Usually, when people think of Southwest Missouri, they think of the conservative bastion of the state. Of course, there are different opinions about what is conservative and what isn’t. The Branson Board of Aldermen seems to be preparing to demonstrate that they can be just as liberal as any other place in the state!
As is true of many other entities throughout Missouri, the Branson Board of Aldermen has the good intentions of protecting us all from the crimes of others by requiring a doctor’s prescription for pseudoephedrine products, which are currently over-the-counter (OTC) medicines.
The Branson aldermen have been sold on the “fact” that this approach will reduce the occurrence of meth production. It may do so temporarily but, as has been the case with other quick-fix approaches, it won’t last long.
Like so many other elected bodies with good intentions, the Branson Board of Aldermen believes increasing the cost of our medical care is a good thing – that, somehow, forcing citizens to pay to go to the doctor to get a prescription for OTC medicines is a good deal. Take it from experience – it’s not!
They haven’t learned the lessons from other places that have passed similar ordinances where consumers have a choice where to shop. Take St. Charles County, for example.
The St. Charles County Council passed an ordinance that requires a doctor’s prescription for OTC medicines containing pseudoephedrine basically in a pill form. Their contention is that other products (such as liquid capsules, etc.), which meth makers have not figured out how to use (YET!), are just as effective. They further assert that “your” doctor will simply phone in the prescription for you. Again, from personal experience – none of it works that way in real life!
The ordinance went into effect on August 30, 2010. Since we live in a world that government fully understands – continue reading after you stop laughing – the St. Charles County ordinance was effective and everyone complied with it, right? Wrong!
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported in “Pseudoephedrine sales jump in cities near St. Charles County” that, thanks to the actions of the St. Charles County government, pseudoephedrine sales actually increased – in other places! To quote the article:
A statewide database showed sales at pharmacies in Bridgeton jumped by 81 percent last month compared with August. The increases in Maryland Heights and Chesterfield were 59 percent and 51 percent, respectively.
The folks pushing this “good intention” bill claim those increases are due to the meth makers going to these places to buy product. Unfortunately for them, the people who are actually interfacing with buyers say it’s in fact law-abiding citizens making the purchases:
Grellner contends that meth-makers from St. Charles County are responsible for most of the buying surge across the county line.
But Robert Elfinger, a spokesman for the Walgreens chain, attributed the sales increase to law-abiding St. Charles County residents.
“Our pharmacy staffs at these locations believe what’s likely occurring is that patients with allergies and seasonal illnesses are traveling to their locations to purchase their medicine rather than making a doctor’s appointment to get a prescription,” Elfinger said.
I can tell you that my family was part of those increased sales figures! We don’t make special trips to get the medication, but as we are in the area we will pick them up often so we have them. We also don’t make meth and neither do the people I talk to who are doing the same!
Apparently, the Branson aldermen do not believe their retailers need the revenue generated from these products. If I’m a retailer in Ozark, Nixa, Springfield, etc. that does not yet have this ordinance in place, I’m all for Branson passing it – the sooner the better!
I don’t doubt the “good intentions” of the Branson Board of Aldermen. I do question whether they have actually studied the proposal and its impacts. As I point out in St. Charles County Council Improving Economy – Elsewhere, there have been a lot of “this will fix the problem” approaches to the scourge of meth production over the years. Each has had a temporary impact. Most have not adversely affected the law-abiding citizen, as this proposal would.
The Branson Board of Aldermen is introducing this bill (Bill 4084) tomorrow night (Tuesday, February 28, 2012 – 7:00 p.m. – Council Chambers – Branson City Hall – 110 W. Maddux).
Now is the time to let your alderman and mayor know: Thanks for the “good intentions,” but no thanks to bigger government measures! You can find their e-mail addresses and phone numbers at: http://www.cityofbranson.org/mayor-a-board.
LTE from a Doctor on the issue:
Requiring a prescription for cold medicine does more harm than good
When St. Charles passed an ordinance that required a prescription for popular and safe products containing pseudoephedrine, I did not anticipate how negative the impact would be on my patients and my practice. I am a physician specializing in pediatric and adult allergies. I hope that by sharing my experience, other municipalities will hesitate before making a similar miscalculation.
Since the prescription requirement was passed for PSE, I have seen unhappy patients who are aggravated and angry that they have to consult with me before buying their cold and allergy medicines. Patients are busy (as are we), and now these medication laws, which vary from city to city and across county and state lines, create confusing requirements both for the need for a prescription and for the number of tablets that can be dispensed. My colleagues and I are equally frustrated that it requires a lot of time to explain these new requirements, taking time away from our ill patients who deserve our attention.
Most important, I don’t believe that turning a law-enforcement function over to doctors will be effective in the long term. Most criminals will find a way around the law. The decision about which medicines belong over the counter and which are available by prescription should be a function of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, not local governments.
I hope that our experience in St. Charles can be a warning to others: A prescription requirement for PSE does more harm than good.
Dr. Susan S. Berdy • St. Louis County
http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/mailbag/letters-to-the-editor-january/article_29e422ca-9fcc-5fb7-b124-82825f61dded.html#ixzz1nbzt0HqO
Banning pseudoephedrine has had horrific *unintended* consequences. See AP article from St. Louis, below.
The ban has forced meth addicts to come up with a new, crude method of making methamphetamine (which uses *less* pseudoephedrine). …The result of this “shake and bake” method is filling up hospitals, here in St. Louis, with burn patients. And, all at taxpayers’ expense!!!
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501367_162-57363650/ap-impact-meth-fills-hospitals-with-burn-patients/
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some time be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” C.S. Lewis
I had a discussion about this, this morning. I went to the Dr. the other week with a terrible head cold. In addition to the Augmentin, my Doctor says, “You should take Sudafed, but you can’t buy it in Arnold without a prescription, and I am not going to write you a script for it when you can get it down the street, so go buy it in St. Louis County where you do not need on.. Jason Grellner totes these stats and “look at the increased purchases…..” well, with my insurance, I pay like $100/appointment until I meet my deductible for the year, which is like $3k for the family. So, do I take time off work and pay $100 for the appointment for a prescription, or do I drive 5 minutes to get the relief I need? How many doctors have advised their patients of the same thing? I guess none of these jacklegs have ever been on the working end of a sinus infection due to allergies or a cold….Sudafed is the best way to dry this up and prevent it.
The Branson Mayor & her Aldermen passed the first reading, everyone in favor, dispite several citizens speaking out against it and two polls showing the majority does not approve. The police Department is really backing it, although when confronted with the fact that they will lose tracking value, they said they knew where they are and don’t need it, so why do they need this law? Go get them!
That is my question, why do they really want this law? It doesn’t take 1 drug user off the street, or target some billion dollar operation bringing it into our area. Nothing really changes except to law abiding citizens privileges and effects on their health & pocketbook. J Peninger, Branson