All these drugs just mask the effects but don't cure the cause. I'd rather cure the cause then mask the symptoms of the cause. Besides, I'd never take a narcotic-analgesic because of the tolerance and dependence side effect. If am in pain, I will take non-narcotic analgesic which even though has bad side-effects like ulcer, it is still safer than narcotic-analgesic although less potent. You don't need to give a smart ass remark about my post, because I know all about these drugs and have taken pharmacology courses that explain how these drugs essentially work. Small children and especially toddlers have immature kidneys and liver, thus they might not be able to completely break down these dangerous drug in the body and in some case could cause toxicity (in overdosing).
I have also worked for the big pharma, so I know they are really in it for making money and setting their budget for future years. They don't really care about long-term effects, but mainly study the short-term effects of drugs in the clinical phase. As long as they get their share of money after FDA approval, they wouldn't give a rats ass anymore about the approved drug until the patent expires and they come up with extensions and spin-off drugs.
That's what painkillers do, nobody in this thread ever said they were to cure the cause. We'd all love to cure the cause and only have to use narcotic pain killers for children as a very last resort. Unfortunately, life just isn't that kind when it comes to childhood injuries and disease. And the article clearly states that the drug trials are being used for moderate to severe pain in children with cancer, sickle-cell anemia and severe burns. Severe, unrelenting pain that is not adequately relieved by the current drugs on the market. They are not talking about a sprain or a skinned knee or a bad sunburn, this drug is a possible tool in relieving unrelenting pain in terminal patients and those with chronic pain who have exhausted all other means of pain relief.
You're not the only one who has taken courses in pharmacology or has a working knowledge of drugs. I deal with the administration of them every day so I do know what I'm talking about, thanks.
My 'smart ass remark' was to show my disdain for your ludicrous progression of addiction after giving a child under the age of 5 a narcotic on a limited basis for severe burns or sickle-cell anemia. Let's see, as a youngster, I was given Morphine, Demerol, Talwin, Codeine, Phenargin........but I'm not hanging out in a crack house or some dirty alley shooting heroin into my veins. See how silly your comment sounds?
My other on-topic posts explain my comments re: children and the way their bodies break down and process some drugs as compared to an adult.
Edited by Bertuzzi Babe, 11 July 2012 - 01:31 PM.