Why Do Opioids Stop Working?

By Forest Tennant, PNN Columnist

One of the most common complaints that we receive from people with intractable pain syndrome (IPS) is that opioids quit working when they previously provided good pain relief. They usually report that increasing the dosage was ineffective as well. The cause is known as “opioid receptor failure.”

Every person with IPS who takes daily opioids needs to carefully review the information given here. Once your opioid quits working, it will likely not work again. You can be left without good pain control options.

Patients are at risk for opioid receptor failure if they use a long-acting opioid such as a fentanyl patch, or oxycodone, morphine, hydromorphone or methadone. Intrathecal pump administration of any opioid also raises the risk for opioid receptor failure.

The reason for this is that long acting and intrathecal opioids never leave the blood and spinal fluid. Consequently, they continually coat opioid receptors, and with prolonged use they literally render the receptor incapable of pain relief.

A good analogy is stretching a rubber band too long and seeing it lose its elasticity. The receptors may become permanently altered. Short acting opioids leave the blood and spinal fluid for a time and that lets the receptors recuperate and re-energize, so opioids usually stay effective over a long-time period.

How to Keep Opioids Working

  1. Opioid receptors hold up better in patients who take vitamin and mineral supplements, and have diets low in sugar and starch, and high in proteins and green vegetables.

  2. Hormone levels must be normal to keep opioids effective. Opioid receptors require adequate blood levels of testosterone, cortisol and pregnenolone.

What To Do If Opioids Quit Working

Here are six recommendations to try, but remember when opioids quit working, they may not work again.

  1. Get a hormone test for testosterone, cortisol and pregnenolone. If you have a deficiency, start hormone therapy and continuously raise the dosage over a 6-week period until your hormone level is normal.

  2. Start a nutrition program with vitamins, minerals, and a low sugar/starch, high protein/green vegetable diet.

  3. Switch to a short acting opioid, if possible.

  4. The addition of an adrenaline or dopamine stimulant such as Adderall or Ritalin may help.

  5. Get an injection of ketorolac to determine if this potent anti-inflammatory analgesic may provide some pain relief.

  6. Take taurine 4,000-8,000 mg per day for 5 days. If there is improvement, continue at 2,000 to 4,000 mg per day.

If you are doing well on a long-acting or intrathecal opioid, don’t stop. Some persons on long acting and intrathecal opioids do well for years. But don’t get overconfident. Opioid receptor failure can be sudden and unexpected. 

Forest Tennant is retired from clinical practice but continues his research on intractable pain and arachnoiditis. This column is adapted from newsletters recently issued by the IPS Research and Education Project of the Tennant Foundation. Readers interested in subscribing to the newsletter can sign up by clicking here.

The Tennant Foundation gives financial support to Pain News Network and sponsors PNN’s Patient Resources section.   

Rare Disease Spotlight: Vulvodynia

By Barby Ingle, PNN Columnist

This month in our Rare Disease Spotlight we’ll look at vulvodynia, which causes chronic pain and discomfort around the vulva, the opening of the vagina. About 15 percent of women will have vulvar pain at some point in their lives.  

I first learned about vulvodynia a few years ago at a medical conference. It was described to me by a woman who has it as the feeling of a chain saw cutting into her private parts. Quite the visual description. It made me stop to pay attention.  

There are many causes for vaginal pain. These range from hormonal changes, nerve conditions, eczema, psoriasis, endometriosis, anxiety, depression, vaginal atrophy and vaginal dryness. Often, multiple causes contribute to vaginal pain. 

There are two main types of vulvodundia: generalized vulvodundia and localized vulvodunia. The latter is also known as vestibulodynia, which occurs when there is any kind of touch or pressure near the vaginal opening that causes irritation. Burning, stinging or itching can be triggered by tampons, cotton swabs, tight clothing, toilet paper and sexual contact.  

For women with generalized vulvodynia, the pain occurs spontaneously and has no known cause. Often we focus on women when we look at pelvic pain. But men can also experience pelvic pain and conditions. A similar disorder to vulvodynia is known as male genital dysaesthesia.

Vulvodynia can resolve within months or become chronic. It can be so painful that some activities feel unbearable, such as sitting for long periods, riding a bike or having sex. If you experience pelvic pain, you should avoid those activities until you see an OB/GYN doctor, physical therapist or primary care provider.  

Some of the symptoms of vulvodynia include vaginal dryness, itching, or inflammation. These can appear with pain in the vagina or pelvis. Pain can increase during sexual intercourse. It may also cause sexual dysfunction, uncomfortable tingling and burning pain.  

Fortunately, there are some potentially helpful treatments. These options include acupuncture, biofeedback, cognitive behavioral therapy, nerve blocks, nerve pain medication, and oral and topical analgesics. You can also try a pelvic floor therapy to strengthen and desensitize the pelvic region. Avoiding irritants and practicing good hygiene may also help. 

There are some new medications being developed in clinical trials for vulvodynia, but they could take years before they are available. In the meantime, physicians may provide patients with vaginal estrogen in low doses, as well as lidocaine. Systemic hormone therapy is associated with an increased risk of heart attack, stroke, blood clots and other complications. Be sure to talk to your provider about the risks involved with vaginal estrogen treatment before starting hormone therapy.

If you have vulvodynia, there are some private Facebook groups where you can get support, such as Vulvodynia Support and Vulvar Vestibulitis Syndrome (VVS) & Vestibulodynia & Vulvodynia Awareness. The National Vulvodynia Association is also a good resource.

So much emphasis in our society is put on sexual health, especially for men. Having lived through endometriosis myself, I know pelvic health is important. Women deserve good sexual health too.

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.

Doctors Required to Provide Patient Health Records at No Cost and On Demand

By Sarah Kwon, Kaiser Health News

A new federal regulation makes it easy to get test results and see what your doctor is recording about your health. One downside: You might not understand what you read.

Last summer, Anna Ramsey suffered a flare-up of juvenile dermatomyositis, a rare autoimmune condition, posing a terrifying prospect for the Los Angeles resident: She might have to undergo chemotherapy, further compromising her immune system during a pandemic.

After an agonizing three-day wait, the results of a blood test came back in her online patient portal — but she didn’t understand them. As hours passed, Ramsey bit her nails and paced. The next day, she gave in and emailed her doctor, who responded with an explanation and a plan.

For Ramsey, now 24, instant access to her test results had been a mixed blessing. “If there’s something I’m really nervous about,” she said, “then I want interpretations and answers with the result. Even if it takes a few days longer.”

On April 5, a federal rule went into effect that requires health care providers to give patients like Ramsey electronic access to their health information without delay upon request, at no cost. Many patients may now find their doctors’ clinical notes, test results and other medical data posted to their electronic portal as soon as they are available.

Advocates herald the rule as a long-awaited opportunity for patients to control their data and health.

“This levels the playing field,” said Jan Walker, co-founder of OpenNotes, a group that has pushed for providers to share notes with patients. “A decade ago, the medical record belonged to the physician.”

But the rollout of the rule has hit bumps, as doctors learn that patients might see information before they do. Like Ramsey, some patients have felt distressed when seeing test results dropped into their portal without a physician’s explanation. And doctors’ groups say they are confused and concerned about whether the notes of adolescent patients who don’t want their parents to see sensitive information can be exempt — or if they will have to breach their patients’ trust.

Barriers Removed

Patients have long had a legal right to their medical records but often have had to pay fees, wait weeks or sift through reams of paper to see them.

The rule aims not only to remove these barriers, but also to enable patients to access their health records through smartphone apps, and prevent health care providers from withholding information from other providers and health IT companies when a patient wants it to be shared.

Privacy rules under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, which limit sharing of personal health information outside a clinic, remain in place, although privacy advocates have warned that patients who choose to share their data with consumer apps will put their data at risk.

Studies have shown numerous benefits of note sharing. Patients who read their notes understand more about their health, better remember their treatment plan and are more likely to stick to their medication regimen. Non-white, older or less educated patients report even greater benefits than others.

For Sarah Ford, 34, of Pittsburgh, who has multiple sclerosis, reading her doctor’s notes helps her make the most of each visit and feel informed.

“I don’t like going into the office and feeling like I don’t know what’s going to happen,” she said. If she wants to try a new medication or treatment, reading previous notes helps her prepare to discuss it with her doctor, she said.

The new rule will have less impact on Ford and the more than 50 million patients in the U.S. whose doctors had already made their notes available to patients before the rule kicked in. However, only about a third of patients with access to secure online health portals were using them.

While most doctors who have shared notes with patients think it’s a good idea, the policy has drawbacks. One recent study found that half of doctors reported writing their notes less candidly after they were opened to patients.

Another study, published in February, found that 1 in 10 patients had ever felt offended or judged after reading a note. The study’s lead author, Dr. Leonor Fernandez, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, said there is a “legacy of certain ways of expressing things in medicine that didn’t really take into account how it reads when you’re a patient.”

“Maybe we can rethink some of these,” she said, citing the phrase “patient admits to drinking two glasses of wine a day” as an example. “Why not just write ‘two glasses of wine a day’?”

UC San Diego Health started phasing in open notes to patients in 2018 and removed a delay in the release of lab results last year. Overall, said Dr. Brian Clay, chief medical information officer, both have been uneventful. “Most patients are agnostic, some are super-jazzed, and a few are distressed or have lots of questions and are communicating with us a lot,” he said.

Some Records Withheld

There are exceptions to the requirement to release patient data, such as psychotherapy notes and notes that could harm a patient or someone else if released.

Dr. David Bell, president of the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine, believes it’s unclear exactly what qualifies as “substantial harm” to a patient — the standard that must be met for doctors to withhold an adolescent patient’s notes from a parent. Clarity, he said, is especially important to protect teenagers living in states with less restrictive laws on parental access to medical records.

Most electronic medical records are not equipped to segregate sensitive pieces from other information that might be useful for a parent in managing their child’s health, he added.

Some doctors say receiving devastating test results without counseling can traumatize patients. Dr. James Kenealy, an ear, nose and throat doctor in central Massachusetts, said a positive cancer biopsy result for one of his patients was automatically pushed to his portal over the weekend, blindsiding both. “You can give bad news, but if you have a plan and explain, they’re much better off,” he said.

Such incidents aren’t affecting the majority of patients, but they’re not rare, said Dr. Jack Resneck Jr., an American Medical Association board trustee. The AMA is advocating for “tweaks” to the rule, he said, like allowing brief delays in releasing results for a few of the highest-stakes tests, like those diagnosing cancer, and more clarity on whether the harm exception applies to adolescent patients who might face emotional distress if their doctor breached their trust by sharing sensitive information with their parents.

The Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, the federal agency overseeing the rule, responded in an email that it has heard these concerns, but has also heard from clinicians that patients value receiving this information in a timely fashion, and that patients can decide whether they want to look at results once they receive them or wait until they can review them with their doctor. It added that the rule does not require giving parents access to protected health information if they did not already have that right under HIPAA.

Patient advocate Cynthia Fisher believes there should be no exceptions to immediately releasing results, noting that many patients want and need test results as soon as possible, and that delays can lead to worse health outcomes. Instead of facing long wait times to discuss diagnoses with their doctors, she said, patients can now take their results elsewhere. “We can’t assume the consumer is ignorant and unresourceful,” she said.

In the meantime, hospitals and doctors are finding ways to adapt, and their tactics could have lasting implications for patient knowledge and physician workload. At Massachusetts General Hospital, a guide for patients on how to interpret medical terminology in radiology reports is being developed, said Dr. William Mehan, a neuroradiologist.

An internal survey run after radiology results became immediately available to patients found that some doctors were monitoring their inbox after hours in case results arrived. “Burnout has come up in this conversation,” Mehan said.

Some electronic health records enable doctors to withhold test results at the time they are ordered, said Jodi Daniel, a partner at the law firm Crowell & Moring. Doctors who can do this could ask patients whether they want their results released immediately or if they want their doctor to communicate the result, assuming they meet certain criteria for exceptions under the rule, she said.

Chantal Worzala, a health technology policy consultant, said more is to come. “There will be a lot more conversation about the tools that individuals want and need in order to access and understand their health information,” she said.

This story was produced by Kaiser Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

Legal Fight Brews Over Non-Opioid Pain Reliever

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Competition between drug companies can get so intense that some resort to bare knuckle tactics to preserve market share. Such is the case for Pacira BioSciences, which filed a lawsuit against the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) last month for “false and misleading conclusions” about the effectiveness of Pacira’s flagship product Exparel, an injectable non-opioid analgesic used for postoperative pain.

In February, the ASA published two research articles and an editorial in its journal Anesthesiology saying Exparel works no better than other bupivacaine products on the market. New Jersey-based Pacira considered that libelous, and filed a complaint in federal court seeking a retraction and damages for lost business.

Now comes word that Pacira’s attorneys withdrew their motion for a retraction after the ASA asked the court for a prompt hearing “to expose flaws in Pacira’s claims.”

“It is vitally important that we defend and stand behind these three works and the integrity and scholarship of those who contributed to them,” said Evan Kharasch, MD, editor-in-chief of Anesthesiology. “These authors are leading physicians and researchers in the fields of anesthesiology and clinical studies. Physicians and patients must have trusted information on which to base clinical decisions and care, and that information needs to be unaffected by commercial interests.”

It is not yet clear if Pacira will withdraw the rest of its libel case. “Our corporate policy is not to comment on pending litigation,” a spokesperson told PNN.

This is not the first time Pacira has used aggressive tactics to promote Exparel or fend off criticism. In 2014, the company filed a lawsuit against the FDA after the agency sent a warning letter to Pacira for off-label marketing of Exparel. The FDA said Pacira promoted Exparel for “surgical procedures other than those for which the drug has been shown safe and effective.”

Pacira won that case in an out-of-court settlement after the FDA backed down, withdrew its warning letter and changed Exparel’s label to say that it can be used for more types of post-operative pain.

In addition to doubts about Exparel’s effectiveness, some have questioned its cost. A 2015 STAT story pointed out that a vial of Exparel cost $285 and provided no better pain relief than a $3 vial of generic bupivacaine. 

In 2016, Pacira funded a report by an expert panel at the Jefferson College of Population Health that called for greater use of non-opioid medication for post-operative pain. One of the non-opioids recommended by the panel was Exparel. Pacira’s funding of the project was only noted at the end of the report.

In 2020, Pacira agreed to pay $3.5 million to resolve federal allegations that it gave kickbacks to doctors in the form of fake research grants that promoted Exparel.

Pacira has also been active politically, spending over $1.7 million on lobbying and campaign donations since 2018, according to OpenSecrets.org.

In 2019, Pacira hired former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie as a consultant for $800,000 and lucrative stock options. The move was controversial, because Christie had just chaired President Trump’s opioid commission, which recommended that Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement policies be changed to encourage hospitals to use more non-opioid painkillers.

All this suggests that Pacira won’t back down easily from a fight. But it doesn’t sound like the ASA will either.

“Although Pacira started this lawsuit, ASA will not shy away from refuting Pacira’s claims and from exposing the important issues with Pacira’s controversial drug,” the ASA said in a news release.

Zynrelef Approved

Pacira is about to get more competition in the post-operative pain market. San Diego-based Heron Therapeutics says it has received FDA approval for Zynrelef, an extended-release analgesic for use by adults up to 72 hours after a bunionectomy, hernia repair and total knee replacement surgery.

Zynrelef combines bupivacaine with a low dose of the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) meloxicam. In clinical studies, the company says the synergy between the two drugs resulted in patients experiencing significantly less pain with less use of opioids compared to bupivacaine alone.

"The first three days after surgery are when patients experience the most severe postsurgical pain and are most likely to receive opioids to manage that pain. With the impressive reduction in pain and opioid use demonstrated by Zynrelef, we now have an important new option to help many patients achieve an opioid-free recovery," said Roy Soto, MD, an anesthesiologist at Beaumont Health System who consults with Heron. 

The company expects Zynrelef to be available by July. Patients are advised not to take the drug if they are allergic or have side effects from NSAIDs. The most common side effects of Zynrelef are constipation, vomiting and headache.

Hospira Recall

Pfizer’s Hospira division is voluntarily recalling a single lot of bupivacaine and a lot of lidocaine due to mislabeling that caused some of the vials to be incorrectly labeled as the other product. Both drugs are used to treat surgical pain. The mislabeling was identified after a customer complaint.

Hospira assessed the potential risk to patients if the mislabeled products were used to be “moderate to high severity.” If the mislabeled lidocaine was administered to a patient instead of bupivacaine, the patient may not get enough pain relief. If the bupivacaine was administered instead of lidocaine, the outcome could be even worse: an overdose of bupivacaine may occur, which could lead to seizures, respiratory problems, irregular heartbeat and cardiac arrest.

The recalled lots were distributed nationwide to wholesalers and hospitals in the United States, Puerto Rico and Guam from December 29, 2020 to April 15, 2021.

Hospira has not received reports of any adverse events associated with the mislabeling. The company did not respond to a request to explain how the mislabeling occurred or how it went undetected for nearly five months.

Patient Z and the Criminalization of Pain Care

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Dr. Stefan Franzen is not a physician or pain patient, but his new book is likely to open some eyes about the poor quality of pain care in the United States and the consequences of criminalizing opioid medication.

“Patient Z” is Franzen’s pseudonym for a family member who lives with ankylosing spondylitis, a severe form of arthritis, who was cut off from opioids when his longtime doctor came under investigation and was forced to stop prescribing. Patient Z struggled for years to find a new doctor and effective treatment, at times contemplating suicide during bouts of intense pain.  

When Franzen, a chemistry professor at North Carolina State with an extensive background in biomedical research, tried to help by speaking with doctors – he came to the realization that Patient Z and millions of others like him had been stigmatized, terrorized and abandoned in the name of fighting opioid addiction.   

“There are doctors who would like to help patients like Patient Z, but they feel that matters are out of their hands. There is not likely to be major change until the citizens of the United States realize that the denial of pain management care is an attack on patients’ rights and that what happened to Patient Z can happen to anyone,” Franzen writes.

Franzen’s book is comprehensive and well-researched, with several chapters dedicated to debunking some of the myths about opioids, such as addiction and overdoses being inevitable after high doses and long-term use. Those myths have been codified into medical guidelines, laws and regulations to a point where many doctors are now afraid to prescribe opioids or even see pain patients.

“It feels like the tribe is moving on and leaving the patients behind. Our attitude is ‘everybody for themselves’ and the doctors are saying, ‘Hey, I could go to jail.’ And the patients are screwed, which is absurd. The criminalization of medicine is a big part of this problem,” Franzen told PNN.

“My book looks at this from the point of view of the pain patient. What does this look like? And to realize what it’s like when you’re rejected. You’re afraid you’ll be called an addict. You’re afraid someone is going to cut you off at any time.”

Franzen says the war on drugs has been a misguided failure that has only made drug trafficking worse, with pain patients caught in the crossfire. As an example, he points to Florida’s crackdown on pill mills a decade ago.

“When they finally cracked down, there was this massive switch to heroin. It was in 2011 and the heroin numbers shot up. And of course, everyone went to draw the conclusion that the prescription drug crisis caused the heroin crisis. It’s the wrong conclusion,” says Franzen.

“I think the reason the heroin numbers went up is the way they clamped down. They were shutting down methadone clinics. They were making it as hard as possible for anyone with an addiction problem to get help. Here are all these people who got hooked and they’re shutting every single door. What choice do those people have? They can either go cold turkey and go into withdrawal or, suddenly, there’s a lot of heroin available.”

PROP’s ‘Lack of Ethics’

Franzen acknowledges that at one time opioid prescribing was excessive and it was too easy to get opioid medication. But he says the reaction to that by government regulators and law enforcement was “draconian and just absurd.”

Much of the blame for that, according to Franzen, lies with Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), an anti-opioid activist group that questioned whether opioids were even effective in treating pain. That led to what Franzen calls a “medical coup d’état” in which PROP bypassed the FDA and persuaded the CDC to release its controversial opioid guideline in 2016.

Franzen says if PROP founder Dr. Andrew Kolodny, PROP president Dr. Jane Ballantyne and PROP board member Dr. Anna Lembke were in his chemistry class, he’d give them all F’s.  

“They’d get an F because they misrepresented the facts. And they did things that were intellectually dishonest. I’d actually not give them a grade. I’d kick them out of the class. They cheated,” says Franzen. “Their academic papers are bunk. Part of what I do in this book is debunk them. I do exactly what I would do if I was writing about somebody in chemistry, which is my area of research, who I thought had written something that did not make sense and was not supported by the data.

“They’re ignoring all of these facts or even contradicting themselves. They’re suggesting that a patient has to admit they’re an addict before you can treat them. Huh?”

As PNN has reported, Kolodny and Ballantyne have been well-paid expert witnesses for law firms that stand to make billions of dollars in contingency fees from opioid litigation. But they neglected to mention that conflict-of-interest in several papers and had to make new disclosure statements.

“That too is just stunning to me. The lack of ethics by Kolodny and Ballantyne, specifically, is just jaw dropping,” says Franzen. “I hope they read my book and come after me. I want them to know what I said about them and try to defend themselves, because I don’t think that they can.”   

As for Patient Z, Franzen says he is in palliative care and getting opioids again. He needs to use a walker and wheelchair to get around, but the pain is at least tolerable. Patient Z has also become a fierce advocate for patient rights.      

Opioid Prescribing Reduced by 50% After Some Surgeries

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

In recent years, hospitals around the country have adopted policies to reduce the use of opioids for post-operative pain, fueled in part by studies showing that many surgery patients were sent home with more pills than they need. New research shows just how far efforts to reduce “overprescribing” have gone.

In an analysis of nearly half a million common surgeries performed at 87 U.S. hospitals, the Epic Health Research Network found that the number of opioid pills prescribed to patients decreased by 50% since 2017. The surgeries included in the study were low-risk arthroscopic or laparoscopic surgeries in which small incisions are made and patients are sent home from the hospital the same day.

Researchers say outpatients are just as likely to get opioids today after surgery as they were in 2017, but they will get significantly fewer pills. For example, a typical patient recovering from arthroscopic rotator cuff surgery in 2017 was prescribed the equivalent of 60 oxycodone 5mg tablets. By the end of 2020, the average patient received about 30 tablets after that procedure.      

“By reducing the number of pills that go out the door, we reduce the amount of time the patient is on opioids and we reduce their risk of long-term opioid use,” explained David Little, MD, a Physician Liaison with Epic Health.  

“The other thing that happens when someone goes home with 60 tablets of opioids is that they probably end up with 50 of them left sitting in the medicine cabinet. Those 50 pills in the medicine cabinet then become a problem in and of themselves, because patients start taking them later for unrelated stuff and they get addicted. Or the teenage child finds the pills and they start on them or take them out to be sold or give out to their friends.”

While the number of pills prescribed has declined significantly, Little told PNN they need to be reduced even more to meet treatment guidelines established by Johns Hopkins University.  A patient recovering from rotator cuff surgery should only get about 20 oxycodone pills according to that guideline, which recommends that ibuprofen also be used for pain relief.   

The Epic Health study did not look at what other medications were given to patients or if they were satisfied with their pain relief.

A recent Mayo Clinic study found that surgery guidelines are useful in reducing the number of pills prescribed, but sometimes go too far. While most patients were satisfied with their pain control, about 10 percent were not.  

Opioid addiction is actually rare after surgery.  A large 2016 study found only 0.4% of older adults were still taking opioids a year after major surgery.  Another large study in 2018 found only 0.2% of patients who were prescribed opioids for post-operative pain were later diagnosed with opioid dependence, abuse or had a non-fatal overdose.

Lessons Learned From the ER

By Victoria Reed, PNN Columnist

Many people have a need to use the emergency room at some point in their lives. As a person with degenerative disc disease, there are times when my chronic back pain is exacerbated by an acute pain event that causes my back to occasionally go out.

By “out” I mean my back seizes up, stiffens and excruciatingly hurts. It doesn’t seem to take much to trigger an onset of pain. One time it happened when I tried to get up from a seated position off the couch. Another time it occurred when I bent over slightly to get something out of a drawer. A third time was triggered by vomiting from a stomach bug, so not only was I sick, I could barely move. Unbelievably, a fourth episode was caused by a sneeze!

During these episodes, I can’t walk or move without significant pain and I need assistance from my family. I will usually be bedridden for the better part of a week or two. One time it was so bad that I had someone take me to the emergency room to try and get some relief.

At the time, I was receiving treatment with a mild prescription opioid for my other chronic pain conditions. However, the medication was not doing anything for the acute pain.

At the ER, the staff was generally compassionate and treated my pain. I was sent home with a small amount of a stronger pain medication to use for a few days. After a while, the back started to calm down and I went back to my normal daily pain level.

VICTORIA REED

VICTORIA REED

Subsequently, I had a follow up visit with my pain management doctor. I didn’t like the look on his face when he walked into the room. This doctor had always been reluctant to treat my back pain with anything other than spinal injections, which were no longer effective. He confronted me about the ER visit and was worked up into a lather about it! He implied that I was drug seeking. Wait, what? No, I was not seeking anything other than pain relief.

I explained that my trip to the ER happened on a weekend, so I wasn’t able to call his office. Regardless, there was no convincing him otherwise. He refused to renew my opioid prescription, but didn’t discharge me from the practice. I walked out of the office shocked, hurt and angry because in my mind, I had done nothing wrong.

I thought it was a basic human right to seek treatment for excruciating pain. I still believe that. But that incident made me realize that some doctors just don’t see it that way and think everyone is drug seeking.

Back then, I was younger and inexperienced with the specialty of pain management. I was unaware that I should get prior approval before receiving any opioids from anywhere else. There had been no contract signed, nor any discussion of what the procedure was.

Ultimately, that trip to the ER for an acute episode of back pain caused me to lose my regular pain medication. Needless to say, I never want to go through that experience again! 

Fortunately, I have since been accepted for treatment by a wonderful, compassionate pain management doctor and have been 100% compliant with the procedures and the pain contract that I signed.

On another occasion, I went to the ER during an acute flare of my rheumatoid arthritis, which caused extreme pain and swelling in many joints. The low dose steroid that I took daily just wasn’t doing much and my stomach doesn’t tolerate higher doses very well. My intent in going to the ER was to obtain a higher dose steroid through an IV that would bypass the stomach.

The first question I was asked as I was being triaged was, “Isn’t RA a chronic illness?” Already, I could see where this was going.  I replied, “Yes, but I’m having an acute flare.” That got an eyeball roll from the ER provider, but once I made it clear that I was not seeking any opioid medication, they were willing to treat me with the high dose IV steroids that I had requested.

I felt that if I didn’t say everything the right away, they would have labeled me as a drug seeker and turned me away altogether.

There is opioid hysteria going on that changes the way pain patients are treated and viewed. How do we use the ER without fear of being labeled as drug seekers? Acute, uncontrolled pain needs to be treated, regardless of whether we are already under care for treatment of chronic pain. All patients deserve to be treated with compassion and fairness.

I would definitely think twice (actually 3 or 4 times) before I go to another emergency room for treatment. We should not be afraid to go for fear of being labeled a drug seeker, nor should we have to be afraid of losing our doctors and medication. The negative stigma associated with prescription opioids is real and ultimately hurts an already vulnerable population of patients.

Victoria Reed lives in Cleveland, Ohio. She suffers from endometriosis, fibromyalgia, degenerative disc disease and rheumatoid arthritis. PNN invites other readers to share their stories with us. Send them to editor@painnewsnetwork.org.

Are Prescription Opioids Really the Same As Heroin?

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

The new HBO documentary “The Crime of the Century” is garnering a lot of attention for its take on the opioid crisis. In the documentary, Dr. Andrew Kolodny, the founder of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing (PROP), claims that prescription opioids are “essentially heroin pills.”

This is a common claim. Dr. Corey Waller, an addiction and emergency medicine expert, recently testified in a West Virginia lawsuit that opioid drugs and heroin are "identical."

"The brain doesn't know the drug you just gave it," Waller said. "It just knows the action that it has."

But it’s not quite that simple. There are two standard ways to look at drugs: pharmacology and epidemiology. The former takes into account a drug’s chemical structure and mechanism of action in the human body. The latter looks at the public health effects of a drug.

Opioid Pharmacology

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) explains that heroin is a type of opioid made from poppy plants that is “chemically similar and can produce similar effects” as prescription pain relievers.

But chemically similar does not mean functionally identical. Small chemical differences affect how quickly a drug is absorbed, how strongly it acts and how long it remains in the body. The specific action of each opioid drug at the various mu, kappa, and delta opioid receptors also varies, creating differing levels of analgesia and other effects.

For example, oxycodone’s chemical composition makes it a particularly powerful opioid.

“What's unique about oxycodone relative to other opioids is the speed at which it's presented to the brain,” anesthesiologist Dr. Heath McAnally explained in a recent MedPage Today op-ed. “And in that regard, oxycodone reigns supreme (rivaling heroin), likely having to do with the fact that oxycodone's transport across the blood-brain barrier is considerably faster and more efficient than that of other opioids.”

Further, oxycodone is more active at kappa opioid receptors, possibly explaining the harder withdrawal that some people experience. It also acts more strongly on mu receptors, which may explain its greater euphoria. Morphine, by contrast, is more prone to histamine effects like itching and is associated with less positive feelings.

The opioid tramadol is also a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, while tapentadol is a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor. Some people do not tolerate tramadol well, and there is less abuse of tapentadol than other prescription opioids. They are very different than heroin.

Opioid Epidemiology

A 2013 study found that about 80% of heroin users first misused prescription opioids, but in more recent years heroin has become the first opioid people abuse in many cases. Heroin’s so-called “capture rate” -- a proxy for the addictiveness of a substance -- is thought to be about 25 percent.

By contrast, NIDA says about 8-12% of people on long-term prescription opioids develop some form of opioid use disorder, and less than 4% of people who misuse prescription pain medication start using heroin within five years.

Among prescription opioids, oxycodone is the most abused. According to a 2020 DEA report, the diversion and abuse of oxycodone “has become a major public health problem in recent years.”

Street prices and illicit sales are similarly revealing. Prescription opioids sold illegally are not all priced the same, nor treated with the same level of interest. There is a clear hierarchy, with oxycodone on top.

But the key driver in the overdose crisis today is illicit fentanyl made in clandestine labs and sold illegally on the street or online, often adulterating heroin or used in counterfeit oxycodone or Xanax pills.

Illicit fentanyl’s impact on the U.S. overdose crisis cannot be overstated. Other opioids, including heroin, do not come close to its level of abuse, addiction and death. Meanwhile, countries like Germany have not seen an opioid crisis, even though Germans are the second largest consumers of opioids worldwide.

It is also important to note that prescription opioids are medically essential, not only for pain management but also when sedating Covid-19 patients for ventilator use, for controlling air hunger in congestive heart failure, and for hospice and palliative care. Prescription opioids are medically useful in ways that heroin is not.

The claim that prescription opioids are identical to heroin does not hold up well. It obscures important information about opioid pharmacology and epidemiology. It may make a good soundbite, but it doesn’t shed light on the risks of opioids or how to address the overdose crisis.

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. 

Americans Reporting More Chronic Pain

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

A startling new study has concluded that the prevalence of chronic pain has grown substantially in the United States since 2002, affecting virtually every age group, sex, ethnicity and demographic. By 2018, over half of American adults (54%) reported having pain, with each birth group in greater pain than the one that came before it.

“You might think that with medical advances we’d be getting healthier and experiencing less pain, but the data strongly suggest the exact opposite,” said co-author Hanna Grol-Prokopczyk, PhD, an associate professor of sociology in the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences.

“We looked at the data from every available perspective including age, gender, race, ethnicity, education, and income, but the results were always the same: There was an increase in pain no matter how we classified the population.”

Grol-Prokopczyk and her colleagues analyzed responses from over 441,000 people who participated in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) from 2002 to 2018. While research on pain trends usually focuses on people over age 50, they look at adults aged 25-84. The data was analyzed for reports of joint, low back, neck, face or jaw pain, along with headaches and migraines.

The research findings, published in the journal Demography, show that pain increased for each body site during the study period, especially for joint, low back and neck pain. Reports of pain in at least one site increased by 10%, representing an additional 10.5 million adults experiencing pain.

SOURCE: DEMOGRAPHY

SOURCE: DEMOGRAPHY

Not surprisingly, pain was most common in the oldest age group (65-84), with health problems such as high body mass index (BMI), hypertension, diabetes and kidney conditions correlating with increases in pain. Obesity was also associated with more pain in young and middle-aged adults, along with more stress and alcohol consumption.

“What we’re seeing in the younger age groups demonstrates how pain in some ways functions as much as a mental health problem as it does a physical health problem,” said Grol-Prokopczyk. “Pain can be exacerbated by stress, and stress can bring about alcohol use.”

Socioeconomic disparities are also involved. While pain increased for people in every income and education level, it rose faster for low-income Americans and those who never attended college.

“This study has documented steep, sustained, and pervasive increases in chronic pain among Americans across the adult life span. This is a concerning finding that should stimulate new research in demography and other social sciences. We found that key correlates of the rise in pain prevalence include not only specific diagnoses, such as arthritis, but also psychological distress, increased body weight, and heavier alcohol use -- factors that highlight the psychosocial roots of pain in populations,” researchers concluded.

Are Americans experiencing more pain or just reporting it more often? And what role, if any, did the opioid crisis play? The researchers found no definitive answers to either question, but they speculated that increased opioid use and awareness about pain may have led Americans to report pain more readily in the hope of getting it treated.

“Our findings in this study are not an argument for increased opioid use; in contrast, we posit that opioids may have contributed to the rise of pain prevalence in the United States,” they said.

That statement is puzzling, because opioid prescribing peaked in 2011 and has steadily declined ever since. The researchers apparently did not consider that more pain is being reported because it is often poorly treated or untreated.

A recent PNN survey of nearly 3,700 patients found that over 92% believe their pain levels and quality of life have grown worse. Over a third said they were unable to find a doctor to treat their pain and 58% said they were taken off opioids or tapered to a lower dose against their wishes.  

What HBO’s ‘Crime of the Century’ Doesn’t Tell You

By Dr. Lynn Webster, PNN Columnist

About 30 years ago, when I opened a pain clinic, I met a patient who made a lasting impression on me. She was a middle-aged woman who sat on my examining table with hunched shoulders and an unsmiling expression. Dejectedly, she began to tell me about her experiences: living with severe, chronic pain; being passed around by hard-hearted doctors; and being ignored or misunderstood by her family members and friends.

Her words, voice, demeanor saddened me. It wasn’t so much that her pain conditions were unforgiving – they were – but my realization that she was always alone with her pain. She didn’t expect me to believe her, she was just going through the obligatory motions of a life of being unseen and unheard.

I would go on to treat thousands more patients with chronic pain over the next decades, each with unique and complex conditions, but they showed up remarkably and tragically similar to that middle-aged woman. They were as invisible as their pain conditions.  

A Narrow Perspective of Opioids

I thought about this particular patient after seeing the HBO documentary “Crime of the Century” and its terribly incomplete perspective of opioids. It occurred to me that the visceral reaction of most viewers would be, "Why are opioids even being used?"

In part, I agreed to be interviewed by Alex Gibney, the director of the documentary, to educate why opioids are still prescribed, despite their risks. After months of exchanging emails and having conversations with a producer, I decided that speaking on the record would be a calculated risk. As a doctor who had prescribed opioids, and who had lost patients because of their pain, I had been confronted by tough interviewers in the past.

The interview reopened a painful episode when a patient under the care of my pain clinic died — despite the treatment we provided, not because of it. The interviewer asked me about my patient's death. I chose not to address it during the interview out of respect for those involved, and I will refrain from doing so in the future.

A claim that I must address, however, is speaking fees. The documentary says that I was paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees which supposedly influenced my prescribing practices. The fact is that I was paid a nominal amount in speaking fees. The purpose of those speaking engagements was to educate clinicians about the safest ways to treat people in pain, not to encourage them to use opioids. At no time ever did I advocate for the use of any branded drug.

Gibney’s comment in an NPR interview that I was “trying to preach the gospel of the opioid” during my career is patently false. If critics can’t distinguish the difference between continuing medical education and being pro-patient (which I devoted my career to) and corporate shilling and being pro-opioid, then that’s their problem. They may want to rethink their profession of telling a story based in truth about a complicated topic.

Narrative over Nuance

Beyond the erroneous claims about me, my fundamental problem with the documentary is its totalizing depiction of an extremely complicated and often confounding societal predicament. According to the documentary, all nuance must comport with the narrative. Deaths due to opioid overdoses – all tragic – are placed under a spotlight, but deaths because of chronic pain, often complicated because of restricted access to opioids, are left alone in the dark.

This narrative could accelerate flawed policies already gaining traction. More policy decisions like the 2016 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) opioid prescribing guideline, could have a further chilling effect on opioid prescribing — despite the fact that lowering the number of opioid prescriptions does nothing to reduce the number of opioid-related overdose deaths.

The documentary appropriately highlights how opioids can, and do, lead to addiction and deaths. But the scientific fact is that not everyone who takes opioids gets addicted or dies; comparatively few do. The benefits of using some opioids outweigh the risks for many people with severe chronic pain. For a certain patient category, opioids can be the difference between life and death, and happiness and misery.

Having studied addiction for my entire career, I am deeply sensitive to the propensity of some people to be harmed by opioids. I also am deeply sensitive to intractable pain for which there are no treatment options today other than the use – as judiciously as possible – of opioids. My experience with patients confirms two things: opioids kill, but so does pain. We cannot continue to treat these outcomes as mutually exclusive.

We must resist the temptation to further restrict or ban opioids for people who desperately need them. Instead, physicians must be allowed to fulfill their professional responsibilities and uphold their oaths, evaluate patients with complicated needs, apply proper discernment, and treat their patients in accordance with the best available scientific evidence.

A CDC disease expert, DEA officer, member of Congress, activist, or documentarian should not ever attempt to practice medicine. 

People Suffer Needlessly

Today, one in five American adults suffers from chronic pain, or pain lasting longer than 12 weeks. Chronic pain is a full-blown crisis, not unlike the opioid crisis. Yet we hear precious little about the chronic pain crisis. Most people with pain silently, if unwillingly, endure their conditions. Few of us would listen to them, even if we had the opportunity.

Thirty years ago, I waited until my patient had finished telling me about her experiences. Then I simply said, “I believe you.” Hearing those three words, she burst into tears of relief. Few people had been willing to take her at her word when she told them her life had been derailed by unremitting pain. Hers was among the millions of voices that were, and remain, unheard.

The documentary’s central claim is that marketing opioids is a crime and was understood as such at the time when they began to be used to treat non-cancer pain. The use of opioids in appropriate circumstances for a certain kind of patient was not a crime then, nor is it today. As long as such narratives continue to take root, we shouldn’t be surprised if one “crime” produces another masquerading as a solution.

Lynn R. Webster, MD, consults with the pharmaceutical industry. He is author of the award-winning book The Painful Truth, and co-producer of the documentary It Hurts Until You Die. You can find Lynn on Twitter: @LynnRWebsterMD.

MindMed Investigating Use of Psychedelics to Treat Chronic Pain

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

A startup pharmaceutical company has announced plans to investigate the use of LSD and other psychedelics to treat chronic pain.

New York-based Mind Medicine (MindMed) is exploring the use of psychedelics to treat two pain conditions, which it is calling “Project Angie.” The company is already investigating the use of psychedelics to treat addiction, anxiety and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

"With the launch of Project Angie, we seek to align closely with MindMed's core mission to improve mental health and combat substance use for the many patients in need. If we can help to develop a new paradigm to treat pain, it may have the potential to greatly reduce the use of addictive medicines such as opioids currently ravaging society and its mental health," MindMed CEO & Co-Founder J.R. Rahn said in a statement.

MindMed did not disclose what pain conditions it was developing treatments for, but it is working with researchers in Switzerland who have a Phase 2 clinical trial underway on the use of LSD to treat cluster headache. The company said it is also evaluating a second indication for a “common, often debilitating, chronic pain syndrome.”

Interest in using psychedelics to treat medical conditions has been growing in recent years. Preliminary research suggests that microdoses of LSD, psilocybin (magic mushrooms) and other psychedelics may offer a new way to treat pain. The exact mechanism in which psychedelics have an analgesic effect is not fully understood, but early research indicates that LSD can modulate serotonin receptors that help regulate pain and inflammation.

"Evidence dating back to the 1950s suggests that LSD and other psychedelics may have analgesic effects, but this treatment area remains largely untapped by companies studying psychedelics, with the majority of research focusing solely on psychiatric indications," said Rob Barrow, MindMed’s Chief Development Officer. 

The company is planning to submit a Pre-Investigational New Drug (IND) application to the Food and Drug Administration for a Phase 2a proof of concept study of LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide) in the second half of 2021.

MindMed will have to clear some high regulatory hurdles. LSD, psilocybin, MDMA (Ecstasy) and other psychedelics are classified as Schedule I controlled substances, meaning they have a high potential for abuse and currently have no accepted medical use in the United States.

Don’t Worry Be Happy: Why People Turned to Cannabis During the Pandemic

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Demand for medical cannabis rose significantly in the U.S. during the pandemic, according to a new study that found many Americans turned to cannabis to relieve stress and make them feel happy.

The study was conducted by Veriheal, a telemedicine company that helps connect patients with licensed marijuana doctors and dispensaries.

In reviewing a database of over 125,000 Veriheal patients from January 2020 to March 2021, researchers found that applications for medical cannabis cards spiked during waves of Covid-19 infections, and as social unrest grew over the presidential election and the murder of George Floyd.

"Medical cannabis has traditionally been viewed as an alternative treatment for relieving physical pain and chronic ailments," said Maha Haq, CEO of Cultivating Research Education and Advocacy Group (CREA), a research firm that studies psychoactive drugs like cannabis and psychedelics.  

"That most people are actually looking to the plant to ease psychological stressors, often related to external social upheaval, is an incredibly important discovery that helps medical professionals better understand evolving consumer relationships with cannabis, and from there, improve the quality of their treatment and related mental healthcare programs." 

Asked what was the primary effect they wanted to get from medical cannabis, nearly half of patients (46%) picked “Happy” and less than a third (29%) said pain relief. Other patients said they used cannabis to help them relax, sleep, feel mellow or more focused.

The chart below shows that sign-ups and appointments for cannabis consultations rose sharply during stressful periods; when there were spikes in COVID-19 infections, last summer’s Black Lives Matter protests, and the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol in January 2021.

SOURCE: VeRIHEAL

SOURCE: VeRIHEAL

Researchers say the findings indicate that new cannabis consumers – at least during the pandemic -- were more likely to use cannabis to improve their mental and emotional health, as opposed to treating pain and other physical symptoms.  

“We found that people are seeking psychological relief in response to exogenous shocks including COVID-19 and beyond. Periods of social unrest, such as the Black Lives Matter protests and 2020 elections, can be seen as spikes in medical cannabis interest within our datasets," said Haq.

Positive Views About CBD Products

Most pain patients have favorable views about medical cannabis, according to a second, smaller survey of people being treated at pain management clinics in southern California. The findings were recently published in the Journal of Pain Research.

Researchers recruited 253 patients to participate in the survey, most of whom were on Medicaid or Medicare and had low incomes. Nearly two thirds (62%) said they had tried a CBD product in different formulations, including those containing THC.

Most CBD users said it significantly reduced their pain (59%) and allowed them to reduce or stop their use of pain medication (68%), including opioids (54%).  

CBD was particularly effective for those suffering from back pain (67%) and nerve pain (47%), and less effective for patients with fibromyalgia (21%) and migraine (33%).  

“While the familiarity with dosing was mixed and participants used a wide variety of products including products containing THC, they report that these products have helped them with many different pain-involving and neurological conditions,” wrote lead author Jan Schilling, MD, Scientific Director of Vitamed Research. “This cohort also reported that products both with and without THC have helped them to reduce overall pain medication and more specifically opioid medication.”

Most respondents believed that CBD was a good treatment option, not harmful and not addictive. About half said they would be more comfortable if their physician prescribed CBD products.

Task Force Calls for Update of Canada’s Opioid Guideline

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

A task force created by Health Canada to study the needs of nearly 8 million Canadians with chronic pain has released its third and final report, saying there is an urgent need for the federal government to address untreated pain and improve access to pain care.

"It is a critical time for action to address unmanaged pain across Canada. Chronic pain is largely invisible and for too long people with pain have faced stigma and had to navigate significant gaps in access to care,” said Fiona Campbell, MD, Co-Chair of the Canadian Pain Task Force.

The task force report – “An Action Plan for Pain in Canada” – calls for more pain research, improved training for pain care providers, and better coordination of government pain policies.

Notably, it also calls for an expansion of Canada’s 2017 opioid prescribing guideline, even while acknowledging the problems the guideline has caused by making access to opioid medication more difficult.   

“Efforts to address opioid-related harms have led to serious and unintended consequences for some people living with chronic pain, including unmanaged pain, increased stigma, reduced access to care for people who use opioids for pain relief, and preventable deaths,” the task force reported. “Despite widespread decreased opioid prescribing, and investments in a continuum of harm reduction, treatment, and prevention initiatives, there are record high numbers of overdose deaths in Canada.”

The report said the guideline should be updated “to better balance the risks of opioids with the risks of opioid discontinuation.” Additional guidance was also needed for treating short-term acute pain, alternatives to opioids, interpreting dose limits, and “best practices in deprescribing.”

The Canadian guideline was modeled after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline, which is being updated for many of the same “unintended consequences.” Opioid prescribing in the U.S. is at 20-year lows, while overdose deaths are at record highs.

‘Rearranging the Deck Chairs’

Some critics were unimpressed with the task force report, saying it equates opioids with addiction and doesn’t address how to improve access to opioid pain relievers.

“Health Canada’s Pain Task Force has finally finished rearranging the deck chairs on a ship that sank a decade ago,” Barry Ulmer, Executive Director of the Chronic Pain Association of Canada, said in a statement. “More and more Canadians suffer serious ongoing pain and, since 2011, fewer and fewer opiates — still the only proven remedy for serious acute and chronic pain — are prescribed to treat it.

“Unsurprisingly, a record rise in overdose deaths among those suffering from addictions who can’t find safe supply is tracking the crackdown and the rise of untreated pain, along with suicides among abandoned patients.” 

The task force said there was an “an emerging consensus” on how to improve pain care in Canada, and that it was up to Health Canada and the federal government to fund and combat a public health emergency.    

"People living with pain deserve relief from their pain, reassurance that they matter, and access to services required to improve their quality of life. We will continue to work with people with lived and living experience, as well as our partners and stakeholders, to explore new approaches and determine our next steps,” said Minister of Health Patty Hajdu.

Hajdu also announced that a $2.8 million grant was being given to the Toronto-based Centre of Effective Practice to provide treatment to patients living with addiction, mental illness and chronic pain. The funding comes from a Health Canada substance abuse program.

Oklahoma Law Protects Pain Patient Rights

By Pat Anson, PNN Editor

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt has signed into law bipartisan legislation that amends a state law regulating opioids and other controlled substances to better protect pain patients from forced opioid tapering and dose limits.

SB57 was passed unanimously by the Oklahoma House and Senate last month, and signed by Gov. Stitt on Monday. Patient advocates worked hard over the last few months to make changes to the state’s Anti-Drug Diversion Act, which imposed several limits on opioid prescribing.

One key amendment emphasizes that “individualized treatment” be provided to patients without tapering or mandatory dose limits, something that has been implemented around the country since the CDC released its controversial opioid guideline in 2016.

“Nothing in the Anti-Drug Diversion Act shall be construed to require practitioner to limit or forcibly taper a patient on opioid therapy. The standard of care requires effective and individualized treatment for each patient as deemed appropriate by the prescribing practitioner without an administrative or codified limit on dose or quantity that is more restrictive than approved by the Food and Drug Administration.”  

“I am so proud of Oklahoma for taking the side of the doctors and formally recognizing the FDA over the CDC. This starts the process of forcing control of regulating medicine back to the states where it always should have been,” said Tamera Lynn Stewart, National Director of the P3 Alliance (formerly known as the C50 Alliance), a patient advocacy group.

Stewart and other advocates were successful in getting further changes to the bill, such as requiring that patients be given access to their prescription drug monitoring program (PDMP) records; expanding the exemption for treating cancer pain with opioids; and clarifying that a palliative care provider does not have to be connected to a licensed hospice.  

“On the Senate floor, all of those changes were read out loud and it was still voted unanimously to pass it. All 151 of our legislators are 100% on board,” said Stewart.

It wasn’t easy. This was Stewart’s third legislative session as a patient advocate in Oklahoma. She made a point of attending every meeting that involved opioids, with help from P3 advocates Kari Kruska, Mark Reese, Julia Heath and Lawrence Pasternak.

Asked what advice she would give other advocates seeking to change legislation in their states, Stewart said it was important to stay visible and meet with as many lawmakers as possible.  

“Keep pushing. Keep advocating, not in an intimidating or fearful way, but being in front of them as often as possible,” she told PNN. “I learned a ton about how political this issue really is and it scared the hell out of me.”

Stewart said many lawmakers and regulators are aware that restrictive opioid policies are harmful to patients, but they are reluctant to speak up or even seek input from patients.

“I kind of forced my way in,” she explained. “I showed up at the public meetings. And if there was a public comment period, I stood up and spoke.”

The Oklahoma law is similar to a state law adopted in New Hampshire last year, which requires doctors and pharmacists to consider the “individualized needs” of pain patients and ensure they are “not unduly denied the medications needed." All decisions regarding pain therapy are left to providers who are required to treat patients “without fear of reprimand or discipline.”

What Would Sherlock Holmes Say About the Opioid Crisis?

By Carol Levy, PNN Columnist

“It is a capital mistake to theorize before you have all the evidence. It biases the judgment.” — Sherlock Holmes

It is also a mistake to mischaracterize or lie about evidence. But this is what is happening with the opioid crisis and with pain patients. Here’s an example of theorizing about opioids by Johns Hopkins Medicine in “The Science of Addiction.”

“For some time in this country we believed patients weren’t at risk of addiction. No one knows for sure the percentage of those who are at risk. What we do know now through an annual survey of drug use in the U.S., when people were asked if they had used heroin, researchers found that 50 percent of those who had also had a longtime history of opioid use and 50 percent of those went on to have problematic heroin use.”

One would have hoped Johns Hopkins would do better than “No one knows for sure” and then openly theorizing that pain patients inevitably become addicted to opioids and that many turn into heroin addicts.

There is no explanation of who had a “longtime history of opioid use,” what type of opioids they started with, or why they turned to heroin. But this is the kind of public messaging we see all the time about opioids and pain patients. 

Recently on the KevinMD medical blog, a pediatrician posted his story of the struggles he had as a medical student and doctor getting diagnosed for fibromyalgia. He also wrote about the problems he had getting appropriate treatment and how many of his colleagues were questioning whether fibromyalgia was “real” or not. 

A physician left a comment to the article (since deleted) saying this: “In my experience with musculoskeletal disease, at least 50+% of those who have been given the diagnosis, really don't have a disease other than secondary gain, ie, disability and pain meds.”  

I replied with a comment of my own: “It sounds like you have a bias against those whose complaint is body pain; and I have to assume that includes those with dx (diagnosis) of fibro and CRPS. It is people like you who make it so much harder for people like us to get proper care from the medical community.”  

The physician responded with: “You're probably partially right.” 

It’s a sad commentary, but a perfect example of a doctor theorizing about his patients with no data or evidence, except that they are coming to him with a pain complaint. We know the problems with both issues: Pain patients are given opioids. There is an opioid crisis. Who better to go after than people who need opioids for a medical reason? 

Our pain is invisible. Doctors mostly have to rely on what we tell them about our pain. It is a lot easier for them to say, “I don’t believe this patient” than to take the time to truly evaluate not only our pain, but what it has done to our lives. How our functioning and interacting in the world has been impacted by the disability caused by the pain. That is evidence. Disbelief is merely theory. 

This reminds me of another Sherlock Holmes story:

 Holmes and Watson are on a camping trip. In the middle of the night Holmes wakes up and gives Dr. Watson a nudge. "Watson," he says, "look up in the sky and tell me what you see."

"I see millions of stars, Holmes," says Watson.

"And what do you conclude from that, Watson?"

Watson thinks for a moment. "Well," he says, "astronomically, it tells me that there are millions of galaxies and potentially billions of planets. Astrologically, I observe that Saturn is in Leo. Horologically, I deduce that the time is approximately a quarter past three. Meteorologically, I suspect that we will have a beautiful day tomorrow. Theologically, I see that God is all-powerful, and we are small and insignificant. Uh, what does it tell you, Holmes?"

"Watson, you idiot! Someone has stolen our tent!”

Like Watson musing about the stars, we are constantly told that opioids are addictive and therefore patients on opioids must become addicted. They can't see our pain on an x-ray or in our blood work, so therefore it must not exist.

I'll give Mr. Holmes the last word: “There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact.”

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.”