Fighting to Survive Suicidal Thoughts

By Crystal Lindell, Columnist

(Author's note: A year ago today, on May 17, 2016, I almost killed myself. It was such a traumatic experience that I have marked the 17th of each month since then, and last night, I counted down the minutes until midnight as though I was counting down until my birthday. I had finally made it a year.

I wrote the following while I was in the darkest part of it — just days after everything happened. I never shared it publically, because I was worried about how it would be received, and I did not feel comfortable telling people about something I felt like I was still working so hard to overcome.

But take heart. I am still alive. And I have gotten lots of medical help since then, and lots of love from my family and friends. There are good days and bad days and very bad days, but they are my days because I am still here.

I hope my words will help you know that it is possible to fight the good fight against depression and anxiety, and that doing so does not mean you are weak — it means you a strong. For anyone currently battling mental health issues, you have all my love. Don’t kill yourself. We need you.)

How do you get over a broken heart?

More importantly, how do you get over a broken heart when you’re having a bad reaction to your new anti-anxiety medication, BuSpar (buspirone), and it’s causing the cruelest of all side effects — increased anxiety and suicidal ideation?

How are you supposed to endure that when you’re barely standing upright in the bathroom stall at work, as your swollen eyes cry for an hour straight, and then another hour after that?

When your suddenly weak wrists are bracing your hands against the blue walls in the stall, because if they weren’t, then your legs wouldn’t be able to hold you up?

I’m actually asking. I really want to know. How do you get over that?

If you’re wondering what medication-induced suicidal ideation feels like, I will tell you. It feels like you’re planning how to kill yourself, and your brain is spinning, and you hear this voice in your head screaming, JUST DO IT. LITERALLY NOBODY WILL EVEN CARE.

It feels like the blue dress you’re wearing is suffocating you, and you just want to take all the medication in your purse, and lock the stall and die.

It feels like the pain of being alive is actually worse than death. It feels like the pain will never cease. And it feels like the only real choice you have is to kill yourself.

It feels like the hours are seconds, and at the same time, every second is an eternity.

But still, deep inside, in your soul, you hear a whisper. A piece of your heart you forgot existed, trying as hard as it can to remind you of the light. You hear the faint, barely audible voice of a little piece of yourself trying to fight it. Trying, with all its strength to remind you that maybe, just maybe there’s a couple reasons you shouldn’t kill yourself.

It’s the voice that you spent your whole life nurturing in case of emergency. Specifically, this emergency. The voice you spent years building up so that when the world is exploding it can remind you where the fire extinguisher is. And you never really think you’ll need that voice. You never really think that your life will depend on that voice.

But suddenly, there you are, suffocating in a blue dress and expensive mascara is dripping down your face, and you’re doing the math on how many meds you have in your purse, and whether or not it will be enough to kill you. And out of the blue, you need that little voice to survive.

Maybe it’s God. Maybe it’s the years of love from everyone I’ve ever known. Maybe it’s the universe. Maybe it’s all three. 

It took me three days of waging war on screaming suicidal thoughts before I realized that all of this was likely a severe reaction to BuSpar, my anti-anxiety medication. I should have called my psychologist right away. And I should have gone to the ER.

But the suicidal thoughts were too loud, too overwhelming, and all the little voice in my soul could manage was continually convincing me to give it a couple minutes before I did anything too drastic. And then the minutes turned to hours, and the hours to days, and here I am, still alive.

I’m off the medication. My heart is still broken. And I’m not sure I can bear the weight of that blue dress ever again.

But I’m alive. Today, I am alive.

Crystal Lindell is a journalist who lives in Illinois. She loves Taco Bell, watching "Burn Notice" episodes on Netflix and Snicker's Bites. She has had intercostal neuralgia since 2013.

Crystal writes about it on her blog, “The Only Certainty is Bad Grammar.”

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.

New Warning About Arthroscopic Knee Surgery

By Pat Anson, Editor

Yet another study is warning against arthroscopic knee surgery, a common orthopedic procedure performed worldwide over two million times a year and at a cost of $3 billion in the U.S. alone.

An international panel of surgeons, physical therapists and clinicians reviewed 25 studies involving nearly two million patients and concluded that arthroscopic knee surgery does not improve long term pain or function in patients with degenerative knee conditions such as osteoarthritis.

Some patients may feel a small amount of pain relief three months after surgery, but the panel said the benefit was usually not sustained after one year.

“We make a strong recommendation against the use of arthroscopy in nearly all patients with degenerative knee disease, based on linked systematic reviews; further research is unlikely to alter this recommendation,” the panel reported in the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

The one exception raised by the review is for people with mechanical locking or clicking symptoms in their knee, which is often caused by meniscal tears in the cartilage of the knee joint.

Knee arthroscopies are a type of “keyhole” surgery in which the surgeon makes a small incision in the knee and inserts a tiny camera and instruments to diagnose and repair damaged ligaments or torn meniscus. Risks associated with arthroscopic knee surgery, although rare, include deep vein thrombosis (DVT), infection, pulmonary embolism, and death.

Over the past decade, the number of arthroscopic knee surgeries have soared in many Western countries where the population is aging. About 25 percent of people older than 50 experience  pain from degenerative knee disease.

SOURCE: THE BMJ

Over the past decade, the number of arthroscopic knee surgeries have soared in many Western countries where the population is aging. About 25 percent of people older than 50 experience  pain from degenerative knee disease.

Previous studies in The BMJ found the benefits of knee surgery “inconsequential” and said the procedure was “not an economically attractive treatment option” compared to physical therapy, exercise and pain medication.

The studies are part of The BMJ's “Too Much Medicine” campaign, which highlights the waste of resources and potential harm caused by unnecessary medical care.

A 2014 report by a German health organization also found that arthroscopic knee surgery provides no benefit to patients with osteoarthritis, and does not relieve pain any better than physical therapy or over-the-counter pain medications. The same conclusion was reached by a large study in Australia.

The American Medical Society for Sports Medicine (AMSSM) lists arthroscopic knee surgery as one of five procedures that are not always necessary in the Choosing Wisely campaign. The AMSSM advises physicians to avoid recommending knee arthroscopy as a treatment for patients with degenerative meniscal tears.

Depending on insurance, hospital charges and the surgeon, arthroscopic knee surgery costs about $4,000.

Are Abuse Deterrent Opioids Working?

By Pat Anson, Editor

In 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration put drug makers on notice that they should speed up the development of abuse deterrent formulas for opioid pain medication.

“(The) abuse and misuse of these products have resulted in too many injuries and deaths across the United States,” Douglas Throckmorton, MD, a top FDA official said at the time. “An important step towards the goal of creating safer opioids is the development of products that are specifically formulated to deter abuse.”

Acting on the FDA's guidance, pharmaceutical companies have spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing abuse deterrent formulas (ADFs) that make opioid medications harder for addicts to chew, crush, snort or inject. Several new opioids with ADF formulas have been approved by the FDA and more are still in the pipeline.

Was it worth the investment? Not according to a new study funded by insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and some drug makers.

The Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER), a non-profit that recommends which medications should be covered by insurance and at what price, released a Draft Evidence Report  earlier this month that questions the effectiveness of ADF opioids, giving them a middling grade of C+ when it comes to preventing abuse.

“Without stronger real-world evidence that ADFs reduce the risk of abuse and addiction among newly prescribed patients, our judgment is that the evidence can only demonstrate a ‘comparable or better’ net health benefit (C+),” the ICER report states.

ICER also gave a lukewarm review to OxyContin, the painkiller that was reformulated by Purdue Pharma in 2010 after widespread reports that it was being abused and causing addiction.   

“Evidence on the impact of reformulated OxyContin on opioid abuse is mixed. The majority of time series studies found that after the abuse-deterrent formulation of OxyContin was introduced, there was a decline in the rate of OxyContin abuse,” the ICER report states. “However, the rate of abuse of other prescription opioids (ER oxymorphone, ER morphine, IR oxycodone) and heroin abuse may have increased during the same period.

“Furthermore, findings from direct interviews with recreational users showed that reformulated OxyContin may have limited impact on changing overall abuse patterns.”

Purdue objects to ICER’s analysis – citing another study that found reformulated OxyContin prevented 7,200 cases of abuse and $200 million in additional medical costs.

“ICER missed the opportunity to fairly evaluate the impact of these innovative technologies, recognized by the FDA, DEA, NIDA (National Institute of Drug Abuse) and other policy makers as an important component of addressing the opioid crisis,” the company said in a statement.

Purdue and other ADF makers are troubled by the ICER report because it gives cover to insurers who are already reluctant to pay for branded ADF opioids like OxyContin when generic opioids without abuse deterrent formulas are much cheaper.  According to one study, OxyContin was covered by only 33% of Medicare Part D plans in 2015. Many insurers create more hoops for patients and doctors to jump through by requiring that prior authorization be given before an OxyContin prescription is filled.  

ICER estimates the average annual cost of an ADF opioid (90mg MED) prescription at $4,234, nearly twice that of a non-ADF opioid ($2,124).  If all opioid medication was made with ADFs, ICER says the additional cost to patients and insurers would be $645 million over five years.

Are ADFs worth it, given their mixed record in preventing abuse and addiction?

According to startling cost-benefit analysis devised by ICER, preventing a single case of opioid abuse with ADFs costs $165,868. The same analysis found that preventing just one overdose death with ADFs would cost $977,119,566 – almost a billion dollars.

Survey Shows Addicts Abusing ADF Opioids

A new report from RADARS, a national drug abuse tracking system, would seem to support ICER’s analysis that ADFs are not making a significant impact on abuse. A survey of 1,775 addicts about to enter treatment in early 2017 found that ADF opioids were still being chewed, snorted, injected and smoked, but at rates "slightly lower" than those of non-ADF opioids.

SOURCE: RESEARCHED ABUSE, DIVERSION AND ADDICTION-RELATED SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (RADARS) 

“The majority of individuals who abused an ER (extended release) opioid abused an ADF opioid (58.6%), but the proportion of respondents who reported abuse via tampering was slightly lower for ADF opioids than ER opioids as a whole. Among individuals entering treatment, abuse of prescription opioids by chewing, snorting, or injecting is prevalent with oral solid dosage formulations of both IR (immediate release) and ER opioids,” the RADARS report said.

Lost in the debate over the cost and effectiveness of ADF’s is the decreasing role played by prescriptions opioids in the nation’s overdose epidemic. As PNN has reported, prescriptions for hydrocodone and other painkillers have been declining for years, yet drug overdoses continue to continue climb; fueled by heroin, illicit fentanyl and other illegal drugs, for which there are no abuse deterrent formulas other than abstinence and sobriety.

Hormone Changes Trigger Migraines in Girls

By Pat Anson, Editor

Changes in female hormones may trigger migraines in adolescent girls, but the frequency and severity of headaches depends on a girl's age and stage of puberty, according to a new study.

Researchers at the University of Cincinnati's College of Medicine and Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center evaluated 34 girls between the ages of 8 and 17 who suffered from migraine.

They found that higher levels of the hormone progesterone were associated with fewer headaches in older teenagers, while lower levels of the hormone resulted in more headaches. In younger girls, the opposite appears to be true.

The findings are published online in Cephalalgia, the journal of the International Headache Society.

"Ours is the first study to show that migraine headaches might also be influenced by female hormones in girls with migraine," says Vincent Martin, MD, a professor and co-director of the Headache and Facial Pain Center at the University of Cincinnati’s Gardner Neuroscience Institute.

"While low and declining estrogen levels are thought to precipitate migraine in adult women, we found that progesterone (appeared) to be the most important trigger factor in these young girls. However, this effect seemed to differ depending on the age of the girls and their pubertal development."

Migraine affects about three times as many women as men. In addition to headache pain and nausea, migraine can cause vomiting, blurriness or visual disturbances, and sensitivity to light and sound.  

About 10 percent of school age children in the U.S. suffer from migraine, according to the Migraine Research Foundation (MRF). As adolescence approaches, the incidence of migraine increases rapidly in girls and by age 17 about 23 percent of girls have experienced migraine.

About two thirds of adult women will develop "menstrual migraine" -- migraine attacks that occur shortly before or during menstrual bleeding. Low and declining levels of estrogen are thought to trigger menstrual migraines. Prior to this new study the contribution of female hormones to migraine was unknown in girls and at what age they begin.

"There is a dramatic change in the way that female hormones affect migraine that occurs during puberty," said Martin. "Prior to puberty, progesterone has little effect on migraine, but after puberty high progesterone levels are associated with fewer headaches and low progesterone levels have more headache."

Girls aged 16 to 17 in the study had a 42 percent chance of having a headache when their progesterone levels were low, but when levels of the hormone were high the chance of headache dropped to 24 percent.

In the 8 to 11 age group, there was 15 percent chance of suffering from migraine or headache when levels of progesterone were low, but a 20 percent chance when high levels of progesterone

"Our study suggests that female hormones play an important role in triggering headaches in young girls and that their response to hormones seems to change at the time of puberty," says Martin. "Since migraine commonly begins during puberty in girls one might ask whether a change in response to hormones might represent the initiating factor for migraine in some girls -- kind of like the ‘big bang’ theory of migraine."

Researchers Warn Against Opioid Backlash

By Pat Anson, Editor

The backlash against opioid medication has gone too far and is depriving chronic pain patients of a treatment many have used successfully for years, according to a commentary published in a prominent medical journal. The article also questions the use of the term “opioid epidemic” in describing the nation’s festering drug problem.

“The movement to virtually eliminate opioids as an option for chronic pain refractory to other treatments is an overreaction,” wrote Kurt Kroenke, MD, and co-author Andrea Cheville, MD, in JAMA. “Many patients currently receiving long-term opioids were started when opioids were still considered a viable treatment option and if satisfied with their pain control and using their medications appropriately should not be unilaterally compelled to wean off opioids.”

Kroenke is a research scientist at the Regenstrief Institute and a professor at the Indiana University School of Medicine. Cheville is a professor and chair of research in the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at the Mayo Clinic. She was recently elected to the National Academy of Medicine.

Kroenke and Cheville say many of the medications recommended as safer alternatives to opioids, such as acetaminophen and NSAIDs, provide little pain relief and have risky side effects. Others, such as pregabalin, gabapentin and antidepressants, may work for some pain disorders but have little benefit for others.

“Many patients respond better to one analgesic than another, just as patients with other medical conditions have differential medication responses,” they wrote. “Given the small analgesic effect on average of most pain drugs, the few classes of analgesic options, and the frequent need for combination therapy, eliminating any class of analgesics from the current menu is undesirable.”

Kroenke and Cheville say only a small minority of pain patients who start using opioids go on to use them long-term, yet medical literature and the mass media are filled with references to the so-called “opioid epidemic.”

“Excessive use of phrases like opioid epidemic should be avoided. An epidemic generally suggests a disease that is widespread and usually highly contagious rather than limited to a minority of those exposed,” they said. “Most patients receiving an initial opioid prescription do not proceed to chronic use and among the subset that do use long-term opioids, the majority neither misuse nor experience an overdose.

“An unintended consequence of excessive concerns raised about opioids could be an increasing reluctance among clinicians to prescribe even small amounts of opioids for a limited time for acute pain, including for patients discharged from the emergency department, those who are recuperating from surgical procedures, or persons with severe dental pain.”

A bill recently introduced in Congress would strictly limit opioids to just 7 days for acute pain, a prescription that could not be renewed. Maine, New Jersey, Ohio and several other states are adopting similar measures to limit opioid prescribing.

Kroenke and Cheville say few long-term studies have been conducted on the safety and effectiveness of any pain medications, and more research is needed on alternative therapies like cognitive behavioral therapy and medical marijuana before opioids are abandoned as a treatment option.

“Clinicians must be careful of replacing the opioid epidemic with a marijuana epidemic,” they warned. “Imperfect treatments do not justify therapeutic nihilism. A broad menu of partially effective treatment options maximizes the chances of achieving at least partial amelioration of chronic pain.”

Lyrica and Neurontin Linked to Opioid Overdoses

By Pat Anson, Editor

British researchers say two drugs commonly prescribed as alternatives for opioid pain medication are linked to a rising number of heroin overdose deaths in England and Wales.

Pregabalin and gabapentin belong to a class of nerve medications known as gabapentoids. They were originally developed to treat epileptic seizures, but are increasingly prescribed to treat neuropathy, fibromyalgia and other chronic pain conditions. The drugs are sold by Pfizer under the brand names Lyrica (pregabalin) and Neurontin (gabapentin).

Researchers at the University of Bristol reported in the journal Addiction that opioid overdose deaths in England and Wales involving gabapentoids increased from less than one per year prior to 2009 to 137 deaths in 2015. The increase coincided with a surge in pregabalin and gabapentin prescribing in Wales and England, from one million prescriptions in 2004 to over 10 million in 2015.   

Researchers say the increased prescribing has made the drugs easier to obtain and abuse, and addicts have found they enhance the effects of heroin. Experiments on laboratory mice found that pregabalin slows respiratory depression, increasing the risk of an opioid overdose.

"It is important that doctors and people dependent on opioids are aware that the number of overdose deaths involving the combination of opioids with gabapentin or pregabalin has increased substantially and that there is evidence now that their concomitant use - either through co-prescription or diversion of prescriptions - increases the risk of acute overdose deaths,” said Matthew Hickman, a Professor of Public Health and Epidemiology in the University of Bristol's School of Social and Community Medicine.

The idea that Lyrica and Neurontin are being abused may be surprising to many patients and doctors, but the drugs are increasingly being used by addicts. In a small 2016 study of urine samples from patients being treated at pain clinics and addiction treatment centers, over one in five patients were found to be taking gabapentin without a prescription.

“The high rate of misuse of this medication is surprising and it is also a wakeup call for prescribers. Doctors don’t usually screen for gabapentin abuse,” said Poluru Reddy, PhD, medical director of ARIA Diagnostics in Indianapolis. “These findings reveal that there is a growing risk of abuse and a need for more robust testing.”

High Risk of Abuse in Prisons

Gabapentin and pregabalin are also being abused by inmates. Jeffrey Keller, MD, chief medical officer of Centurion, a private correctional company, says both drugs have a high abuse potential.  

“Gabapentin is the single biggest problem drug of abuse in many correctional systems,” Keller recently wrote in Corrections.com. “There is little difference (in my opinion) between Lyrica and gabapentin in both use for neuropathic pain or for abuse potential.”

Why would someone be so desperate to abuse them?

“If you are addicted, or even if you just like to get high once in a while, and you can’t obtain your preferred drugs of abuse because you are incarcerated, these are the drugs that can serve as an alternative in a pinch,” Keller wrote.
“It is critically important for medical professionals in corrections to know which seemingly benign drugs have the potential to be abused and diverted. Even if a particular inmate doesn’t care about getting high himself, he can still profit by selling these drugs to others who are. Vulnerable inmates can be (and are) bullied into obtaining these drugs for distribution.”

Gabapentin is approved by the FDA to treat epilepsy and neuropathic pain caused by shingles. It is also prescribed “off-label” for depression, migraine, fibromyalgia and bipolar disorder. About 64 million prescriptions were written for gabapentin in the U.S. in 2016, a 49% increase since 2011. Gabapentin is not scheduled by the DEA as a controlled substance.

Pregabalin is a Schedule V controlled substance, which means the DEA considers it to have a low abuse potential. Pregabalin is approved by the FDA to treat diabetic nerve pain, fibromyalgia, epilepsy, post-herpetic neuralgia caused by shingles and spinal cord injury. It is also prescribed off label to treat a variety of other conditions. Lyrica is Pfizer’s top selling drug, generates over $5 billion in annual sales, and is approved for use in over 130 countries.

The CDC’s opioid prescribing guidelines recommend both pregabalin and gabapentin as alternatives for opioids, without saying a word about their potential for abuse or side effects.

“Selected anticonvulsants such as pregabalin and gabapentin can improve pain in diabetic neuropathy and post-herpetic neuralgia. Pregabalin, gabapentin, and carbamazepine are FDA-approved for treatment of certain neuropathic pain conditions, and pregabalin is FDA approved for fibromyalgia management,” the guidelines state.

Opioids vs. NSAIDs for Chronic Pain

 By Roger Chriss, Columnist

The latest shot in the debate over opioids versus non-steroidal inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for chronic pain has been fired, with the Minneapolis Star Tribune reporting on a new study that found “patients with chronic pain fared no better with the potentially addictive painkillers than they did with non-opioid meds.”

The research was conducted by Erin Krebs, MD, who is investigating the efficacy of medications for osteoarthritis aspart of a study called the Strategies for Prescribing Analgesics Comparative Effectiveness (SPACE).

(Editor's note: Dr. Krebs appeared in a lecture series on opioid prescribing that was funded by the Steve Rummler Hope Foundation, which is the fiscal sponsor of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an anti-opioid activist group.)

Her research involved 240 veterans who were treated for back, hip and knee pain with either opioids or non-opioids for 12 months. She presented her findings recently at the Minneapolis VA Medical Center and the Society of General Internal Medicine.

"For long-term treatment of chronic back pain and osteoarthritis pain, non-opioid medication therapy is superior to opioid therapy for both pain and side effects,” Dr. Krebs said.

A summary of the SPACE research states that the “findings showed no significant advantage of opioid therapy compared with non-opioid medication therapy.”

Naturally, critics of opioid prescribing weighed in.

“If pain doctors still think these medicines are effective, then they have a lot of explaining to do and their competence and professionalism deserve to be challenged,” said Chris Johnson, MD, who is a board member of PROP as well as the Steve Rummler Hope Foundation.

But the study did not show that opioids were ineffective, only that non-opioids were more effective in this particular study. Thus, pain doctors are justified in claiming they are effective. Of course, so are NSAIDs, but this is not a new or surprise finding. Similar results have been obtained before, though only in shorter-term studies.

Dr. Krebs’ results are an important addition to our understanding of which medications are useful for certain types of pain management. In some cases, NSAIDs may be better than opioids, and in other cases, opioids may be better.

But a response like the one from Dr. Johnson is another example of over-generalization and simplification of a complex medical result, and how anti-opioid activists often spin research findings to fit their agendas.  

It also insults the expertise of physicians like Roger Chou, MD,  a Professor at Oregon Health & Science University’s School of Medicine and one of the lead authors of the CDC guidelines; and Sean Mackey, MD, Chief of the Division of Pain Medicine at Stanford University and immediate past president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine.

In a recent Medscape interview, Dr. Chou said, "I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with maintaining somebody on low doses of opioids, as long as it's doing what it's supposed to in terms of helping their pain and function and not causing harm." 

And in a recent Vox interview, Dr. Mackey said, "The fact is if you go looking, there’s clearly data out there that opioids improve pain. These drugs would have never been approved by the FDA if they didn’t."

More importantly, statements like Dr. Johnson’s ignore the difficult challenges that people with chronic pain conditions face.

"Everything we know about pain is that this is a complex biopsychosocial phenomenon,” said Dr. Chou.

Or as Forest Tennant, MD, put it in Practical Pain Management: “A major point to be made about painful genetic diseases is that pain will almost always worsen as the patient ages.”

Chronic Pain is a Complex Problem

Chronic pain management is thus a long-term endeavor requiring as many tools as possible. What works for one person may be ineffective or even contraindicated in another person. NSAIDs may cause intolerable levels of nausea or gastrointestinal pain, and can be contraindicated in some patients because of kidney disease or bleeding disorders. A major study released this week also found that NSAIDs increase the risk of a heart attack.

The converse also holds. Some people do not tolerate opioids well, have too much brain fog or get constipated. And opioids may be contraindicated in a person with respiratory illness or a history of substance abuse. So having an effective alternative such as NSAIDs is important.

Thus, the “risk profile” of each person must be considered. No medication is perfectly safe. According to the FDA, as many as 20,000 people die from NSAID use every year.

At the same time, opioids have risks. Practical Pain Management reported in 2013 that mortality was higher in patients receiving opioids than other analgesics. The risk of addiction to opioids is well-publicized and makes good headlines, but in chronic pain patients it is less than 5 percent.

The unfortunate reality is that pain management is often a lifelong necessity for people who suffer from chronic pain disorders. Such people don’t have the luxury of ideological debates or moralistic disputes. They need a pain toolkit that is as well-equipped as possible, and they have to deal with medication trade-offs in order to address their medical problems.

Prescribing decisions are best left to experienced physicians who know their patients and the medical conditions they have, and can work with them on the risks and benefits of opioids and NSAIDs.

In reality, there is no “versus” here. Opioids and NSAIDs are both valuable tools for chronic pain management. To pretend that one is inherently better than the other is to miss the essential point: Both work and should be available for use as medically appropriate.

Roger Chriss suffers from 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.

NSAIDs Raise Risk of Heart Attack Within Days

By Pat Anson, Editor

Taking prescription strength non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) raises the risk of a heart attack as soon as the first week of use, according to a large new study published in The BMJ.

An international teams of researchers analyzed data from eight studies involving nearly 450,000 patients in Canada, Finland and Germany -- 61,460 of whom had a heart attack. They found that taking any dose of NSAIDs for one week, one month, or more than a month was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction. Researchers estimated that the overall risk of a heart attack was about 20 to 50% higher when using NSAIDs.

"Given that the onset of risk of acute myocardial infarction occurred in the first week and appeared greatest in the first month of treatment with higher doses, prescribers should consider weighing the risks and benefits of NSAIDs before instituting treatment, particularly for higher doses," wrote lead author Michèle Bally, PhD, an epidemiologist at the University of Montreal Hospital Research Center.

The NSAIDs of particular interest to the researchers were ibuprofen, diclofenac and naproxen, as well as the COX-2 inhibitors celecoxib and rofecoxib. COX-2 inhibitors work differently than traditional NSAIDs, by targeting an enzyme responsible for pain and inflammation.

“All NSAIDs, including naproxen, were found to be associated with an increased risk of acute myocardial infarction. Risk of myocardial infarction with celecoxib was comparable to that of traditional NSAIDS and was lower than for rofecoxib. Risk was greatest during the first month of NSAID use and with higher doses,” Bally wrote.

Several previous studies have also found that NSAIDs and COX- 2 inhibitors raise the risk of a heart attack, but the exact cause is unknown. Researchers at the University of California Davis reported last year that NSAIDs impaired the activity of cardiac cells in rodents.  

NSAIDs are widely used to treat everything from fever and headache to low back pain and arthritis. They are in so many different pain relieving products, including over-the-counter cold and flu products, that health officials believe many consumers may not be aware how often they use NSAIDs. 

In 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ordered that stronger warning labels be put on NSAIDs to indicate they increase the risk of a heart attack or stroke. The warning does not apply to aspirin.

“There is no period of use shown to be without risk,” said Judy Racoosin, MD, deputy director of FDA’s Division of Anesthesia, Analgesia, and Addiction Products. “Everyone may be at risk – even people without an underlying risk for cardiovascular disease.”

The BMJ study was published the day after Canada released new guidelines that recommend NSAIDs as an alternative to opioid pain medication. The Canadian guideline makes no mention of the health risks associated with NSAIDs, but focuses on their “cost effectiveness.”

“NSAID-based treatment may have lower mean costs and higher effectiveness relative to opioids,” the new guideline states. “Naproxen-based regimens in particular may be more cost effective compared to opioids and other NSAIDs, such as ibuprofen and celecoxib.”

Opioid guidelines released last year by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which the Canadian guideline was modeled after, also recommend NSAIDs as an alternative to opioids, but acknowledge the medications “do have risks, including gastrointestinal bleeding or perforation as well as renal and cardiovascular risks.”

Despite those risks, the CDC cited the low cost of NSAIDs and other non-opioid treatments as an “important consideration” for doctors.

“Many pain treatments, including acetaminophen, NSAIDs, tricyclic antidepressants, and massage therapy, are associated with lower mean and median annual costs compared with opioid therapy,” the CDC guideline states.

Don’t Drown in Anxiety Over Healthcare Bill

By Barby Ingle, Columnist  

With everything going on with the American Health Care Act (AHCA), there is a lot of anxiety and stress over possible changes to our health coverage.

There were people who took to social media to start their protests before all of the facts were in. I have yet to read the actual bill and when I reached out to others who were commenting on it -- as if they read it and knew what was in it – well, they have not read it yet either.

So I kept looking and found an interview with House Speaker Paul Ryan, which talked about the biggest concern most of us have – pre-existing conditions. Before the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) became law, people with pre-existing conditions paid several times more than others — if they could afford or be approved for a policy in the first place.

The latest version of the ACHA passed by the House would allow states to seek waivers from existing federal law and create “high risk pools” that would allow insurers to charge more for pre-existing conditions if someone lets their insurance lapse.

To help combat the increased premiums and out-of-pocket costs, GOP Reps. Fred Upton (MI) and Billy Long (MO) crafted a provision to provide $8 billion to states to help fund high risk pools or subsidy programs for people with pre-existing conditions. It would be left to each individual state to decide how to spend the money.

If you have a pre-existing condition, what can you do? First, contact your state legislators and make sure that your health conditions are covered under any pool or subsidy program. It is up to us to raise our voices, share our stories, and demand that our lawmakers remember us and our conditions as they move forward.

Luckily for us, there are many steps to go in this process and we don’t know what the outcome will be. The U.S. Senate still has to vote on the ACHA and is likely to make changes.  It is also important to note that the House version of the ACHA does not spell out what sort of pre-existing conditions insurers may cover if states seek a waiver. In the past, some insurers identified domestic violence, sexual assault, caesarean birth and postpartum depression as grounds for denying coverage or charging higher premiums.

Letting ourselves drown in hearsay, low expectations of the current administration, and sharing information that is not accurate to make a point is not going to fix or change anything. It will only cause us anxiety, stress and energy pennies that as chronically ill patients we don’t have the ability to recover from.

Is it time to act? YES. Is it time to over-react? NO. The water is rising, but it’s only up to our knees and we’re still standing. Before the tide comes in further, make sure you are doing what you can to be heard and in ways that will matter for our pain communities. VOTE, make phone calls, be willing to testify in person if needed, answer calls from the media to discuss how the ACHA will affect you if the conditions you are living with are not covered.

Don’t exaggerate or give false information about a list of pre-existing conditions that won’t be covered. Remember, each state will decide what pre-existing conditions will be included if they get the waiver granted. Instead, bring to light that our healthcare costs are already higher than healthy patients, because we have more doctor visits and treatments, and are paying more in out of pocket costs.

Our options are already limited and we need to have a seat at the table of decision makers. We can get that by being factual and accurate, and by voting for people who will remember our stories.  

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. 

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.

Does Coffee Work Better Than Painkillers?

By Pat Anson, Editor

Insomnia and chronic sleep loss are well known to increase pain sensitivity. But an unusual animal study suggests that stimulants that keep you awake – like a cup of coffee -- may give sleep deprived patients more pain relief than morphine or ibuprofen.

That unexpected finding was reached by researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, who studied pain sensitivity in sleep deprived laboratory mice.

Unlike other sleep studies that force rodents to stay awake walking treadmills or falling off platforms, the researchers deprived the mice of sleep in a way that mimics what happens with people: They entertained them.

"We developed a protocol to chronically sleep-deprive mice in a non-stressful manner, by providing them with toys and activities at the time they were supposed to go to sleep, thereby extending the wake period," says sleep physiologist Chloe Alexandre, PhD.

“This is similar to what most of us do when we stay awake a little bit too much watching late-night TV each weekday."

The mice wore “tiny headsets” to monitor their sleep cycles and sensitivity. Whenever they showed signs of sleepiness, the mice were given toys to keep them alert.

"Mice love nesting, so when they started to get sleepy, we would give them nesting materials like a wipe or cotton ball," says pain physiologist Alban Latremoliere, PhD. "Rodents also like chewing, so we introduced a lot of activities based around chewing, for example, having to chew through something to get to a cotton ball."

The mice were kept awake for as long as 12 hours in one session, or six hours for five consecutive days. Pain sensitivity was measured by exposing the mice to controlled amounts of heat, cold, pressure or capsaicin -- the chemical agent in chili peppers -- and then seeing how long it took the animal to move from or lick away the discomfort.

"We found that five consecutive days of moderate sleep deprivation can significantly exacerbate pain sensitivity over time in otherwise healthy mice," says Alexandre.

Surprisingly, when the mice were given ibuprofen or morphine, the analgesics didn’t seem to reduce their pain sensitivity. But when the rodents were given caffeine or modafinil, a drug used to promote wakefulness, it blocked the pain caused by sleep loss. Researchers think the caffeine and modafinil gave the mice a jolt of dopamine – a “feel good” hormone – that helped alleviate their pain.

"This represents a new kind of analgesic that hadn't been considered before, one that depends on the biological state of the animal," Clifford Woolf, a professor of neurology and co-senior author of the study. "Such drugs could help disrupt the chronic pain cycle, in which pain disrupts sleep, which then promotes pain, which further disrupts sleep."

The study only involved rodents, but researchers were quick to suggest there are lessons to be learned for people. Rather than just taking painkillers, they say pain patients would benefit from better sleep habits or by taking sleep-promoting medications at night.

"Many patients with chronic pain suffer from poor sleep and daytime fatigue, and some pain medications themselves can contribute to these co-morbidities," notes Kiran Maski, MD, a specialist in sleep disorders at Boston Children's. "This study suggests a novel approach to pain management that would be relatively easy to implement in clinical care.”

Canadian Opioid Guideline Modeled After CDC’s

By Pat Anson, Editor

Canada this week is officially adopting new guidelines for the prescribing of opioid pain medication that are very similar to those released by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention a little over a year ago.

And, like the CDC guidelines, there is controversy over the role played by addiction treatment specialists and anti-opioid activists in drafting them.

The Canadian guideline, developed at the National Pain Centre at McMaster University and published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, contains 10 recommendations for treating non-cancer chronic pain, most of them focused on reducing the use of opioid medication.

"Opioids are not first-line treatment for chronic non-cancer pain, and should only be considered after non-opioid therapy has been optimized," said Jason Busse, PhD, lead investigator for the guideline and an associate professor of anesthesia at McMaster University’s School of Medicine.  "There are important risks associated with opioids, such as unintentional overdose, and these risks increase with higher doses."

Nearly 1 in 5 Canadians suffer from chronic pain and Canada has the second highest rate of opioid prescribing in the world. Opioid overdoses are soaring in Canada, as they are in the United States, but increasingly the deaths involve illegal opioids such as heroin and illicit fentanyl, not prescription painkillers.

The new guideline recommends that non-drug therapies, such as exercise and cognitive behavioral therapy, and non-opioid medications such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), be used first in treating patients with chronic pain. It is recommended that opioids only be prescribed if patients do not respond to non-opioid treatments, and only if they do not have a history of substance abuse or a psychiatric disorder.

The guidelines also suggest that initial doses of opioids be limited to no more than 50 mg morphine equivalents daily (MED), and strongly recommend that doses not exceed 90 mg MED. The previous Canadian guideline suggested a ceiling of 200 mg MED. For patients who already exceed 90 mg MED, the guideline recommends the gradual tapering of opioids to the lowest effective dose or to discontinue opioid treatment altogether.

"The opioid epidemic has serious consequences for families and communities across Canada. We are committed to working with our partners to ensure a comprehensive response to this public health crisis, including supporting physicians in improving prescribing practices. I applaud the work that went into updating the prescription opioid guideline, and I urge healthcare professionals to apply the recommendations when prescribing these types of medications," said Jane Philpott, Canada's Minister of Health, in a statement.

A major difference with the CDC guideline, which is intended only for primary care physicians, is that the Canadian version applies to all prescribers, including family physicians, pain specialists and nurse practitioners.

The Canadian guideline was also developed with more transparency than the CDC guideline, which was initially drafted in secret meetings by an unidentified panel of experts.  Leaks later revealed that the panel included several academics and addiction treatment specialists, but only one retired doctor with experience in pain management.

PROP Involved in Canadian Guideline

Four advisory panels involving over 50 clinicians, academics, patients and “safety advocates” helped draft the Canadian guideline. Among them were three board members of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an anti-opioid activist group that played a key role in drafting the CDC guidelines: PROP Vice-President Gary Franklin, MD, Mark Sullivan, MD, and David Juurlink, MD.

Juurlink, an academic toxicologist at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, had an influential role on the Canadian Guideline Steering Committee; while Franklin and Sullivan, both of them Americans affiliated with the University of Washington, served on the Clinical Expert Committee.

Juurlink and Sullivan disclosed their involvement with PROP in their conflict of interest statements, while Franklin did not specifically name the group.

“These guidelines, which appear to be influenced by the extremely flawed and biased guidelines by the CDC in the United States, written by a small group of anti-opiate crusaders with strong ties to a large drug rehab chain, seem to reflect more attention to people with addictions and not people with pain,” said Barry Ulmer, Executive Director of the Chronic Pain Association of Canada, in written comments to the guideline.

PROP's founder and Executive Director, Andrew Kolodny, MD, was until recently chief medical officer of Phoenix House, which runs a chain of addiction treatment facilities in the U.S.

A news release on the guideline produced by McMaster University emphasizes that experts with “diverse views on the role of opioids” participated in drafting them and only those “without important financial or intellectual conflicts of interest” were allowed to vote on the recommendations.

Ulmer says the guidelines should have focused on improving pain education for physicians, which is limited in medical schools in both Canada and the U.S.

“Pain patients feel strongly the authors and policy makers behind these guidelines have missed another golden opportunity to create real change in this area of medicine. They would have impacted pain medicine far more positively if they had used their resources to develop forward thinking educational programs and incorporate them into the curricula in our teaching hospitals,” Ulmer wrote.

“By putting forth guidelines like this, at this time, to influence (or control) a profession that has little education and understanding about chronic pain is myopic and similar to the last attempt at guidelines will simply encourage more physicians to dump pain patients they now have. Or is that the real goal?”

One of the many unintendend consequences of the CDC guidelines in the United States is that pain patients are losing access to treatment. A recent survey of over 3,100 patients by PNN and the International Pain Foundation found that over 60 percent had a hard time or were unable to find a doctor willing to treat their chronic pain. Over 90 percent believe the CDC guidelines have harmed patients and worsened the quality of pain care. 

Although the CDC guidelines are voluntary and only intended for primary care physicians, they are being implemented and treated as mandatory by many prescribers, insurers, and federal and state agencies. Critics worry the same thing could happen in Canada.

“No guideline can account for the unique features of patients and their clinical circumstances, and the new guideline is not meant to replace clinical judgment. Patients, prescribers and other stakeholders, including regulators and insurers, should not view its recommendations as absolute,” wrote Drs. Andrea Furlan of the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, and Owen Williamson of Monash University in Australia, in an editorial published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal.

British Columbia adopted its own mandatory version of the CDC guidelines nearly a year ago, and made them a legally enforceable standard of care for all prescribers. The move has yet to slow the rising tide of drug overdoses in British Columbia, which are now occurring at a rate of four deaths every day. Most of the overdoses are blamed on illicit fentanyl and other street drugs, not prescription opioids.

A Pained Life: Lost in Translation

By Carol Levy, Columnist

Whenever I go to a doctor with a pain related complaint, I am asked the question we all know: “On a scale of 1 to 10, how bad is it?”

I always preface my answer: “Only trigeminal neuralgia is a 10.”

Nevertheless, they persist: “Give me a number. Well, okay, if I have to, I guess a 6.”

What does that mean? To me, it means the pain is pretty bad. Compared to trigeminal neuralgia, nothing can ever reach a 10 (I pray). As such, a 6 is pretty bad.

But to them, a 6 is not all that bad. I get the equivalent of a pat on the head and “take some aspirin or Advil.” Luckily, I am pretty healthy and usually that works. The few times it hasn't, it took a number of appointments, in one case a number of years, before I got a diagnosis and referral to someone who could help me.

On a scale of 1 to 10, who decides what’s qualifies as a 1 or what is a 10?

Each doctor, nurse and practitioner has their own definition in mind. I have yet to hear one say, “Well, I consider stubbing your toe a 2, appendicitis a 6, breaking your leg a 9. Based on that rating, what is your pain level?”

Then at least we'd have some basis for comparison and would be speaking the same language.

Years ago I walked into a neurologist's exam room. The air conditioning was on. It was triggering my trigeminal neuralgia. “Could you turn that down? It is really setting off my pain,” I asked.

The doctor looked at me and practically snarled, “If it was really making your pain bad you would have turned it off yourself.”

No, I wouldn't. I was not raised that way. As a female, as a patient, and as a person who tries to be courteous. It was his office and his air conditioner. It was not my place to just walk over and change the settings.

What we have here is a failure to communicate. He did not ask me, “If it is causing so much pain, why didn't you just turn it off yourself?”

I did not reply to what felt like an attack on me and my truthfulness. And he wrote in his records, “I do not think her pain is as bad as she says.”

We often talk and write about issues of communication.

“Friends, coworkers, and family don't understand my pain.”

“The doctor won't give me the medication I need.”

“He ignores my complaints.”

Maybe the issue is not being ignored or misunderstood. Maybe it is simpler than that.

When I was in high school, we had a Brazilian foreign exchange student live with us. She spoke no English. I spoke no Portuguese. The two of us walked around with a Portuguese-English dictionary. I looked up the English words and spoke the Portuguese equivalent. She looked up the Portuguese words so she could speak to me in English. It was tedious, but it worked.

Before we can go forward with getting help and understanding, maybe we need to do the same. Find a dictionary so we are all on the same page.

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.

Hydrocodone Prescriptions Continue Falling

By Pat Anson, Editor

For the fifth year in a row, fewer prescriptions for the opioid painkiller hydrocodone were dispensed in the U.S. in 2016, according to a new report by the QuintilesIMS Institute, which tracks prescription drug use and spending.

The report adds further evidence that the nation’s overdose epidemic is being fueled by illegal opioids such as heroin and illicit fentanyl, not prescription painkillers.

About 7 million fewer prescriptions were filled last year for hydrocodone, which is usually combined with acetaminophen in Vicodin, Lortab, Lorcet, Norco, and other hydrocodone combination products.

As recently as 2012, hydrocodone was the #1 most widely dispensed medication in the nation, with 136 million prescriptions filled. Since then, hydrocodone prescriptions have fallen by over a third, to 90 million prescriptions.

Hydrocodone now ranks fourth, behind the thyroid drug levothyroxine (Synthroid), the blood pressure medication lisinopril (Zestril), and the statin atorvastatin (Lipitor).

Hydrocodone was reclassified by the DEA as a Schedule II controlled substance in 2014, making it harder to obtain. Opioid guidelines released last year by the CDC also probably had an impact, although hydrocodone prescriptions were falling long before the CDC and DEA acted.

HYDROCODONE PRESCRIPTIONS IN U.S. (MILLIONS)

Source: QuintilesIMS Institute

Prescriptions for hydrocodone and other opioids are likely to fall even further in 2017, because the DEA plans to reduce the supply of almost every Schedule II opioid pain medication by 25 percent or more "to prevent diversion." The 2017 quota for hydrocodone is being reduced by a third, to 58.4 million prescriptions, which the DEA considers an adequate supply.

Overall, QuintilesIMS reported 13 million fewer prescriptions for pain medicines in 2016, “as restrictions on prescribing and dispensing become increasingly common and impactful.” The company includes both narcotic and non-narcotic treatments in its pain medicine category.

Over 7 million more prescriptions were written last year for gabapentin (Neurontin), a medication originally developed to treat seizures that is now widely prescribed for neuropathy and other chronic pain conditions.  About 64 million prescriptions were written for gabapentin in 2016, a 49% increase since 2011.

More prescriptions are also being written for ibuprofen, a widely used pain reliever available both by prescription and in over-the-counter drugs. About 44 million prescriptions were filled for ibuprofen in 2016, a 19% increase since 2012.

The shift in prescribing away from opioids is hardly a surprise to pain sufferers. According to a recent survey of over 3,100 patients by PNN and the International Pain Foundation, over 70% said they were no longer prescribed opioids or were getting a lower dose since the CDC guidelines were released. About half of the doctors and pharmacists we surveyed also said they were writing or filling fewer opioid prescriptions, or had stopped them altogether.  

“My doctor cut me off hydrocodone cold turkey last fall leading to an overnight in the hospital emergency room,” a patient with chronic back pain and anxiety told PNN. “For years I have been stable on a mix of hydrocodone and Valium. Last October my doctor said he would only fill one prescription and asked me to make a choice so I stayed with the Valium.”

“With the VA allowing me only 2 hydrocodone per day now, I get very little exercise and stay in bed a lot,” a 70-year old veteran wrote. “My quality of life has gone down considerably. Before the changes, I stayed quite active taking 4 hydrocodone a day.”

“I had an interventional pain management doctor scream at me that the guidelines were mandatory and he refused to write for any type of opioids even though I've been on the same level of hydrocodone for several years,” another patient said.

“I took hydrocodone pain medicine for 25 years as the doctor proscribed. Never called in for more, now I'm having to go a pain doctor and get steroid shots every 3 months,” wrote a patient with lives with chronic back pain.

Overall spending on prescription drugs in the U.S. reached $323 billion in 2016, a 4.8% increase that is less than half the rate of the previous two years. The QuintilesIMS report blames the slowdown in growth on increased competition among drug makers and efforts to limit price increases.

“New medicines introduced in the past two years continue to drive at least half of the total growth as clusters of innovative treatments for cancer, autoimmune diseases, HIV, multiple sclerosis, and diabetes become accessible to patients,” said Murray Aitken, Senior Vice President and Executive Director, QuintilesIMS Institute.

Study Finds ‘Nocebo Effect’ of Statins Cause Pain

By Pat Anson, Editor

An industry funded study is adding more fuel to a sometimes heated debate over statins – and whether the cholesterol-lowering drugs cause muscle pain and weakness.

Research involving nearly 10,000 patients published in The Lancet medical journal suggests that people taking Lipitor – the brand name for the statin atorvastatin -- are more likely to report muscle aches and other side effects, but only if they knew there were taking the drug.

This is what is called the “nocebo effect” – the opposite of the placebo effect – where people complain of side effects because they expect to have them.

"Just as the placebo effect can be very strong, so too can the nocebo effect. This is not a case of people making up symptoms, or that the symptoms are 'all in their heads'. Patients can experience very real pain as a result of the nocebo effect and the expectation that drugs will cause harm,” said lead author Peter Sever of the National Heart and Lung Institute at Imperial College London.

“What our study shows is that it's precisely the expectation of harm that is likely causing the increase in muscle pain and weakness, rather than the drugs themselves causing them."

Sever said complaints about the side effects overstate how common the problems are and discourage people from taking statins, resulting in "thousands of fatal and disabling heart attacks and strokes, which would otherwise have been avoided."

“These results will help assure both physicians and patients that most AEs (adverse effects) associated with statins are not causally related to use of the drug and should help counter the adverse effect on public health of exaggerated claims about statin-related side-effects,” he said.

The study was funded by Servier Research Group, Leo Laboratories and Pfizer – the maker of Lipitor. Five of the eight co-authors reported potential conflicts of interest, including payments from Pfizer and other drug makers that manufacture statins.  

Only about 2 percent of the patients taking Lipitor in The Lancet study reported having muscle pain, a finding that is substantially at odds with previous research.

For example, in a study at the Cleveland Clinic last year, 42 percent of patients taking Lipitor reported muscle pain and weakness. Other studies have found muscle pain in 5% to 29% of statin users.

The Food and Drug Administration considered the problem serious enough that in 2014 it required warning labels on statins, cautioning that some statins can cause a muscle injury called myopathy, which is characterized by muscle pain or weakness. In rare instances, the FDA says statins can also cause liver injury, diabetes and memory loss.

Another study this week, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, linked statin use to back pain conditions such as spondylosis and intervertebral disc disorders. The study involved over 13,000 military veterans and their families.

“To our knowledge, this study is the first to report greater odds of back disorders among statin users compared with the odds of nonusers in a population with equal access to and the same cost of health care,” said Una Makris, MD,  of the VA North Texas Health Care System in Dallas. “Our results provide additional motivation to further investigate the overall influence of statin therapy on musculoskeletal health, specifically if prescribed for primary prevention in physically active individuals.”

Study Finds Alcohol Risky but Effective Pain Reliever

By Pat Anson, Editor

The dangers of alcohol are well known – from drunk driving to health, work and social problems. But with opioid painkillers becoming harder to obtain, some chronic pain sufferers are turning to alcohol to dull their pain.

And now there’s research to back them up.

In an analysis of 18 studies published in the Journal of Pain, British researchers found “robust evidence” that a few drinks can be an effective pain reliever.

“Findings suggest that alcohol is an effective analgesic that delivers clinically-relevant reductions in ratings of pain intensity, which could explain alcohol misuse in those with persistent pain despite its potential consequences for long-term health,” wrote lead author Trevor Thompson, PhD, University of Greenwich.

Thompson and his colleagues say a blood-alcohol content of .08% -- which meets the legal definition of drunk driving in many U.S. states – produces a “moderate to large reduction in pain intensity” and a small elevation in pain threshold.

“It can be compared to opioid drugs such as codeine and the effect is more powerful than paracetamol (acetaminophen),” Thompson told The Sun newspaper.  “If we can make a drug without the harmful side effects then we could have something that is potentially better than what is out there at the moment.”

Despite the risks involved, some pain sufferers are turning to alcohol as a last resort and mixing it with pain relievers – a potentially lethal combination.

“My doctor took me off all opioids last year and put me on Effexor, Naproxen, and extended relief Tylenol. It barely touches my pain so I am also drinking each night to help dull the pain,” one patient told us.

“The doctor tried gabapentin but I ended up with an overnight stay in the hospital due to a bad reaction to the medication,” another patient said. “I'm now using alcohol nightly to help me sleep along with high amounts of Naproxen and Tylenol daily.”

“I suffer extreme back and neck pain. Since they no longer prescribed painkillers I started drinking and find it is helpful. I take also thousand mg of arthritis Tylenol every day,” wrote another patient.  “It's either suicide or drinking. Frankly I'd prefer death. Too bad they can't give painkillers anymore.”

How much is too much?

According to the Mayo Clinic, moderate alcohol consumption for healthy adults means up to one drink a day for women of all ages and men older than age 65, and up to two drinks a day for men age 65 and younger.