Kevin Keitzman(voice of Kansas City sports) rips Andy Reid as a coach and parent..

[vincec]

26 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Odd that you chose to not bold, "Britt got hooked on painkillers when he suffered a football injury in high school."

 

This is what's wrong with our society.  No one wants to address the ROOT of the problem.

I disagree. I think that people spend far too much time looking for and lamenting over a problem's "roots." Whether it's what someone did to you or your parents, how you grew up, where you grew up, some bad stroke of luck, a poor decision, ... whatever.

 

Life is unfair. Everyone has problems. Everyone has to face adversity. It's how we choose to react to them in the present that determines how things will go in the future. Understanding the past can be helpful if it gives you an insight as to how you can react better now (like perhaps not prescribing painkillers so easily for injuries in the future), but using it as an excuse or a justification for anything is really counterproductive to improving situations. IMO, of course.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

Odd that you chose to not bold, "Britt got hooked on painkillers when he suffered a football injury in high school."

 

This is what's wrong with our society.  No one wants to address the ROOT of the problem.

 

I don't think the injury was the root of the addiction alone. The court suggested it was the environment they were housed in as well.

 

The judge said it best.  Living in his parents "drug emporium" of a house that was searched and found to filled with prescription narcotics was had become an unstable place and the sons needed to get out of there.  These kids were not busted in some pill house hovel...they were in their parents posh suburban home.  This was happening while they were all under one roof.

 

The older son said that, early on, he enjoyed being the spoiled rich kid who would go into poor neighborhoods to sell drugs.  

 

NO one is arguing the horrors of addiction, especially of a child.  But saying it's a terrible and tragic disease doesn't mean one can NEVER question the family dynamics under which it developed (twice in this family).   I don't think that's a controversial statement.

 

Let me pose this question:  would anyone here, given the scenario where 2 of your sons living at home and floundering with addiction and the law and you have millions in the bank, at some point say "I have to get my boys out of this life, out of this town---I'm devoting all of my time and energy to saving them starting now (say, after they were jailed even)"?

 

Or would you say:  "I've done all I can.  This is a terrible disease.  See you after work, guys"?

[Gugny]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

I don't think the injury was the root of the addiction alone. The court suggested it was the environment they were housed in as well.

 

The judge said it best.  Living in his parents "drug emporium" of a house that was searched and found to filled with prescription narcotics was had become an unstable place and the sons needed to get out of there.  These kids were not busted in some pill house hovel...they were in their parents posh suburban home.  This was happening while they were all under one roof.

 

The older son said that, early on, he enjoyed being the spoiled rich kid who would go into poor neighborhoods to sell drugs.  

 

NO one is arguing the horrors of addiction, especially of a child.  But saying it's a terrible and tragic disease doesn't mean one can NEVER question the family dynamics under which it developed (twice in this family).   I don't think that's a controversial statement.

 

Let me pose this question:  would anyone here, given the scenario where 2 of your sons living at home and floundering with addiction and the law and you have millions in the bank, at some point say "I have to get my boys out of this life, out of this town---I'm devoting all of my time and energy to saving them starting now (say, after they were jailed even)"?

 

Or would you say:  "I've done all I can.  This is a terrible disease.  See you after work, guys"?

 

A judge is not qualified to determine why someone he does not know has become a drug addict.  He's actually just as qualified as the dumb schmuck who just lost his radio gig.

 

As for the questions you posed, it's really easy to be an armchair/Monday morning quarterback and say, "well I would have done ....."  

[Mr. WEO]

4 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

A judge is not qualified to determine why someone he does not know has become a drug addict.  He's actually just as qualified as the dumb schmuck who just lost his radio gig.

 

As for the questions you posed, it's really easy to be an armchair/Monday morning quarterback and say, "well I would have done ....."  

 

The judge wasnt determining why these guys became drug addict.  Far from it.  He's was commenting on the circumstances that ended in both of them, separately being in his court for drug related offenses and he made those comments after hearing all of the evidence brought forth in his court.  The facts were as he described him.  As a "judge" (and one who sees these cases innumerable times in a career), he is completely qualified to argue the obvious--and he did.  He said the Reid's home was a disaster.  A bad place for drug addict s to be living even with both parents under the roof with them.  Questioning the judge's statements at this sentencing senseless.

 

And, no, it's not easy at all.  And the question really isn't Monday morning QB'ing.   As I've asked it, it's answerable.

Edited June 29, 2019 by Mr. WEO

[Doc Brown]

He could've easily made his point without bringing Reid's family tragedy into the discussion.   I don't know if he should've been fired over it, but I disagree with those defending Keitzman.  I encourage local media to be as critical of their teams as possible as long as they keep it within the parameters of football. 

[Mr. WEO]

12 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

He could've easily made his point without bringing Reid's family tragedy into the discussion.   I don't know if he should've been fired over it, but I disagree with those defending Keitzman.  I encourage local media to be as critical of their teams as possible as long as they keep it within the parameters of football. 

 

How?  He was specifically linking the two:  his perception that the way Reid dealt with his sons' behavioral issues is similar to his dealing with sociopaths on his roster (just keep playing football..)  How does he make that point without mentioning the sons?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

22 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

Sadly at least a couple like you describe.

 

 

...and my thoughts and prayers go out to the good folks my friend.......a parent losing a child still is incomprehensible for me...a close friend who has long since passed, outlived ALL THREE  of his sons......one died tragically as a child when a playmate was playing with Daddy's gun shot through the bedroom door because they wouldn't let him in to play, another due to heavy drinking in his earlier years despite finally getting his life on track remarrying his ex-wife who divorced him due to drinking, and the 3rd who was shot down while in the Air Force....I could NOT even stoop low enough to wish such tragedy on this radio pig scum........

[Hapless Bills Fan]

23 hours ago, Gugny said:

Odd that you chose to not bold, "Britt got hooked on painkillers when he suffered a football injury in high school."

This is what's wrong with our society.  No one wants to address the ROOT of the problem.

 

Agreed. 

I'll reiterate as a PSA something I posted this spring.

 

My "hair stood straight up on my head" moment was reading this Washington Post article.  A nugget: teens who received prescription opiods with wisdom tooth extraction were 15x more likely to be diagnosed with opiod abuse than teens who did not.  Dentists are the most frequent prescribers of opiods for youth age 10-19.

When our kid had her wisdoms extracted, the oral surgeon's staff really twisted our arms to fill the prescription "just in case".  What kind of blue-meanie parent wouldn't want to be able to help a child crying in severe pain at 2 am by giving them something stronger than acetaminophen?  Yet by so doing, we were putting her at risk for a severe, potentially fatal disease of drug addiction.  And there are studies which suggest actually acetaminophen and ibuprofen work better!!!!!

 

Similar scenarios for sports injuries. 

There has GOT to be a push from the AMA and the ADA to educate its member physicians and dentists, and to educate the public about the risks of requesting or filling these prescriptions.
 

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

How?  He was specifically linking the two:  his perception that the way Reid dealt with his sons' behavioral issues is similar to his dealing with sociopaths on his roster (just keep playing football..)  How does he make that point without mentioning the sons?

 

And my point is that since there is no available evidence that the way Reid dealt with his son's issues and the way he is dealing with problem players are the same, linking the two is a douche move. 

I notice you are not addressing the point made that whether or not Reid would agree that he was a bad parent (in the wake of his son's death) is not germaine to this

 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Agreed. 

I'll reiterate as a PSA something I posted this spring.

 

My "hair stood straight up on my head" moment was reading this Washington Post article.  A nugget: teens who received prescription opiods with wisdom tooth extraction were 15x more likely to be diagnosed with opiod abuse than teens who did not.  Dentists are the most frequent prescribers of opiods for youth age 10-19.

When our kid had her wisdoms extracted, the oral surgeon's staff really twisted our arms to fill the prescription "just in case".  What kind of blue-meanie parent wouldn't want to be able to help a child crying in severe pain at 2 am by giving them something stronger than acetaminophen?  Yet by so doing, we were putting her at risk for a severe, potentially fatal disease of drug addiction.  And there are studies which suggest actually acetaminophen and ibuprofen work better!!!!!

 

Similar scenarios for sports injuries. 

There has GOT to be a push from the AMA and the ADA to educate its member physicians and dentists, and to educate the public about the risks of requesting or filling these prescriptions.

 

And my point is that since there is no available evidence that the way Reid dealt with his son's issues and the way he is dealing with problem players are the same, linking the two is a douche move. 

I notice you are not addressing the point made that whether or not Reid would agree that he was a bad parent (in the wake of his son's death) is not germaine to this

 

...outside the purview of sports and OFF LIMITS period.....despite it being my opinion 'Hap, this radio pig's firing may lend some credence...........

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 6/29/2019 at 11:14 AM, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I'm going to disagree.  Andy Reid had not one but 2 sons who served prison time for drug and/or gun charges.  In fact, at Britt Reid's sentencing, the judge called Andy Reid's home, where both adult sons were living, a "drug emporium".  This was all going on....in Andy Reid's house!

 

"There isn't any structure there that this court can depend upon," Montgomery County Judge Steven O'Neill said before sentencing 22-year-old Britt Reid to up to 23 months in jail plus probation.

 

"I'm saying this is a family in crisis," O'Neill said.

Earlier Thursday, O'Neill sentenced 24-year-old Garrett Reid, a drug addict and dealer who said he got a thrill out of selling drugs in "the 'hood," to up to 23 months in jail for smashing into another motorist's car while high on heroin.

O'Neill noted that searches of the Reid home found illegal and prescription drugs throughout the house. He said both boys had been overmedicated throughout much of their lives and that Britt got hooked on painkillers when he suffered a football injury in high school.

 

While the judge was sympathetic to the parents, when Britt Reid says he did everything without his parents' knowledge, the judged "questioned that claim".

 

Reid took a few weeks off and then he went right back to work in a job that demands all of his time away from a "family in crisis".

 

So anyone feigning surprise that this topic was broached by some radio bro (i.e. brought up at all) in the context of that same HC tolerating players with bad behavior is ignoring the history here.  Reid's parenting was publically discussed at both of his sons' arraignments by the judge who sentenced them both.  Therefore, it can't be a forbidden topic just because no one has brought up in 12 years.....

 

 

I would have to know a lot more about the specifics of the situation to agree that it's germaine and relevant to Reid's behavior as a football coach.

I note that at the time frame of the article you quote, the sons were 22 and 24.  Having known the parents of an adult addict child and what they went through, it can easily be the case that the parents are in a cleft stick at this point - they know that their kid is very likely abusing drugs or alcohol in their premises, they neither approve nor support this, but their options for dealing with it are extremely limited.  They could kick the kid out and have them take their addiction to the street.   That's about it.  So they take a "don't ask" approach.  Both can be true - the kids actually do stuff without the parents knowledge, but the parents could know more and choose not to because what can they do?

Reid is not "parenting" at the point described in this article.  He has "parented", his children have been legally adults for 4 and for 6 years.  His options became much more limited the day they turned 18.

If the kids were "overmedicated" as younger kids and that may have been the initiating factor of their addiction problem, as noted there is no shortage of physicians and trainers who will say that's the right and responsible thing to do  - get your kid narcotic pain meds to help them cope with the pain of sports injuries.  Been there, heard that.

In any event, 5 years after the court interaction described above, Garrett Reid was found dead of a heroin overdose.

So there are a bunch of implicit assumptions that have to be made here for your point to be valid:
1) The judge is correct that Reid's parenting whilst his kids were growing up (4 and 6 years before the article you post) was causally responsible for their addictions

2) Reid's parenting and his viewpoint about it have to have undergone no change between the point of this article, the point of his son's death 5 years later, and today

3) The "shock jock" is correct that Reid's parenting actions  are similar to his handling of troubled players - a point where no evidence is offered (or ought to be available)

 

 

 

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Agreed. 

I'll reiterate as a PSA something I posted this spring.

 

My "hair stood straight up on my head" moment was reading this Washington Post article.  A nugget: teens who received prescription opiods with wisdom tooth extraction were 15x more likely to be diagnosed with opiod abuse than teens who did not.  Dentists are the most frequent prescribers of opiods for youth age 10-19.

When our kid had her wisdoms extracted, the oral surgeon's staff really twisted our arms to fill the prescription "just in case".  What kind of blue-meanie parent wouldn't want to be able to help a child crying in severe pain at 2 am by giving them something stronger than acetaminophen?  Yet by so doing, we were putting her at risk for a severe, potentially fatal disease of drug addiction.  And there are studies which suggest actually acetaminophen and ibuprofen work better!!!!!

 

Similar scenarios for sports injuries. 

There has GOT to be a push from the AMA and the ADA to educate its member physicians and dentists, and to educate the public about the risks of requesting or filling these prescriptions.
 

 

And my point is that since there is no available evidence that the way Reid dealt with his son's issues and the way he is dealing with problem players are the same, linking the two is a douche move. 

I notice you are not addressing the point made that whether or not Reid would agree that he was a bad parent (in the wake of his son's death) is not germaine to this

 

 

Physicians are aware of the risks and also of  non-opioid alternatives.  But the risk, for oxycontin as an example, of abuse is .0055 per 100,000 prescriptions.

 

You can conclude it's a douche move, many have.  I'm just saying it's not a question that can't be asked.  And to answer your question, I bet in retrospect Reid (ANY PARENT) would look back at how his career, etc, could have been altered to have a better outcome for his TWO struggling children.  So it is germaine to this topic. 

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I would have to know a lot more about the specifics of the situation to agree that it's germaine and relevant to Reid's behavior as a football coach.

I note that at the time frame of the article you quote, the sons were 22 and 24.  Having known the parents of an adult addict child and what they went through, it can easily be the case that the parents are in a cleft stick at this point - they know that their kid is very likely abusing drugs or alcohol in their premises, they neither approve nor support this, but their options for dealing with it are extremely limited.  They could kick the kid out and have them take their addiction to the street.   That's about it.  So they take a "don't ask" approach.  Both can be true - the kids actually do stuff without the parents knowledge, but the parents could know more and choose not to because what can they do?

Reid is not "parenting" at the point described in this article.  He has "parented", his children have been legally adults for 4 and for 6 years.  His options became much more limited the day they turned 18.

If the kids were "overmedicated" as younger kids and that may have been the initiating factor of their addiction problem, as noted there is no shortage of physicians and trainers who will say that's the right and responsible thing to do  - get your kid narcotic pain meds to help them cope with the pain of sports injuries.  Been there, heard that.

In any event, 5 years after the court interaction described above, Garrett Reid was found dead of a heroin overdose.

So there are a bunch of implicit assumptions that have to be made here for your point to be valid:
1) The judge is correct that Reid's parenting whilst his kids were growing up (4 and 6 years before the article you post) was causally responsible for their addictions

2) Reid's parenting and his viewpoint about it have to have undergone no change between the point of this article, the point of his son's death 5 years later, and today

3) The "shock jock" is correct that Reid's parenting actions  are similar to his handling of troubled players - a point where no evidence is offered (or ought to be available)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

His adult sons living in his home needed parenting.  This is clear.

 

The shock jock was implying that the way Reid handled both topics was with status quo---keep coaching, keep racking up the wins.  I'm just telling you that is the line he is drawing.

Edited June 30, 2019 by Mr. WEO

[Boca BIlls]

You guys got what you wanted.... I guess that ends this conversation.

[Augie]

44 minutes ago, Boca BIlls said:

You guys got what you wanted.... I guess that ends this conversation.

 

?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

49 minutes ago, Boca BIlls said:

You guys got what you wanted.... I guess that ends this conversation.

...and what the hell does THAT mean?........

[Augie]

21 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

...and what the hell does THAT mean?........

 

I posted about my buddy who’s Doc refused to give him, or ANYBODY, OxyContin because it was just too addictive and dangerous. Much better ways of dealing with pain. Quoted WEO’s .0055 per 100,000 stat. No idea where that came from.

 

I then related how my dentist’s wife was in a car wreck and got some Oxy, and now her kids don’t have a mom.  I think the stat is some made up BS, and if you know the people instead of the (bogus) stats, the whole thing looks very differently. That’s as deep as I went. 

 

Then I deleted it, because I don’t want to debate with a bunch of ignorant knuckleheads. That was on me...not @Boca BIlls (I think, but it’s a guess on my part). 

 

 

.

Edited June 30, 2019 by Augie

[JohnC]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

How?  He was specifically linking the two:  his perception that the way Reid dealt with his sons' behavioral issues is similar to his dealing with sociopaths on his roster (just keep playing football..)  How does he make that point without mentioning the sons?

He was linking the two issues (football and family) when it wasn't necessary to make the point that he was trying to make. He could have just stated that the coach doesn't have a good record in bringing in troubled players and rehabilitating them. Was it necessary to bring up the family history to make the football point? I don't believe that it was a worthy comparison. In general, bringing up one's personal history to illustrate a point regarding one's job performance is very ill-advised and inappropriate. 

[Gugny]

1 hour ago, Augie said:

 

I posted about my buddy who’s Doc refused to give him, or ANYBODY, OxyContin because it was just too addictive and dangerous. Much better ways of dealing with pain. Quoted WEO’s .0055 per 100,000 stat. No idea where that came from.

 

I then related how my dentist’s wife was in a car wreck and got some Oxy, and now her kids don’t have a mom.  I think the stat is some made up BS, and if you know the people instead of the (bogus) stats, the whole thing looks very differently. That’s as deep as I went. 

 

Then I deleted it, because I don’t want to debate with a bunch of ignorant knuckleheads. That was on me...not @Boca BIlls (I think, but it’s a guess on my part). 

 

 

.

 

I was going to respond to your post, but decided against it for the same reason you deleted it.  But ***** it.  This is what I was going to respond with and what I am responding with ...

 

Opioid drugs are highly addictive. Prescription variants are no safer than illicit heroin. In fact, because of its legality, overdose is far more common for drugs like OxyContin than it is for heroin. The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy reports 3,635 people died as the result of a heroin overdose in 2012 across 28 reporting states, compared to 9,869 people who died from prescription opioids.

 

https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/oxycontin-addiction/#gref

 

 

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

I was going to respond to your post, but decided against it for the same reason you deleted it.  But ***** it.  This is what I was going to respond with and what I am responding with ...

 

Opioid drugs are highly addictive. Prescription variants are no safer than illicit heroin. In fact, because of its legality, overdose is far more common for drugs like OxyContin than it is for heroin. The National Association of Boards of Pharmacy reports 3,635 people died as the result of a heroin overdose in 2012 across 28 reporting states, compared to 9,869 people who died from prescription opioids.

 

https://www.therecoveryvillage.com/oxycontin-addiction/#gref

 

 

 

I’m sure the numbers have exploded since 2012. As fentanyl is easier and more attractive to those “in the business”, things get even scarier. For those who don’t know,  fentanyl is like 50 times stronger than heroin, but you never know what you’re getting. You can die from touching fentanyl. When you can’t get the pills, you do what you have to do. 

 

At one point about 85% of all OxyContin sold in the country was in Florida as laws allowed pill mills. People came from all over. OxyContin is the devil, and I agree with my buddy’s doctor.....it should be banned. It would be already if there wasn’t so much money involved. That’s the sad bottom line. 

[Gugny]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

I’m sure the numbers have exploded since 2012. As fentanyl is easier and more attractive to those “in the business”, things get even scarier. For those who don’t know,  fentanyl is like 50 times stronger than heroin, but you never know what you’re getting. You can die from touching fentanyl. When you can’t get the pills, you do what you have to do. 

 

At one point about 85% of all OxyContin sold in the country was in Florida as laws allowed pill mills. People came from all over. OxyContin is the devil, and I agree with my buddy’s doctor.....it should be banned. It would be already if there wasn’t so much money involved. That’s the sad bottom line. 

 

I agree with everything you said, here.  And it is VERY sad.

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Augie said:

 

I posted about my buddy who’s Doc refused to give him, or ANYBODY, OxyContin because it was just too addictive and dangerous. Much better ways of dealing with pain. Quoted WEO’s .0055 per 100,000 stat. No idea where that came from.

 

I then related how my dentist’s wife was in a car wreck and got some Oxy, and now her kids don’t have a mom.  I think the stat is some made up BS, and if you know the people instead of the (bogus) stats, the whole thing looks very differently. That’s as deep as I went. 

 

Then I deleted it, because I don’t want to debate with a bunch of ignorant knuckleheads. That was on me...not @Boca BIlls (I think, but it’s a guess on my part). 

 

 

.

 

https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7517-8-29 (there are others).

 

No matter how tragic any one incident may be (and I am sympathetic to the personal suffering you have shared with us here regarding this subject), in medicine, we don't base decisions on anecdotes.  We use data to guide our decisions. Convincing, new data will always be used to change practice.  But stories can't...

 

Every provider should seriously consider non-narcotic alternatives before prescribing.  My personal opinion is that every provider (MD, NP, PA) should NOT be able to prescribe narcotics (those who have a DEA number of course).  I think all patients should have to go to a "Narcotic Provider" if they need more than 5 pills prescribed, just like in NYS where they have to really have to go out of their way to find a medical marijuana prescriber.  That may be impractical, but it have an immediate profound impact.

 

 

[Augie]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7517-8-29 (there are others).

 

No matter how tragic any one incident may be (and I am sympathetic to the personal suffering you have shared with us here regarding this subject), in medicine, we don't base decisions on anecdotes.  We use data to guide our decisions. Convincing, new data will always be used to change practice.  But stories can't...

 

Every provider should seriously consider non-narcotic alternatives before prescribing.  My personal opinion is that every provider (MD, NP, PA) should NOT be able to prescribe narcotics (those who have a DEA number of course).  I think all patients should have to go to a "Narcotic Provider" if they need more than 5 pills prescribed, just like in NYS where they have to really have to go out of their way to find a medical marijuana prescriber.  That may be impractical, but it have an immediate profound impact.

 

 

 

I read the first paragraph. With so many doctors refusing to prescribe OxyContin, it’s not anecdotal. It’s real life and death science, and how to make the most money. Period. 

[Mr. WEO]

11 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I’m sure the numbers have exploded since 2012. As fentanyl is easier and more attractive to those “in the business”, things get even scarier. For those who don’t know,  fentanyl is like 50 times stronger than heroin, but you never know what you’re getting. You can die from touching fentanyl. When you can’t get the pills, you do what you have to do. 

 

At one point about 85% of all OxyContin sold in the country was in Florida as laws allowed pill mills. People came from all over. OxyContin is the devil, and I agree with my buddy’s doctor.....it should be banned. It would be already if there wasn’t so much money involved. That’s the sad bottom line. 

 

No of that money goes to the providers.  And pharmaceutical grade fentanyl, while never should be available outside of a hospital, it is safely used every day in nearly every ICU and OR in every hospital in the country.

1 minute ago, Augie said:

 

I read the first paragraph. With so many doctors refusing to prescribe OxyContin, it’s not anecdotal. It’s real life and death science, and how to make the most money. Period. 

 

 

Read the second paragraph.

 

And doctors aren't making money writing scripts.

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

He was linking the two issues (football and family) when it wasn't necessary to make the point that he was trying to make. He could have just stated that the coach doesn't have a good record in bringing in troubled players and rehabilitating them. Was it necessary to bring up the family history to make the football point? I don't believe that it was a worthy comparison. In general, bringing up one's personal history to illustrate a point regarding one's job performance is very ill-advised and inappropriate. 

 

Well, the comparison WAS his point, so he would say "yes".

[Augie]

3 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No of that money goes to the providers.  And pharmaceutical grade fentanyl, while never should be available outside of a hospital, it is safely used every day in nearly every ICU and OR in every hospital in the country.

 

 

Read the second paragraph.

 

And doctors aren't making money writing scripts.

 

Well, the comparison WAS his point, so he would say "yes".

 

They make money by having patients, many of whom are there for exactly what they prescribe. They are also courted to no end by the pharmaceutical companies who push the stuff. Get your head in the real world. 

 

Look, my wife’s immediate and extended family are almost ALL doctors (with a few lawyers sprinkled in). They agree with me, not some study you read. In fact, I had long discussion with one just last month. He has a nice practice in the Carolinas but has a specialty in addiction. He’s known throughout the mid-Atlantic states for his care and research. HE thinks OxyContin is evil. 

 

Copy and paste all the crap you want. People in the real world are on this side of the argument. Don’t read it, live it either in life or as a profession. Short of that, you are pointing out why I originally deleted my first post here. I’m out, not willing to argue against ignorance. 

 

 

.

Edited June 30, 2019 by Augie

[Mr. WEO]

3 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

They make money by having patients, many of whom are there for exactly what they prescribe. They are also courted to no end by the pharmaceutical companies who push the stuff. Get your head in the real world. 

 

Look, my wife’s immediate and extended family are almost ALL doctors (with a few lawyers sprinkled in). They agree with me, not some study you read. In fact, I had long discussion with one who has a nice practice in the Carolinas but has a specialty in addiction. He’s know throughout the mid-Atlantic states for his care and research. HE thinks OxyContin is evil. 

 

Copy and paste all the crap you want. People in the real world are on this side of the argument. Don’t read it, live it either in life or as a profession. Short of that, you are pointing out why I originally deleted my first post here. I’m out, not willing to argue against ignorance. 

 

 

This is my real world.  

 

I don't make more money on a patient visit by prescribing anything.  Also, "sunshine laws" have made most of the pharma junkets for Docs a thing of the distant past.  My university employer doesn't allow me to accept a slice of pizza for a minute with a pharmaceutical rep.  

 

I've already explicitly told you my thoughts about the presiding of narcotics.  Any of these meds can be highly addictive.  But every prescriber knows that the vast majority of single prescription patients will not become addicted to narcotics.  No doctor can state this as fact because it's simply not true.

 

I get your sensitivity on this issue.  But those of us in this "real world" have to deal with this on a daily basis.

 

I'll bow out here, because this is no longer a conversation.

 

Cheers.

[JohnC]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No of that money goes to the providers.  And pharmaceutical grade fentanyl, while never should be available outside of a hospital, it is safely used every day in nearly every ICU and OR in every hospital in the country.

 

 

Read the second paragraph.

 

And doctors aren't making money writing scripts.

 

Well, the comparison WAS his point, so he would say "yes".

You missed my point. The comparison didn't need to be made to make his basic point about how Reid brings in renegade players and then has to deal with the messy aftermath. That's the point!

[Cripple Creek]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

https://harmreductionjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1477-7517-8-29 (there are others).

 

No matter how tragic any one incident may be (and I am sympathetic to the personal suffering you have shared with us here regarding this subject), in medicine, we don't base decisions on anecdotes.  We use data to guide our decisions. Convincing, new data will always be used to change practice.  But stories can't...

 

Every provider should seriously consider non-narcotic alternatives before prescribing.  My personal opinion is that every provider (MD, NP, PA) should NOT be able to prescribe narcotics (those who have a DEA number of course).  I think all patients should have to go to a "Narcotic Provider" if they need more than 5 pills prescribed, just like in NYS where they have to really have to go out of their way to find a medical marijuana prescriber.  That may be impractical, but it have an immediate profound impact.

 

 

So, you're telling me that each resident of Ohio really needed 69 opoids? That's what was prescribed in one year.  Your system, and your people are broken.

[Mr. WEO]

46 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You missed my point. The comparison didn't need to be made to make his basic point about how Reid brings in renegade players and then has to deal with the messy aftermath. That's the point!

 

Yeah, but clearly that was not what the radio guy was saying.  He wouldn't have commented at all if it was just to say "Andy Reid tolerates bad men on his team".  He very clearly, specifically, wanted to link his tolerance for bad behavior in his roster with, in his mind, a permissive behavior with his sons.  Not sure how you could have missed that.

15 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said:

So, you're telling me that each resident of Ohio really needed 69 opoids? That's what was prescribed in one year.  Your system, and your people are broken.

 

No, I'm not telling you that.   In your example, a very small number of prescribers prescribed a massive number of pills to a small number of Ohioans, many of which were then likely sold to others for money.  

 

 

[Augie]

On 60 Minutes tonight (maybe a replay) about the possible future of opioid manufactures getting hammered in court. As they should. I want nothing, other than to force them to be responsible. 

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Yeah, but clearly that was not what the radio guy was saying.  He wouldn't have commented at all if it was just to say "Andy Reid tolerates bad men on his team".  He very clearly, specifically, wanted to link his tolerance for bad behavior in his roster with, in his mind, a permissive behavior with his sons.  Not sure how you could have missed that.

I disagree how you are framing the issue. The central topic was Reid bringing in renegades and not being able to modify them. That was what he was getting at with the family reference. There was no need to go there. In fact, if he would made the simple argument about the players and not bring up the family his argument would have been more clearly made without the populace outraged by the personal issue. As it turned out the issue about the  players was sidetracked by the explosive response over the family tragedies. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, JohnC said:

I disagree how you are framing the issue. The central topic was Reid bringing in renegades and not being able to modify them. That was what he was getting at with the family reference. There was no need to go there. In fact, if he would made the simple argument about the players and not bring up the family his argument would have been more clearly made without the populace outraged by the personal issue. As it turned out the issue about the  players was sidetracked by the explosive response over the family tragedies. 

 

 

That wasn't his intent.  Just saying Reid brings in bad players is obvious.  Why would anyone even comment on it?  This guy sees it as a character defect with Reid.  That's why he spoke out on this--because he thinks this is why Reid has these bums on his team---because he doesn't care about that stuff.

[Augie]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

That wasn't his intent.  Just saying Reid brings in bad players is obvious.  Why would anyone even comment on it?  This guy sees it as a character defect with Reid.  That's why he spoke out on this--because he thinks this is why Reid has these bums on his team---because he doesn't care about that stuff.

 

Purdue pharma on 60 Minutes (interestingly enough timed) admitted in court they lied about your less than 1% stat. Just sayin’. Reading is nice, but living in the real world tells you a lot. 

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, Augie said:

 

Purdue pharma on 60 Minutes (interestingly enough timed) admitted in court they lied about your less than 1% stat. Just sayin’. Reading is nice, but living in the real world tells you a lot. 

 

The stat wasn't produced by Purdue...

 

I don't know how else to express this to you.  You don't believe that the vast majority of patients prescribed a single script of narcotics escapes addiction.  You call that the "real world", yet you base this on anecdotes and phone calls.  

 

If you don't believe in data, that's fine--because your real world clearly doesn't depend on it to function.   In my world, we can't do that, obviously, because of the consequences.

 

[Augie]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

The stat wasn't produced by Purdue...

 

I don't know how else to express this to you.  You don't believe that the vast majority of patients prescribed a single script of narcotics escapes addiction.  You call that the "real world", yet you base this on anecdotes and phone calls.  

 

If you don't believe in data, that's fine--because your real world clearly doesn't depend on it to function.   In my world, we can't do that, obviously, because of the consequences.

 

OK, put it this way. Big Pharma is getting sued, which they will lose, and they’ve already admitted to lying about their previous claims. You believe what you want. Oh, by the way, cigarettes are bad for you too.  And to be clear, this is NOT personal, this is just obvious. It’s a reason that 1/3 of 60 Minutes was spent on it tonight and it’s a constant issue. Don’t be lame and think it’s a non-issue. 

 

I’m done, at least for now. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, Augie said:

OK, put it this way. Big Pharma is getting sued, which they will lose, and they’ve already admitted to lying about their previous claims. You believe what you want. Oh, by the way, cigarettes are bad for you too.  And to be clear, this is NOT personal, this is just obvious. It’s a reason that 1/3 of 60 Minutes was spent on it tonight and it’s a constant issue. Don’t be lame and think it’s a non-issue. 

 

I’m done, at least for now. 

 

Can you point to any post where I have even hinted it was a "non-issue"?  You're straight up fabricating at this point.  I've said the opposite over and over..

 

Go in peace and learn more.

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

The stat wasn't produced by Purdue...

 

I don't know how else to express this to you.  You don't believe that the vast majority of patients prescribed a single script of narcotics escapes addiction.  You call that the "real world", yet you base this on anecdotes and phone calls.  

 

If you don't believe in data, that's fine--because your real world clearly doesn't depend on it to function.   In my world, we can't do that, obviously, because of the consequences.

 

WEO, The drug companies are being sued and settling law suits all over the country not because they are not culpable for the epidemic of addiction but because they know that the evidence proves otherwise. The carnage exists throughout the country sparing no segment of the society. It's not anecdotal evidence but rather a large body of evidence that addictive pain killer drugs were irresponsibly issued without the required caution. The underpinning reason for this recklessness was greed. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/purdue-pharma-state-of-oklahoma-reach-settlement-in-landmark-opioid-lawsuit/2019/03/26/69aa5cda-4f11-11e9-a3f7-78b7525a8d5f_story.html?utm_term=.1fa74dec2449

[Augie]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Can you point to any post where I have even hinted it was a "non-issue"?  You're straight up fabricating at this point.  I've said the opposite over and over..

 

Go in peace and learn more.

 

OK, underselling it to the point of not being rational. 

[Augie]

26 minutes ago, JohnC said:

WEO, The drug companies are being sued and settling law suits all over the country not because they are not culpable for the epidemic of addiction but because they know that the evidence proves otherwise. The carnage exists throughout the country sparing no segment of the society. It's not anecdotal evidence but rather a large body of evidence that addictive pain killer drugs were irresponsibly issued without the required caution. The underpinning reason for this recklessness was greed. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/purdue-pharma-state-of-oklahoma-reach-settlement-in-landmark-opioid-lawsuit/2019/03/26/69aa5cda-4f11-11e9-a3f7-78b7525a8d5f_story.html?utm_term=.1fa74dec2449

 

WEO will not be a fan of the real facts, I’m guessing. Don’t give me a link to a company funded study....who won in and out of court. THOSE are the facts. And this is just the beginning. They are already talking bankruptcy. 

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

WEO will not be a fan of the real facts, I’m guessing. Don’t give me a link to a company funded study....who won in and out of court. THOSE are the facts. And this is just the beginning. They are already talking bankruptcy. 

The world is upside down. Republican AGs suing giant drug companies. That's like mommas taking their own kids to court for misbehavior. 

[Cripple Creek]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

No, I'm not telling you that.   In your example, a very small number of prescribers prescribed a massive number of pills to a small number of Ohioans, many of which were then likely sold to others for money.  

 

 

I'm glad you agree that your system is horribly broken.

[Augie]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

No, I'm not telling you that.   In your example, a very small number of prescribers prescribed a massive number of pills to a small number of Ohioans, many of which were then likely sold to others for money.  

 

 

 

Duh? Do you feel embarrassed right now? Or do you STILL not get it?