? It’s because thoughts and emotions tend to be unreliable indicators of long-term value. They ebb and flow constantly and we have little control over them. If we act based solely on them, we can lose out on experiences that bring true meaning and vitality to our lives.

In my case, I could have held onto my thoughts tightly and isolated myself at home with my pain, but instead I chose not to buy into those thoughts, to be willing to have the pain (acceptance), and commit to an experience which brought richness to my life. I knew my evening out would not reduce or eliminate my pain. I chose to do something of value to me -- the pain came along for the ride.

The catch is that unhelpful thoughts and emotions can dominate without a person even being aware of them. This results in “psychological inflexibility,” which leads to rigid, ineffective behaviour. If I let my thoughts run the show, the result would have been that I isolated myself at home with my pain and likely more suffering. Other positive behaviours and experiences would have been essentially blocked from me. No thank you.

Evidence to support ACT for chronic pain continues to grow, and its efficacy is about the same as CBT at this point. This is no small feat, considering CBT has been the gold standard for decades.

There are at least six randomized controlled trials which support the use of ACT for chronic pain. Most show ACT increases the acceptance of pain, along with improvements in anxiety, depression, and reductions in disability. This psychological flexibility significantly improves life satisfaction, disability, emotional distress and fear of movement.

It will be interesting to see future studies as ACT continues to advance and helps us find new and different ways “to act successfully in the world.”

Ann Marie Gaudon is a registered social worker and psychotherapist in the Waterloo region of Ontario, Canada with a specialty in chronic pain management. She has been a chronic pain patient for over 30 years and works part-time as her health allows. For more information about Ann Marie's counseling services, visit her website.

February 15, 2019

Advocating for Migraine and Headache Research

February 15, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Mia Maysack, PNN Columnist

This week I had the privilege of attending the 12th annual “Headache on the Hill” lobbying event in Washington, DC, which is organized by the Alliance for Headache Disorders Advocacy (AHDA). This was my second time being involved and I plan to attend for as many years as possible.

Headache on the Hill is a two-day engagement that began with a briefing for over 160 advocates who traveled to Washington from around the country. This is when we heard from experts and learned how to strategize, focus on what we want to achieve, and get an opportunity to engage and ask questions.

Early the next morning we had a headache policy forum breakfast and heard from Rep. Andy Harris, MD (R-Maryland), who lives with cluster headaches and is passionate about our cause.

“If we have to drag the federal government kicking and screaming into a modern age on treatment of pain syndromes, including headache pain syndromes, migraine, cluster headaches - we'll do it and I'll be there with you every step of the way," Harris said.

After breakfast, we all joined together to venture as a group to Congress to meet with our representatives and shares our stories on the struggles we face as migraine and headache sufferers.

ALLIANCE FOR HEADACHE DISORDERS ADVOCACY

Most important is the need of more funding for research on headache disorders. Only through research do we possess a chance at ever understanding all the layers of this complex medical problem.

Headache disorders affect more than 90% of Americans and cost the economy $31 billion every year in lost productivity, yet less than 1% of the budget for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is spent on headache and migraine research.

We are not attempting to suggest that our cause is more worthwhile than others. We're merely pointing out that we are on severely unequal ground. How is it that so many millions of Americans are enduring migraines and headaches, yet it is the least funded field of medical research?

We know that chronic migraine is the second leading cause of global disability and cluster headache has the deserved reputation of being "the most severe pain that humans can experience." I have endured both in some form every day for almost 20 years straight.

Is there a logical reason why 59% of Americans impacted by chronic migraine who seek refuge in emergency departments receive opioid medication? Opioids can worsen the severity and frequency of migraines. Meanwhile, we have to fight for other treatments such as oxygen therapy, which has been proven to assist in decreasing cerebral blood flow and lessen the pain of cluster headaches. Oxygen is natural, has no side-effects and is non-habit forming, which are the approaches the NIH should be investing in.

Breath work and mindfulness meditation have also changed the game for me personally and I am grateful to declare that discipline in those practices has led to an overall heightened sense of awareness, which actually helps me with coping.

We've recently been fortunate enough to have several injections introduced as preventative treatments for migraine. That’s a great start -- though many of us are unable to gain proper access to these expensive treatments due to our circumstances.

The bottom line is that by showing up in D.C. and by advocating every chance we get in regular everyday life, we can make progress in raising awareness and funding for more research. Our efforts during Headache on the Hill were well received. Advocates from over 40 states attended, our meetings were empowering and there was empathy for our stories.

I am extraordinarily grateful to the members of Congress that made time to meet with us, the advocates who were alongside me for this adventure, and everyone who has or will participate in Headache of the Hill.

Mia Maysack lives with chronic migraine, cluster headaches and fibromyalgia. Mia is the founder of Keepin’ Our Heads Up, a Facebook support group, and Peace & Love Enterprises, a wellness coaching practice focused on holistic health.

February 15, 2019

Health Is the Wealth We Need

February 15, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Barby Ingle, PNN Columnist

I recently came across an interesting quote on Instagram about the four types of wealth. The quote goes like this:

“There are 4 types of wealth:

Financial wealth (money)
Social wealth (status)
Time wealth (freedom)
Physical wealth (health)

Be wary of jobs that lure you in with 1 and 2, but rob you of 3 and 4.”

The quote is meant as advice for people looking for employment and the types of jobs they should seek. But I look at it from the health perspective, since that is my biggest challenge in life. I want health wealth. Financial, social and time wealth are often dependent on our health wealth. Without health we are limited in what we can do.

People planning to have a child wish for a healthy baby. We also wish for long and healthy lives. We don’t always get to choose our health or even learn how to achieve it. I believe one way to help this would be putting more emphasis on health education in school.

It is hard to have good social wealth when your health is poor. You can’t participate in as many social outings or events, and you may have a poorer attitude about your living situation if you have a chronic pain condition. Belonging to a social group, maintaining friendships, being actively engaged in a positive productive way, and even being married all raise your social wealth.

Maintaining financial wealth is more straightforward. You either have money or you don’t. But even when you have money, you are often working on making, getting or winning more. Most of us would love to be millionaires, but even on relatively modest incomes of $75,000, studies show that people are happier.

Now take the average income of someone disabled by pain. Our households typically bring in less than $30,000 and many single disabled people are living on less than $15,000 a year. It is difficult to climb out of a financial rut with poor health and medical bills needing to be paid.

I know chronic pain patients who work, but due to poor health they are not able to take jobs that are high paying or sustainable long-term. Missing work due to illness, brain fog due to pain, depression, anxiety and painsomnia all affect our ability to be productive in a standard work environment. And it is often more difficult for a company hire you due to extra liability or disability costs made to accommodate you.

Even when your own health is good and you are taking care of someone who is disabled, it affects your finances through the type of jobs you take, health insurance, medical bills and supporting the rest of the family.

My husband has lost multiple jobs because my health care and insurance costs were too high for his employers. They found or invented reasons to let him go, such as missing too much work because he had to take time off to drive me to appointments. One company fired him for entering the parking lot without scanning his badge at the guard gate on the way in, a common practice in the mornings when the line to enter the lot was long.

For all of the reasons above, I believe that health wealth is the most important when it comes to living life to the fullest. It takes the most effort and action of all four types of wealth.

We strive to improve our health wealth so that we can live better lives. We don’t have the luxury of waiting for retirement to enjoy ourselves, so we must find and create moments when we can use our time and social wealth. They are the two most easily obtainable when living with chronic illness and striving for health wealth.

Barby Ingle lives with reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD), migralepsy and endometriosis. Barby is a chronic pain educator, patient advocate, and president of the International Pain Foundation. She is also a motivational speaker and best-selling author on pain topics.

More information about Barby can be found at her website.

February 12, 2019

Guideline Paranoia

February 12, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Carol Levy, PNN Columnist

I recently posted an article to an online chronic pain support group about the CDC’s opioid prescribing guideline.

“For treating acute pain, the guideline recommends a quantity no greater than what is needed for the expected duration of pain severe enough to require opioids, specifying that three days or less will often be sufficient and more than seven days will rarely be needed,” the guideline states.

It makes sense to me. And I assumed that would be the response my post would get. The recommendation is only for treating acute pain and acute pain shouldn’t need chronic, long term opioid treatment.

Instead, the replies were quick, angry and knee jerk:

“How dare they decide what and how many we need? This will hurt chronic pain patients.”

“They always come after us. These may be for acute pain patients, but you just know more draconian guidelines are just around the corner for chronic pain patients.”

The CDC guideline does not say, “And no one, even if their acute pain continues longer than 3 or 7 days, will be able to get the pain meds they need.” But that was how it was interpreted.

And then the people replying went one step further: “Soon they will be writing guidelines that even those in chronic pain can only have opioids for a specified period of time and a specific dosage, and not one grain more or one day longer.”

I see this common response and reaction as a major issue. When any new guideline is proposed (and people forget these are guidelines, not absolutes), it is a major catastrophe: “They are coming after us.”

Too often we act in a way that appears akin to addictive behavior. We have to have our opioid medications. And any restriction, even when it is not related to chronic pain, is one restriction too many: “They are going to take away my drugs. Then what will I do?”

We seem to have lost the concept of consideration. No time is taken to think through the new suggestions. Instead it is an immediate jump to: “This will hurt me. I won't be able to get the meds I need.”

For many of us, opioid medication is all that is left or the only option. The idea that someone, especially the government, may rip them from us is truly terrifying.

But I wonder. Maybe if we did not take any and all new guidelines as a frontal attack on us, maybe we would not be seen and referenced so often as a major component and cause of the “opioid epidemic.”

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.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represent the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.

February 01, 2019

Civil Rights Case Gives Hope to Pain Patients

February 01, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Richard Dobson, MD, Guest Columnist

People with chronic disabling pain frequently complain that doctors discharge them from their practice because of the medications they take. Sometimes doctors refuse to accept patients who are taking opioid pain medications, even though the medications treat a legitimate medical condition.

There may be hope that such actions will be considered violations of the civil rights of patients.

This week the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice (DOJ) signed a formal agreement with Selma Medical Associates, a large primary care practice in Virginia, that may open the door for people with chronic pain to regain their full access to medical care.

Selma Medical refused to schedule a new patient appointment for a man who was taking the addiction treatment drug Suboxone. He filed a civil rights complaint asserting that his rights were violated because has a disability.

According to the complaint, Selma Medical “regularly turns away prospective new patients who are treated with narcotic controlled substances such as Suboxone.”

The DOJ and Selma Medical settled the complaint out-of-court. The full agreement can be read here.

In essence, Selma Medical agreed to stop discriminating on the basis of disability, including opioid use disorder (OUD). The settlement identifies several specific ways that Selma Medical was violating the civil rights of people with disabilities.

“By refusing to accept the Complainant for a new family practice appointment solely because he takes Suboxone, Selma Medical discriminated against him by denying him the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of Selma Medical.

By turning away the Complainant and other prospective patients who are treated with narcotic controlled substances, including Suboxone, Selma Medical imposed eligibility criteria that screen out or tend to screen out individuals with OUD.

Further, Selma Medical failed to make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, or procedures, when such modifications are necessary to afford such goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations to individuals with disabilities.”

In the agreement, Selma Medical agreed to stop discriminating now and in the future. The staff and administration are also required to undergo intensive training on the implementation of the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA).

Importantly for pain patients, the agreement applies to people taking “narcotic medications” for any reason and is not limited to people who are taking Suboxone for OUD. The agreement does seem to imply that people taking opioid medications also have their civil rights violated if they are refused medical care on the basis of their diagnosis and their use of opioids.

A former staff attorney in the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division agrees.

“This formal settlement agreement from DOJ affirms that discrimination in access to medical treatment based solely on an individual’s use of a particular medication — in this case, a narcotic controlled substance — may violate the law,” says Kate Nicholson, a pain patient and civil rights attorney who helped draft federal regulations under the ADA.

Anyone who has chronic pain and who is discharged from a practice or refused admission to a medical practice should let the medical staff know that this is a violation of the ADA. Show them the agreement between Selma Medical and the DOJ. Then if the medical practice still refuses care, file a formal complaint with the Office of Civil Rights. Instructions on filing can be found here.

As part of the settlement agreement, Selma Medical had to pay $30,000 to the complainant for “the discrimination and the harm he has endured, including, but not limited to, emotional distress and pain and suffering.” Selma Medical also had to pay a civil penalty of $10,000.

It seems to me that the substance of this agreement gives real hope to the chronic pain community that discrimination based on disability, even if the disability is based on pain, is illegal and violates their civil rights.

Richard Dobson, MD, worked as a physician in the Rochester, New York area for over 30 years, treating and rehabilitating people suffering from chronic pain, mostly as the result of work or motor vehicle accidents. He is now retired.

January 28, 2019

Memories, Medications and Hospital Horrors

January 28, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Tom Parker, Guest Columnist

Some things you never forget. Your mother’s love, your favorite teacher, your first home run (oh, that’s right, I’m 61 and that still hasn’t happened yet), your first date, your first kiss and your wedding.

Christmas to the Parker family is also memorable for many reasons. My delightful wife and I have always sought to make Christmas a precious time for our family. We listen to Christmas music off and on throughout the year, but nonstop in the fall and winter. Bing Crosby and Karen Carpenter mellifluously bless our home with the glorious sounds of Christmastime.

So why do I not remember a season of joy that just ended a month ago?

For several weeks, I had been experiencing pain and an inability to fully empty my bladder. I have quite a few health problems, so I just chalked this up as just another one and pretty much ignored it as it continued to get progressively worse.

My wife and son were on a long trip to take my youngest daughter back to college. I was home alone and finally felt the need to call my doctor about the urinary retention. My doctor’s sagacious nurse urged me to immediately go to the ER, so I called for an ambulance.

I was in St. Peter’s Hospital in Albany for almost a week while an interminable number of tests were conducted to determine what was wrong. I was not allowed any of my normal medications, pain or otherwise, or food or liquids while the initial tests were conducted. Nothing whatsoever passed my lips.

When my normal medication regimen finally resumed, I found out very quickly that I had to specifically request an oxycodone tablet when meds were dispensed or I wouldn’t get one.

Which leads me to very distinct memories of my roommate for the rest of my stay. A very brawny young man of 30 or so, a massively-muscled professional bodybuilder, was wheeled into the room and into the next bed. He was just out of elective bilateral double knee replacement surgery. Forgive me for listening as his mother and wife conversed waiting for him to come out of anesthesia.

PNN readers are all too acutely aware of how pain medications are no longer properly given for serious conditions -- which would seemingly include bilateral double knee replacement. As my compatriot emerged from anesthesia, it was very audibly obvious that he was quite understandably in unimaginable agony. Multiple nurses and techs rushed in and out, and at one point a resident was summoned as the young man was having difficulty breathing.

There was serious conversation about rushing him back into surgery when I heard a loud thump. My roommate had hit his head against the headboard, knocking himself out. His relatives argued with the nurses and resident about what pain medicines should be administered during his recovery.

We live in an ungodly, strange and insidiously cruel perverse world! When medical professionals seriously consider Tramadol as the most viable and appropriate medicine at such a time, we have reached a new low standard of medical barbarity in these United States of America.

Paging Dr. Sessions, paging Dr. Sessions….

Yes, Tramadol is a somewhat effective pain reliever for some people. But for an operation as critically complex as bilateral double knee replacement surgery? It never was effective for me and it engendered extreme vomiting for several days.

The agonized screams of that young man over three days still haunt my sleep today -- hopefully, not again tonight.

All of us are familiar with the 1 to 10 pain scale and how it often seems wholly inadequate for describing the pain that many of us feel every day. When the young fellow awoke from his self-induced head to the headboard knockout, he was asked what his pain level was at that moment. Three numbers unmistakably rang out, loud, clear and true: “555! What the blank do you think?”

His anguish was finally lessened by multiple doses of Dilaudid, both orally and intravenously. He was also administered Celebrex for inflammation, and oxycodone. I was a very personally-interested witness to this for several days.

He and I left the hospital at almost the same time, me to go home with my beloved, and he to a rehabilitation facility nearby. His last pain attestation before leaving was “10 or 12.” I was utterly appalled to hear him say that “I will do it all over again” if he were unable to resume his bodybuilding career after rehabilitation.

Well, I have had my follow-up visit with my GP now. He renewed my oxycodone prescription without even asking me about it. For that, I am eternally grateful to God and to my kindhearted physician. He explained to me that he was very glad that I had listened to his nurse’s urging to go to the ER.

I asked him, “Why are my memories of Christmas just a month ago so very foggy?”

It was then my physician made it very clear to me, for the first time, that I had almost died from blood poisoning and kidney failure.

Tom Parker was born in beautiful Charleston, South Carolina. He currently lives in the Albany region of frozen upstate New York with his wonderful Vermont wife of 30 years, Kelly Sue. They have four adult children. Tom has multiple spine problems, including severe cervical spinal stenosis, osteoarthritis, and was born with just one kidney.

Pain News Network invites other readers to share their stories with us. Send them to editor@painnewsnetwork.org.

January 28, 2019

How Government Shutdowns Worsen the Opioid Crisis

January 28, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Lynn Webster, MD, Guest Columnist

On October 26, 2017— a little bit more than a year ago — President Donald Trump declared that the opioid crisis was a national Public Health Emergency. Most Americans seemed to back his initiative to stop opioid abuse, and to reduce drug supply and demand.

However, it seems the recent 35-day government shutdown and Trump's desire to build a border wall have been at cross-purposes with his concern about addressing the opioid crisis.

Two key aspects of Trump’s opioid plan were prevention and treatment of opioid use disorder. Prevention, in part, means reducing the supply. However, everything in the supply is not equally problematic.

Opioids fall into two major categories: those that are prescribed and those that are smuggled into the United States. The number of overdoses associated with prescription opioids has remained essentially unchanged since 2011, while the number of opioid overdoses due to illicit fentanyl and other synthetic opioids surged from 3,000 in 2013 to more than 29,000 in 2017. Most of these drugs originate in China.

One of Trump's major arguments for building a wall is that most drugs that kill Americans are coming over the southern border from Mexico. However, that conflicts with the final report of his opioid commission, which found that "we are losing this fight predominately through China."

Mexican cartels do smuggle illicit opioids across the southern border in passenger vehicles and tractor trailers, often at legal points of entry. Heroin and fentanyl are also smuggled into the U.S. by sea and air or through the mail. A physical barrier doesn’t block any of these types of entry.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is tasked with inspecting mail to prevent drug smuggling. Before the government shutdown, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb was calling for more postal inspectors to intercept shipments of opioids. He wanted the government to be able to inspect 100,000 suspicious packages per year, but that would have required double the number of personnel that he had.

Government shutdowns handicap those efforts because it is difficult to hire during shutdowns. It can be challenging just to retain the employees you already have.

The Department of Homeland Security works with the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection to patrol the South Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea to stop drug smuggling. These efforts may have been impeded during the shutdown, because some of these "essential" employees had to decide whether to work without pay or call in sick. We can assume that some of them chose the latter course of action. Some government employees may be looking for other jobs because they want a reliable paycheck.

Ironically, due to increased scrutiny at the border, drug smugglers have gotten more creative, increasing their use of tunnels, boats, air and even catapults. These efforts may have been more successful due to the lack of personnel guarding trouble spots because of the shutdown.

Addiction Treatment Impacted

Government shutdowns increase the likelihood that opioids could find their way past our borders. And our ability to treat people with opioid addiction may also be compromised.

Providing treatment for addiction was the other important part of Trump's plan for addressing the opioid crisis. An estimated 2.1 million people had an opioid use disorder in 2016, yet only about 20% had access to treatment. One of the reasons so few people are treated is that not enough clinicians are trained and certified to treat opioid addiction. The president's initiative requires increasing the number of clinicians certified to treat addiction.

Buprenorphine (Subxone) is one of the tools physicians use to treat opioid use disorder. Doctors require special training and certification to prescribe the drug, as well as a waiver from the Drug Enforcement Agency. During the government shutdown, the DEA was still able to review doctors’ applications, but there were about 30% fewer certifications than there were before the shutdown. It is unclear if that was due to the shutdown or not.

Regardless of whether there will be a physical wall on our border with Mexico, we can see the potential damage that the recent government shutdown can have on curbing the opioid crisis. Congress will now discuss the merits of various options to secure the border, and President Trump is threatening another shutdown if a border wall isn’t funded.

But one thing we should take away from the recent experience is that there isn't much point in saving ourselves from illegal immigrants if we can't protect ourselves from the dangers posed by a government shutdown.

Lynn R. Webster, MD, is a vice president of scientific affairs for PRA Health Sciences and consults with the pharmaceutical industry. He is a former president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. Webster is the author of “The Painful Truth: What Chronic Pain Is Really Like and Why It Matters to Each of Us.”

You can find him on Twitter: @LynnRWebsterMD.

January 26, 2019

A History Lesson of the War on Drugs

January 26, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Iris Erlingsdottir, Guest Columnist

One hundred years ago this month, the 18th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was ratified, prohibiting the production, transport and sale of "intoxicating liquors.” It cleared the way for the Volstead Act, which declared that liquor, wine and beer all qualified as intoxicating liquors.

Prohibition – the first War on Drugs -- was on.

The U.S. government has never been above abusing its citizens in the name of fighting drug wars. Then, like now, government efforts to legislate the human condition were a losing, deadly battle. In today’s war against opioid addiction, it is patients on the receiving end. A century ago it was drinkers.

Alcohol deaths only increased during Prohibition, as Deborah Blum recounts in her 2010 book, “The Poisoner’s Handbook.”

Policymakers believed poisoning the alcohol supply was an acceptable way to stop people from drinking. Methanol was added to industrial alcohol to make it unfit for human consumption, but bootleggers found ways to distill the poisoned alcohol to make it drinkable.

The government responded by adding even more toxic chemicals, like gasoline and kerosene. And bootleggers kept stealing the increasingly dangerous alcohol and turning it into liquor.

At the start of Prohibition, New York City’s Bellevue Hospital treated about twelve annual cases of moonshine and wood alcohol poisoning. About a fourth of those were fatal. By 1926, the hospital treated 716 people for blindness and paralysis due to poisoned alcohol. The holiday season that year was especially deadly. On Christmas Day alone, 60 people were treated at Bellevue for alcohol poisoning and eight died from it. By New Year’s Day 1927, 41 people were dead.

Prohibition-era statistics are notoriously unreliable, but according to some estimates over 10,000 Americans died during Prohibition from the effects of drinking poisoned liquor, courtesy of both government and organized crime chemists. Many more were blinded. Prohibition’s attempt to foster temperance instead fostered intemperance, along with violence and crime. The solution the government had concocted to address alcohol abuse had made the problem worse.

Act of Betrayal

“There is no Prohibition,” New York City medical examiner Charles Norris said in an angry report about the alcohol deaths. “All the people who drank before Prohibition are drinking now — provided they’re still alive.”

Norris and his staff considered the government’s deliberate poisoning of alcohol an “act of betrayal.” They weren’t accustomed to having their national government adopt a policy known to kill people.

Policymakers in the 21st century have few such qualms about the opioid crisis. Nor does the media, which continues to parrot the government’s blatantly misleading propaganda, blaming illicit fentanyl and heroin deaths on prescription opioids. Just as thousands died from alcohol poisoning during Prohibition, opioid hysteria has had horrible consequences for millions of patients doomed to suffer torturous pain because of irresponsible journalism and the policy blunders it enables.

Many of the nation’s largest Prohibition-era newspapers, however, didn’t hesitate to condemn a government policy “gone haywire.”

“Prohibition in this area is a complete failure,” the New York Herald Tribune’s editorial page declared, “enforcement a travesty, the public a victim of poisonous liquor.” The Evening World said no administration had been more successful in “undermining the health of its own people,” while The St. Paul Pioneer Press called the government an “accessory to murder.”

Perhaps the Chicago Tribune stated it best: “It is only in the curious fanaticism of Prohibition that any means, however barbarous, are considered justified.”

It’s a sentiment that applies just as aptly to today’s epidemic of opioid hysteria.

Íris Erlingsdóttir is an Icelandic journalist and writer who lives in Minnesota. Iris has a rare, untreatable arthritic condition that causes severe pain and progressive destruction of the joints. She became an advocate for pain patients’ rights after being denied continued opioid pain medication.

January 19, 2019

How Hollywood Romanticizes Addiction

January 19, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Lynn Webster, MD, Guest Columnist

We all love good storytelling. Cinema can mirror the real world or create a universe of its own. Movies can transport us to another world, beyond ordinary consciousness and emotions. They can be an agent for positive cultural change, or they can spread false narratives that are largely adopted by society. They can help solve our problems, or they can exacerbate them.

Two films that were released this past year -- "Ben Is Back" and "Beautiful Boy" -- are examples of movies that tell heart-wrenching stories, but fail to provide solutions. Instead, they reinforce unhelpful narratives that we glean from the news media and politicians.

Both are mainstream films with wide distribution and built-in audiences due to their talented casts and subject matter. They both tackle a theme that often works well for Hollywood: a child in life-threatening danger.

Each of these films focuses on the drama of a troubled young person who struggles with addiction. In both cases, the addiction creates a tragedy that feeds a romantic thread.

As a frequent film goer, I appreciate both movies' artistic delivery. However, their messages don’t necessarily reflect the realities of addiction in America. The movies perpetuate stereotypes and demonstrate that the color (pun intended) of addiction matters.

Through both of these films, Hollywood provides viewers with romantic views of addiction that are played out as love stories between parents and their children.

Josephine Livingstone, culture staff writer at The New Republic, recently wrote, “To make a movie about drugs almost guarantees that you romanticize them, because otherwise there would be no narrative at all -- just long nights, empty bank accounts, and a feeling like cold hunger.”

"Ben is Back" stars Julie Roberts as the loving but frightened mother and Lucas Hedges (Ben) as a young man in an upper middle-class white family.

Ben is polite and likeable. His only apparent flaws are the behaviors associated with his addiction to opioids. The audience is primed to wonder how this could happen to an All-American boy. This young man and his family surely couldn't be responsible for the problem.

The film poignantly blames a senile physician for initiating the boy’s addiction years earlier by prescribing Ben an opioid following a painful injury. The doctor is portrayed as the villain who pushes Ben toward a path of destruction.

This works because the characters in "Ben Is Back" are of the same demographic and ethnicity as most of the viewers who would watch the movie. The film reinforces the clichés the audience has come to believe about addiction and its etiology.

History tells us that poor inner-city minority members, by contrast, are usually blamed for their addictions. If the film starred a black or brown young man, the plot would have likely focused on the criminal activity and character flaws of the drug abuser.

Julia Roberts told USA Today that she was able to relate to the problem of watching a family member suffer from addiction because, in real life, her older brother had suffered from the disease. However, Roberts acknowledges, "The position of the mother in this film is very different from a sister," reinforcing the parent/child love theme.

The other film, "Beautiful Boy," is based on a true story. In contrast to "Ben Is Back," the movie is about a relationship between a father and his son. Steve Carell and Timothée Chalamet (Nic) play the father and son. As Rolling Stone says, "It’s the two leads who, thanks to their astonishing, ripped-from-the-guts performances, make this movie a standout."

Nic has a great relationship with his father. The father introduces his son to marijuana, which the movie inaccurately suggests is the seed to Nic's eventual use of methamphetamine.

The story is told from the father's point of view. The father blames himself because he buys into the myth that marijuana is a gateway drug. Unfortunately, many movie goers probably also inaccurately believe that using marijuana could lead to meth addiction.

Meth is not an opioid. However, the story line is similar to that of "Ben Is Back." Nic is a good white kid from a loving home, but he, too, is caught in a web of addiction.

While Nic's story is emotionally riveting, we know that he lives a privileged life. Like Ben, Nic is a sympathetic character.

These two movies blame outside causes for addiction. The movies fail to explore the real motivators to using drugs. Both characters acknowledge, in a discreet and almost offhand way, that they use drugs to feel alive. This subtlety is a huge statement. It describes the reason for their drug use that most viewers probably miss.

Why should these two movies matter so much to us?

These films may be entertaining, but they fail to tell the true story of addiction. Addiction is not sentimental. It is a tragedy, regardless of color. There are no tidy endings in real life. Propagating misleading narratives about addiction has made it more difficult for people in pain to be treated.

If Hollywood producers are going to make films about addiction that don’t feed false narratives, they will have to stop romanticizing addiction.

January 18, 2019

How to Check Out a Charity Before You Donate

January 18, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Stefanie Lee Berardi, Guest Columnist

Many of us have been following PNN’s reporting on the misuse of donated funds by the former CEO of the U.S. Pain Foundation. Paul Gileno allegedly misappropriated about $2 million for his own personal use from the non-profit from 2015 to 2017.

The acting CEO and chair of U.S. Pain’s board of directors has admitted that a lack of financial oversight enabled Gileno to commit his misdeeds. Nicole Hemmenway says the board has instituted “a robust system of checks and balances” to make sure it doesn’t happen again.

As the story continues to unfold, U.S. Pain has attempted to refocus the public’s view of this fraudulent activity by claiming that 2018 was “its most successful year of programs and services,” while also indicating that additional financial irregularities may be reported on its 2018 tax return.

Arguably, their claim of success does not comport with the facts and does not enumerate the numerous failings of the board and senior staff that enabled the fraud to continue for years. Until there is full disclosure of what happened and people are held accountable, the public cannot be sure that U.S. Pain’s resources are being utilized effectively going forward.

Choosing to support a non-profit organization is an investment. And those of us who give our limited time and money to a charity must protect that investment by learning all that we can about what the organization does, what senior staff they employ, where they get their money and how they spend it.

It is not always easy to find reliable information about a non-profit, but if you know where to look, a short online search can give you a wealth of information. Here are some tips that donors and volunteers may want to explore.

Search Their Website

Consider an organization’s website as the front door to its operations and core mission. A disease-related organization’s mission, for example, might be to provide support for those affected, education about the disease, and research to find a cure.

An organization must be accountable and transparent to its investors. Their website should provide an annual report of its accomplishments from the previous year and goals for the next. You will need to review several annual reports to evaluate if the organization is making progress on the previous years’ goals.

Look at Their Tax Returns

Examine the organization’s tax returns to learn about how they operate, where they get their funding, and what proportion of their money is spent on programs that actually help people versus overhead costs like administration, salaries and fundraising.

There are a few exceptions, but most non-profit organizations’ tax returns are public information, meaning anyone can inspect them. When you compare two or three years of the organization’s tax returns, you can get a sense of the organization’s financial stability over time.

I find ProPublica to be the easiest place to find these documents. You can also search an IRS database to see if an organization’s tax-exempt status is in good standing. If a non-profit misses a tax return filing deadline, as was the case with U.S. Pain, that could be a sign of trouble.

Identify Their Funding Sources

In order for a non-profit to remain financially healthy and compliant with IRS regulations, it must seek funding from different types of revenue streams, such as grants and corporate or individual donations. For example, an organization may accept donations from pharmaceutical companies or charge membership dues or fees to attend their events.

Investors need to know where the organization gets its money. If the organization is growing and thriving, you will see a steady increase in the money they bring in (revenue); the money they spend (expenses) will remain proportional to their revenue; and their bottom line (net assets) will remain stable from year to year.

Learn Where They Are Spending Their Money

There are well-established benchmarks for how much of a non-profit’s budget should be spent on programs versus administration and fundraising. Organizations should be spending at least 75% of their revenue on programs that raise awareness or directly benefit a cause and less than 25% of their revenue on overhead.

As a reference, Charity Navigator publishes an annual report on CEO pay that finds mid-sized non-profits pay their CEO’s in the low $100,000’s. And the Better Business Bureau’s accountability standards indicate that fundraising expenses should not exceed 10 to 25 cents of every dollar raised.

As an investor, we want to see these figures as low as possible and to ensure they are aligned with organizations of similar size and type.

Engage with a Non-Profit at All Levels

If an organization is worthy of receiving your financial support, it should also be worthy of receiving your time and talent. Volunteering for the organization is an important way for you to increase the value of your investment. Most non-profits depend on volunteers to help them run programs, raise funds and promote awareness.

When you find the right organization, consider pledging a monthly, rather than a one-time annual donation. Large foundations that offer grants to non-profits want to see repeat donations because it is an indication of a healthy, growing organization that is capable of using their grant money effectively. Staying involved with an organization helps ensure your investment is used to its fullest potential.

There is simply too little time and money to waste on an organization that lacks oversight and is not using its resources effectively. Many of us have made donations to organizations simply because they asked and believed they were doing good things. In the future, we must raise that benchmark.

When nonprofit organizations solicit for financial support, they are in a position of public trust. That money is not theirs to misuse and they should be held accountable if they lose that trust.

Each of us has the responsibility to learn everything we can about an organization before we offer our time, talent and money. We must advocate for each other and contribute to the body of knowledge about the organizations that we support.

Stefanie Lee Berardi worked as an advancement and communications professional, grant writer and principal investigator of several multi-agency grant programs at Illinois State University. She has a graduate degree specializing in the management and administration of non-profit organizations.

Stefanie is an avid volunteer in her local community and has volunteered for organizations supporting individuals with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, a disease she developed in 2008.

January 17, 2019

Climbing Mountains Together

January 17, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Mia Maysack, PNN Columnist

Just about every time I'm in the bathtub, I contemplate slipping my head under water for a tad bit too long. I do not consider myself suicidal, nor do I really want to die in the literal sense. But sometimes I reach a point when I'd do almost anything to kill this pain.

Current situation: At least 30 cluster headache attacks thus far this week. Constant migraine going strong for about two weeks. Ongoing fibromyalgia flares. Working to pass kidney stones induced by stress and dehydration. Nausea, dizziness, fatigue and exhaustion have latched onto my soul like draining parasites. None of my go-to treatments have eased any of the discomfort.

Despite my own battles, I consistently make myself available to others in the thick of their own private storms. The world needs more light and I can always use a distraction from my own body self-destructing. Win/win.

Recently I did what I could to talk a loved one off the ledge. This person is also unwell but in a very different way. Their infliction is not physical, but boils down to their own personal choices.

You might imagine the frustration I feel when surrounded by others who could save themselves from drowning simply by standing up.

All the while, I've been standing strong for years but consistently get swept away by overwhelming undercurrents that are entirely out of my control.

It can be difficult to encourage others to live when you're barely hanging onto a shred of hope for yourself. But I consider myself honored for the opportunity to try.

I cannot keep track of how many times I've had to “die" in a figurative sense so that I could grieve the losses of countless aspirations, ideas, goals and dreams. I've always been known as a positive person and that's most definitely who I am. It is not an act, but people tend to think it’s easy for me and they couldn't be more wrong.

It takes absolutely everything I have to lay my head down at night, knowing I'll awaken to the same demons I spent the previous day slaying. And that it'll likely remain this way, forever.

My positivity began out of necessity and is a method of survival. Relentless pain every single day for 20 years straight is enough for anyone to question their sanity or possibly even lose it. As a matter of fact, we're currently mourning the medically assisted suicide of a fellow Pain Warrior, who endured similar pain for the same amount of time.

I felt the need to write this so that others do not think they are crazy. Under our circumstances, it's understandable we might fantasize about no longer feeling this way. The mantras, positive quotes and clichés can only get us so far, and it can be downright devastating to not have adequate support, acknowledgment, validation or pain relief.

I also had to write this because I want to convey that you are all the main reason why I still hold on. Knowing there's a community of others who truly get it, provides me with a purpose and reason to get myself out of bed in the morning.

It has become my mission to demonstrate that these mountains of misfortune aren't meant to be carried, but they can be climbed. They might even be moved if we all work together.

No one can give us quality of life or the will to live outside of ourselves, but we can lean on one another during our deepest and darkest moments of despair. It's okay to have bad days, to be in a negative headspace, to question the purpose of all this, to feel angry, hurt or sad.

As I envision the water calming my ailments and swirling its way down the drain, I think about the possibility of someone reading this at a time they needed it most. That thought gives me the strength I need.

January 16, 2019

National Safety Council's Misleading Report on Opioids

January 16, 2019/ Pat Anson

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

This week the National Safety Council released a report claiming that “for the first time on record, your odds of dying from an accidental opioid overdose are greater than dying in a motor vehicle crash.”

Media outlets from The New York Times to NPR were quick to repeat that claim.

“The opioid crisis in the United States has become so grim that Americans are now likelier to die of an overdose than in a vehicle crash,” The Times reported.

This is incorrect. The average American is vastly more likely to die in a car crash than of an opioid overdose. The reason is simple: the typical American does not have any opioids to overdose on.

Good practice in epidemiology and public health research is to look at the “population at risk.” This population represents those people who would be counted if they are affected by whatever risk is being studied.

The population at risk for opioid overdose consists of people exposed to opioids, intentionally or otherwise. Within this population are people with varying degrees of risk, from low-risk in the form of a single dose of opioid medication in a hospital to high-risk in the form of heroin injection.

By contrast, the population at risk for car crash death is people who are exposed to car rides, whether as drivers or passengers. Needless to say, this is a very broad population that includes most Americans.

These two populations are not the same. There is some overlap between the two, but that does not mean they can be lumped together for the purpose of a generalized conclusion. Instead, epidemiological investigations look at a target population, that is to say the group of people about which conclusions will be drawn.

Again, these are distinct populations. The target population for reducing car crash fatalities is not the same as the target population for reducing opioid overdose fatalities.

As a result, a general comparison between the odds of dying of an opioid overdose versus a car crash is not statistically meaningful. Moreover, such comparisons misconstrue risk management and may lead to poor allocation of resources.

For instance, in 2017 there were 2,008 fatal overdoses with Benadryl and 1,250 with tramadol, according to the CDC. But this does not mean that Benadryl is more dangerous than tramadol. Far more people use Benadryl than tramadol, and usually without a prescription or monitoring. Ranking one as inherently more dangerous than the other would not lead to good public health policy.

Further, the risk of opioid overdose rises when people use other substances like alcohol, benzodiazepines or cocaine. Similarly, the risk of fatal car crashes rises when driving under the influence or other risky driving behaviors are involved. Because most people do not do these things, they are at the low end of the range of risk in the population at risk.

State laws like California’s AB 2760 requiring naloxone co-prescribing may help reduce opioid overdoses, but only if they reach people at greater risk. And resources committed to people at low risk may be taking resources away from people at high risk.

So although the National Safety Council’s report may be technically accurate, it is flawed and misleading. Most people are much more likely to die in a car crash because they are exposed to that risk on a regular basis. Only a small number of people are more likely to die of an opioid overdose, and risk reduction strategies need to be directed to them.

The NSC is a nonprofit that promotes itself as a "data-driven organization," but this is not the first time it has provided misleading information about opioids. As PNN has reported, an NSC memorial to opioid victims that toured the country last year overestimated the number of Americans who overdosed on prescription opioids by about 25 percent.

Good public health policy involves assessing the relative risks for the population at risk and adopting effective harm reduction policies. Sweeping statements that confuse a population at risk with the population at large can only lead to bad policies. And we’ve seen enough of those.

Latest Stories