Pubdate: Sun, 08 Apr 2001 Source: Bristol Herald Courier (VA) Copyright: 2001 Bristol Herald Courier Contact: http://www.bristolnews.com/contact.html Website: http://www.bristolnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1211 Authors: Loretta J. Johnson, Bruce Shaffer BANNING OXYCONTIN ALTOGETHER NO ANSWER To the editor: I am appalled by the attempt to remove oxycontin from the market. People who advocate that are overlooking two things: 1. The drug is not the problem; abusers are the problem. 2. Advocates probably have never been in severe, long-term pain. In 1998 I broke a vertebrae in an auto accident. At the same time, a kidney stone was dislodged and became very painful. I did not get lithotrypsy for several weeks. I was in extreme pain and several drugs were tried for pain relief. Only morphine and then oxycontin were effective, without undesirable side effects. My back pain lasted for over a year. This drug allowed me to survive the long-term pain and function daily. No other drug worked so well. In 1994-95 I suffered a rotator cuff tear for which surgery was denied for eight months. During that time I functioned with severe pain and only Tylenol for relief after the first six weeks. Doctors would not prescribe more potent painkillers after that time. I assure you, the second experience was a great improvement. To abuse oxycontin, one must alter its form, a deliberate act. Persons who do so are like those who use guns to kill and then blame the gun, or those who use cars as weapons. The instrument is not at fault; the user is. There is no good reason to deny pain relief to those who need it to survive debilitating pain, in order to reduce temptation for abusers. Does anyone doubt that if this drug is removed from the market, another will take its place with abusers? Could we look for alternate methods to reduce drug abuse, or to reduce abuse of this particular drug? Banning oxycontin for legitimate use is not the answer. Loretta J. Johnson Cedar Bluff, Va. - ---------------------------------------------------- DOES `ZERO TOLERANCE' DEPEND ON WHO YOU ARE? To the editor: After reading the article about the two Virginia High students caught using marijuana in the school restroom, I began to wonder why they call it a ``zero tolerance'' policy. If smoking pot in the bathroom doesn't exceed zero tolerance, then what in the world would? After thinking about it, I realized the inconsistency must be because of ``who'' the students are. As someone who only knows what I read in the paper, I can only guess that the students must be related to someone on the School Board or to one of our city officials or social leaders. If the child of the average working man was caught using marijuana at school, he would surely feel the effects of ``zero tolerance.'' Perhaps I am wrong, but that is certainly the way it looks to me. If the School Board thinks the penalty for the zero tolerance policy is too harsh, then the policy should be changed. But don't exempt certain students and leave the policy in place for others. Bruce Shaffer Bristol, Va. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom