orangesunshine

One box of the Lyrica costs about £60 without the subsidy.

Wow! I was on just 75mg lyrica 3x/day ... and it was around $500 for a months supply in the U.S. I was forced to switch to gabapentin due to the economics. Thankfully, I actually had much better results with gabapentin than I did Lyrica ... so even if the economics changed I'd likely stick with the gabapentin.

Almost all brand-name proscriptions in the US I've been on have been prohibitively expensive ... some of them quite a bit more than the Lyrica. What really erks me is when a generic primary ingredient is extraordinarily expensive because the company has released a new time-release formulation.

Like the 24-hour time release Avinza (morphine) was around $800 ... while the generic IR or ER medications were under $50 when paying out of pocket.

I just don't understand how a company can charge $800 for the very first alkaloid to be isolated and used as a pharmaceutical. Morphine was first marketed in 1817!

... for someone suffering in chronic pain, is "euphoria" really a bad thing?

I sort of understand the negative implications for those who use the drugs recreationally.

Though I'm not sure I fully understand what benefit it is to me in my struggle against chronic pain.

If a non-euphoric drug provides a significantly better outcome, I'd be happy to make the switch. Though, it really seems like in the current political climate just having the option of "non-addictive" .. "non-euphorigenic" drugs will put doctors and the medical establishment in the position where they are completely unwilling to prescribe opiates ... even when their benefits over these new drugs are enormous.

Drugs don't win approval for being more effective than another available medicine. They win approval for simply being effective. This thus leaves a very dangerous situation for those of us out there that rely upon these medicines.

As it stands right now, I've encountered many doctors and hospitals completely unwilling to prescribe narcotics even when there aren't other options available.

Why don't you try yoga or acupuncture. Don't you know these drugs are addictive?!

"One would put me in a wheel chair and the other is more religion than medicine. I'm also not sure how dependence upon a drug I plan on taking for the remainder of my life is a concern."

Obviously, in the perfect world I'd be left with the autonomy to choose. Unfortunately, it seems that even when my personal risk is zero ... we are weighing everyone's risks when it comes time to open up the prescription pad. The fear is rationale in some cases, but the behavior I've seen is anything but rationale; when you start grasping at the straws of other people's risk when it's been established there's no risk to the patient you're treating.

So, having another option out there is great in theory. Though in practice it seems like it might just be enough fuel on the fire to help the prohibitionists effectively win their fight.

... and instead of sitting in an office with perfectly rational sane reasons why I should be prescribed narcotics. I'm left with ...

"Well for me they seem to work better."

The studies will show the new drugs are efficacious. What they won't show is whether they are better or worse than narcotics for every individual case ... and won't even likely have any evidence to illustrate they are better for any case when all they have to do is illustrate they have a statistically significant benefit.

With the existing evidence out there that my "autonomy" means jack shit .... this obviously scares the bejesus out of me.