I came back with a lot injuries, as we all did of course. But my legs and back took a lot of lead. But I a lot better off than some I see.
I take only lorazepam for panic attacks and anxiety and the low dosage works fine. I rarely have to use it.
But I get pain a lot. I am not stupid about drugs. I was an OR tech aside from all the PJ work.I have to take hydrocodone for the back when I do something stupid and strain it. Gabapentin handles the leg pain, which is from an adhesion of tissue around a GSW.
The DEA in its infinite wisdom raised hydrocodone to a Schedule II drug from a III. That means it's harder to get when I really mess up. Just getting one script filled takes hours for the pharmacist to look things up and get codes from the DEA site. I did some homework and found hydrocodone is used by Americans to the tune of 94% of the world's supply. Apparently it must be so good that the DEA has to make it harder to get. A lot of doctors are protesting that decision and I am afraid I join the list.
It's the one pain killer that does the best job with the least number of side effects. No drug except the killer drugs like morphine or propofol is perfect for pain management. For me, hydrocodone does well. A lot of others who take even less a dose than I, do not know what to do. There's no surgery, no physical therapy. (I have done PT 5 times and bleeding starts in the leg.) I read one article from a pain therapist who said when certain drugs are upgraded, the suicide rate increases for those taking the drug. (I don't consider myself in that category.)
Most back pain goes away even without meds after 4-6 weeks but handling the pain in the meantime is simply a pain in the ass. Sometimes these episodes keep me from walking. With hydrocodone I could at least walk and assist with recovery.
Oh well, rant over. I think DEA made a bad decision. Any suggestions for an alternative is appreciated. I am tapped out for ideas.
I take only lorazepam for panic attacks and anxiety and the low dosage works fine. I rarely have to use it.
But I get pain a lot. I am not stupid about drugs. I was an OR tech aside from all the PJ work.I have to take hydrocodone for the back when I do something stupid and strain it. Gabapentin handles the leg pain, which is from an adhesion of tissue around a GSW.
The DEA in its infinite wisdom raised hydrocodone to a Schedule II drug from a III. That means it's harder to get when I really mess up. Just getting one script filled takes hours for the pharmacist to look things up and get codes from the DEA site. I did some homework and found hydrocodone is used by Americans to the tune of 94% of the world's supply. Apparently it must be so good that the DEA has to make it harder to get. A lot of doctors are protesting that decision and I am afraid I join the list.
It's the one pain killer that does the best job with the least number of side effects. No drug except the killer drugs like morphine or propofol is perfect for pain management. For me, hydrocodone does well. A lot of others who take even less a dose than I, do not know what to do. There's no surgery, no physical therapy. (I have done PT 5 times and bleeding starts in the leg.) I read one article from a pain therapist who said when certain drugs are upgraded, the suicide rate increases for those taking the drug. (I don't consider myself in that category.)
Most back pain goes away even without meds after 4-6 weeks but handling the pain in the meantime is simply a pain in the ass. Sometimes these episodes keep me from walking. With hydrocodone I could at least walk and assist with recovery.
Oh well, rant over. I think DEA made a bad decision. Any suggestions for an alternative is appreciated. I am tapped out for ideas.