DEA Cuts Oxycodone Supply, But Raises Production of Morphine in Surprise Move

By Pat Anson

The Drug Enforcement Administration is moving ahead with its plan to reduce the supply of oxycodone by over 6% in 2026, while at the same time significantly raising its production quota for morphine. There will be small reductions in the supply of hydrocodone, codeine and other Schedule II opioids this year.

The move to increase the supply of morphine by 10.5% is surprising, as the agency proposed cutting morphine production by over half a percent a little over a month ago. 

The DEA officially announced its plans January 5 in the Federal Register, 35 days after a December 1 deadline set for the agency in the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). Under the CSA, the DEA has broad legal authority to set annual aggregate production quotas (APQs) for opioids and other controlled substances. 

The December 1 deadline is important because it gives the pharmaceutical industry time to prepare for the coming year by adjusting drug manufacturing and distribution schedules. The DEA’s chronic failure to meet that deadline in previous years has contributed to shortages, according to drug makers.

Over 5,000 public comments were received by the DEA in response to the agency’s initial APQs for 2026. Most comments pleaded with the agency not to make any further cuts in the supply of opioids, many of which are already in short supply at pharmacies and hospitals. 

“I oppose cutting production for controlled medications at this time as there is already a shortage for many of these medications and patients are often not able to obtain their prescriptions. Cutting production during a shortage will only exacerbate the problem and increase patient suffering,” Hannah Khalil wrote in a public comment echoed by many others. 

The DEA, however, was dismissive of claims about opioid shortages, saying it was not responsible for them.

“Drug shortages may occur due to factors outside of DEA's control such as manufacturing and quality problems, processing delays, supply chain disruptions, or discontinuations,” the DEA said. “Currently, FDA has not listed on its Drug Shortage website any nationwide shortages of oxycodone and hydrocodone products.”

While it is true the FDA does not currently have oxycodone or hydrocodone on its shortage list, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) has listed both opioids on its shortage list since 2023. Limited supplies of oxycodone and hydrocodone are available from some manufacturers, according to the ASHP, while others have the medications on back order.

The difference between the FDA and ASHP shortage lists is that the FDA relies on drug manufacturers to report shortages, while the ASHP proactively surveys both pharmacies and drug makers about their inventories. That arguably makes it superior to the FDA’s methodology.

Ironically, the DEA itself has challenged the reliability of the FDA’s drug shortage list.

“DEA has made it clear it does not trust FDA’s information, as it does not consider many of the shortages that FDA verifies to be legitimate,” the General Accountability Office (GAO) said in a 2015 audit report. “They do not believe FDA appropriately validates or investigates the shortages.”

Increased Morphine Production

The DEA offered no explanation for the increase in morphine production. The production quota for morphine is 10.55% higher than last year's quota and the highest amount since 2021.

One likely reason for the DEA’s decision is that the FDA recently added morphine tablets and injectable morphine solutions to its shortage list, due to discontinuations and short supplies. The ASHP has listed morphine in shortage for several months. 

Morphine solutions and other injectable opioids are an important resource in hospitals, emergency rooms and surgery centers, where they are used in post-op care, sedation and anesthesia.

Morphine tablets are most often used to treat severe chronic pain.

“I fear there will be continued shortages resulting in many patients suffering from the DEA’s quota decisions.”

— Dr. Lynn Webster, pain management expert

“In 2025, there were major shortages of morphine immediate release (15-mg, 30-mg tablets) and morphine extended release (mostly 30-mg tablets) that lasted 3-4 months and were disruptive to care. I mentioned morphine in my personal, submitted comments (to the Federal Register),” said Chad Kollas, MD, a palliative care physician in Florida.

“I suspect that others also complained about last year’s morphine shortages, which may have led to the increase in production of morphine in 2026. It is also the cheapest of the traditional opioids, which may have played a role in the decision. I’m disappointed that they held the line on the oxycodone reduction.”

“I don't know why the DEA would reduce oxycodone while increasing the morphine quota. It seems illogical since there are reports that both are in shortage at the clinical level,” says Lynn Webster, MD, a pain management expert and former president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. “I fear there will be continued shortages resulting in many patients suffering from the DEAs quota decisions.  

“They know patients are struggling to get access to both medications but they may think oxycodone is more likely to be abused than morphine. It appears they are trying to tell providers what they should prescribe. Yet they are not supposed to be involved in determining how medicine is practiced. Whether intentional or not, that is exactly what they are doing.”

Even with this year’s increase in morphine production, DEA has reduced the supply of morphine by over 63% since 2015. Steep declines have also been made in quotas for hydrocodone (-73%), oxycodone (-71%), and codeine (-70%) over the past decade.  

The DEA began cutting the opioid supply in response to pressure from Congress and anti-opioid activists, who claimed that prescription opioids were responsible for soaring overdose rates. While that claim has been largely debunked, opioid prescribing has continued to fall, as doctors became fearful of being accused of “overprescribing.”

The DEA says the “medical usage” of opioids fell by 10.5% in 2024 alone. The agency expects  that trend to continue, while dismissing claims that its shrinking opioid production quotas have interfered with the practice of medicine. 

“DEA's regulations do not impose restrictions on the amount and the type of medication that licensed practitioners can prescribe. DEA has consistently emphasized and supported the authority of individual practitioners under the CSA to administer, dispense, and prescribe controlled substances for the legitimate treatment of pain within acceptable medical standards,” DEA said. 

The 5 Most Popular PNN Stories of 2025

By Crystal Lindell

Looking back at 2025, there was a lot of news to cover when it came to chronic pain and illness. Access to opioids was again a major concern for our readers, but there was also a lot of interest in the potentially harmful effects of gabapentin.

Below is a look at the top 5 most widely read articles that PNN published in 2025.

We truly appreciate every time you read, comment and share our articles. And we can’t wait to bring you more great coverage in 2026! 

1) Over 15 Million Americans Prescribed Gabapentin Despite Warnings

In September, we covered an analysis by CDC researchers that showed that the use of gabapentin (Neurontin) continued to soar in the United States — usually for chronic pain and other health conditions the drug is not approved to treat. 

Gabapentin is the fifth most prescribed drug in the United States, with prescriptions nearly tripling since 2010, according to findings published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The number of patients prescribed gabapentin reached 15.5 million in 2024, up from 5.8 million in 2010.

Read the full article here.  

2) Cannabis Use by Older Adults Linked to ‘Younger Brains’ and Improved Cognition

In August, we covered a study that showed that cannabis use by older adults slowed the aging of their brains and may even improve cognitive function.  

An international research team analyzed health data on more than 25,000 adults in the UK, looking at the relationship between cannabis use, aging, and cognitive function. They found that cannabis users had brain characteristics “typically associated with younger brains” and “enhanced cognitive abilities.” 

Read the full article here. 

3) 6 Things to Try If Your Doctor Won’t Prescribe Opioid Pain Medication

A lot of pain patients find that their doctors are reluctant to prescribe opioids. So in February, I shared six things to try if your physician tells you to go home and take ibuprofen.

The first tip is not to give up. Tell your doctor what poorly treated pain is doing to your life – that you’re unable to work or that you may have to go to the emergency room. Tell the truth and don’t exaggerate, and you just might get them to change their mind.

Another option is to try kratom and/or cannabis. They don’t work for everyone, but many patients say they provide some level of pain relief.  

Read the full article here. 

4) DEA Plans Further Cuts in Oxycodone Supply

In November, we covered the DEA’s plan to cut the supply of oxycodone by more than 6% in 2026, along with marginal reductions in the supply of hydrocodone, morphine and other Schedule II opioids. 

From year-to-year, the cuts may not appear significant. But over the past decade, there has been an historic decline in the nation’s opioid supply. If its current plan is adopted, DEA will have cut the supply of hydrocodone and oxycodone by over 70% since 2014.

The DEA says the “medical usage” of prescription opioids is declining, when in fact the “medical need” for them is actually increasing.

Read the full article here. 

5) Study Links Gabapentin to Increased Dementia Risk 

In July, we covered how gabapentin (Neurontin) may significantly increase the risk of dementia and cognitive impairment, even for middle-aged patients who only took the nerve medication for six months.

That was according to research published in the Regional Anesthesia & Pain Medicine journal, which looked at health records for more than 26,000 U.S. patients with chronic low back pain.

Researchers found that patients with six months or more of gabapentin use had a 29% higher risk of developing dementia and an 85% higher risk of developing mild cognitive impairment 

Read the full article here.

We hope you enjoyed reading PNN in 2025 and that you found our stories informative and helpful. We look forward to continuing our coverage of chronic pain and other health issues in 2026. 

Unlike many other online news outlets, we don’t hide behind a paywall or charge for subscriptions. PNN depends on reader donations to continue publishing, so please consider making a donation today.

Happy New Year everyone!

A Doctor’s Appointment Can Feel Like Criminal Court for Pain Patients

By Crystal Lindell

This week I had an appointment where I was worried that I would have to submit to a urine drug test. And if anything went wrong, it could ruin my life.

It wasn’t a criminal court date or a meeting with a probation officer. It was with my doctor.

Every six months, I have to see the doctor who prescribes my opioid pain medication for a check-in. I’m actually very lucky that I only have to see him twice a year, because many patients are required to go in much more frequently.

But those two appointments each year cause me so much stress that I have trouble functioning. There is always the fear that if something doesn’t go according to plan, my opioid prescriptions could be cut off. And when a doctor has that much power over you, it’s rational to worry about how things will go.

So, in the weeks leading up to the appointment, I stress about everything that could go wrong.

Chief among my worries is that I haven’t had health insurance since 2022, so now a lot of my previous medical bills are in collections. Mind you, even when I had insurance, a lot of my medical bills went to a collections agency because, between co-pays and deductibles, the bills were in the thousands of dollars.

I always worry that this be the visit when my doctor finally cuts me off from care because of unpaid bills. Or maybe it will be the front-desk receptionist who confronts me about the overdue bills. What do I do if they refuse to see me as a patient because I am late paying? While it’s a decision that would fully be within their rights, it would ruin my life.

I have good reason to fear this. In 2008, I got an HPV vaccine from a doctor, and the shot came with a $150 co-pay. I had just finished paying thousands of dollars in medical bills for my gall bladder removal surgery, so I was having trouble paying for the vaccine.

And then, out of the blue, I got a letter from that doctor’s office saying that they were cutting off my care because of the unpaid bill. And I was no longer allowed to get care at any of the doctors in that hospital system.

I was shocked and sad, and also thankful that I was moving out of the area soon. But the experience scared me and left me constantly worried that even small unpaid medical bills could result in a doctor abandoning me.

Money isn’t the only stress factor when it comes to these appointments. There is also the chance of a urine drug test going wrong. While my doctor has not ordered one in a while, it’s always a possibility.

Now, you might assume that since I take my medications as prescribed, there should be nothing to worry about when it comes to peeing in a cup. But if anything does go wrong, I could lose access to the medications that I need to function. Like if there’s a false result on the screening, which happens more often than you might think.

So, I stress.

A lot of people assume that drug tests only look for non-prescribed or illicit substances. That what they are really looking for is cocaine and heroin. But the tests go far beyond that, and they are constantly adding substances to check for. While they have never tested for kratom in the past, I have no idea if it will suddenly be added to the screening, and what would happen if I tested positive for it.

The real reason most doctors order drug tests is they want to make sure you are taking your opioid medication as prescribed. If the medication isn’t found in your urine, that means you might be selling or diverting it. 

Again, not a problem for me. But still, the act of being forced to pee in a cup for the sole purpose of policing my compliance with the doctor is always going to feel punitive.

All of these worries are rolling around in my brain when the day of the appointment arrives. I have to wake up earlier than normal to shower and make the drive to the doctor’s office. It’s almost two hours each way because he works at the closest university hospital, and my complex medical needs require more than a local primary care doctor can handle.

My body hates waking up early, and my chronic pain often flares up in rebellion if I don’t get enough sleep. So, I have to ease into functioning while waiting for my pain medication to kick in.

All of this stress is compounded by the fact that on the day of this particular appointment it was snowing, with a mix of rain and sleet hitting the ground in just the right way to make all the roads extremely icy.

I knew this was going to make driving difficult, but I also knew that if I canceled my appointment, I risked not being able to get my next pain medication refill. So I prepared myself for an extremely treacherous drive and planned to leave a full hour early

Before I was set to leave, my fiancé went to the local Casey’s gas station to fill up the car for me. When he came back he sounded like he had been to war: “You can’t drive to your appointment in this weather! People were literally spinning out in the Casey’s parking lot!”

Ugh. Fine. I decided to suck it up and call my doctor’s office to see what my options were because I knew the weather was too bad to drive.

I assumed that I would need to completely reschedule, because he’s usually booked out for months. But when I called, the receptionist said that in the notes my doctor had said that I could do the appointment virtually if needed.

I once heard that wearing different colored socks brings good luck, and thus I have done this many times throughout my life on stressful days. And this time, it actually worked!

I was able to do a very easy telehealth call, from the comfort of my own home! Everything went extremely well. He told me that he had seen the weather, and that I had made the right call to stay off the roads that day. I had spent all that time stressing for nothing. 

But it shouldn’t take a pair of mismatched socks to get compassionate care. Millions of chronic pain patients are constantly stuck navigating these types of appointments because of the war on opioids. Unfortunately, many of them end up living the things that I feared. 

Of course, in six months’ time, I will have to go to his office again, and I’m sure I’ll go through all the same stress before that appointment too. Hopefully by then I’ll have some sort of health insurance, and ideally it will be a clear summer day..

Until then, I’m just happy that my doctor decided to rule in my favor. In an ideal world, a doctor’s appointment shouldn’t feel like a verdict.

DEA Missed Deadline for Opioid Production Quotas. Will It Worsen Shortages?

By Pat Anson

In recent years, hundreds of physicians have been prosecuted by the U.S. Justice Department for violations of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA).

In many cases, the doctors were accused of prescribing opioid pain medication without “a legitimate medical purpose” – a vague term in the CSA that was meant to prevent drug abuse, but in practice put the DOJ in charge of deciding whether healthcare decisions involving controlled substances are legal. 

The CSA is rigidly enforced when federal prosecutors believe opioids are prescribed excessively. But when it comes to enforcing another provision in the CSA, the DOJ and Drug Enforcement Administration have routinely ignored deadlines for setting aggregate production quotas (APQs) for opioids and other Schedule I and II controlled substances:

“On or before December 1 of each year, upon application therefor by a registered manufacturer, the Attorney General shall fix a manufacturing quota for the basic classes of controlled substances in schedules I and II.”

The December 1 deadline is important because it gives the pharmaceutical industry a small window to prepare for the coming year by acquiring raw materials for drugs, setting manufacturing schedules, and distributing medications to hospitals and pharmacies – a process that can take as long as six months. . 

But Attorney General Pam Bondi and acting DEA Administrator Terry Cole didn't publish their proposed quotas for 2026 in the Federal Register until November 28, which call for a 6% cut in the supply of oxycodone.

Allowing for a shortened public comment period that ends December 15, and time to review thousands of comments and make changes in the quota allotments, that means the final APQs for next year will likely not be ready until after January 1.

The last time production quotas were that late was in 2024, when the final APQs were not published until January 3. Drug shortages spiked to record levels in the first few months of that year, including many medications that are covered under the quota system. 

Missing the deadline again this year threatens to worsen chronic shortages of oxycodone, hydrocodone, fentanyl, hydromorphone, morphine and amphetamine-based stimulants that are vital to millions of patients who live with pain or attention deficit disorder (ADHD).

The DOJ and DEA did not respond to multiple requests from PNN to explain why the CSA deadline was missed again.

This is not a new problem. Late quotas and drug shortages have persisted for years, as the DOJ and DEA have focused on going after doctors who prescribe opioids – at times using “flimsy evidence” – rather than ensuring that essential medications are available on time. 

That mindset of being a law enforcement agency first – with maintaining the drug supply an afterthought – may have cost some patients their lives. 

“We talk a lot about opioid misuse, but almost never about the quiet suffering caused when essential pain medicines simply aren't available,” says Lynn Webster, MD, a pain management expert and former president of the American Academy of Pain Medicine. “Chronic delay and rigidity in quota decisions make patients with serious illness feel like collateral damage in a war on drugs that has lost sight of its humanitarian obligations.

“Quotas were meant to curb diversion, not to create a permanent state of scarcity for people in pain. By keeping quotas tight and decisions late, the DEA has turned an already fragile supply chain into a game of musical chairs where patients lose their seats.”

Late Quotas Worsened Drug Shortages

As far back as 2015, the General Accountability Office (GAO) warned in an audit report that the DEA “has not effectively administered the quota process.” Although a decade old, many of the problems cited by the GAO still exist today.

“Each year, manufacturers apply to DEA for quota needed to make their drugs. DEA, however, has not responded to them within the time frames required by its regulations for any year from 2001 through 2014,” the GAO said.

“Manufacturers who reported quota-related shortages cited late quota decisions as causing or exacerbating shortages of their drugs.”

The report found that drugs containing Schedule II controlled substances accounted for over half the shortages between 2001 and 2013. Several manufacturers complained to the FDA the shortages were caused by the DEA’s mishandling of the quota system.

But the DEA denied any responsibility for the shortages, while blaming the missed deadlines on  “inadequate staffing” and an “increasing workload” in its Quota Unit.

“DEA is confident that its administration of the quota process did not affect a shortage during the period of review because drug product shortages are not limited to products that contain Schedule II controlled. substances,” Joseph Rannazzisi, then-DEA Deputy Assistant Administrator, wrote in the agency’s response to the GAO report.

Rannazzisi would later emerge as a “whistleblower” on 60 Minutes, who blamed the opioid crisis on lax policies at the FDA that favored that drug industry.

The relationship between DEA and FDA, at least in 2015, was not one of trust. The FDA advised the DEA about medical demand for Schedule II drugs and any shortages that may exist, but the DEA didn’t always listen.

“DEA and FDA are not able to effectively collaborate due to fundamental disagreement over whether any given shortage exists. DEA has made it clear it does not trust FDA’s information, as it does not consider many of the shortages that FDA verifies to be legitimate,” the GAO said. “They do not believe FDA appropriately validates or investigates the shortages.” 

The GAO concluded that problems in DEA’s Quota Unit run deeper than any petty rivalries with the FDA. 

“Our work shows that DEA’s lack of internal controls, such as controls to ensure data reliability, performance measures, and monitoring of performance, may hinder the agency’s ability to ensure an adequate and uninterrupted supply of controlled substances,” the 2015 report found. “This approach to the management of an important process is untenable and poses a risk to public health.”

New Deadline

The GAO’s critique came at a time when the DEA’s deadline for final APQs was October 1 – a deadline the agency consistently failed to meet. 

To buy itself more time to work on quotas, the DEA lobbied Congress to change the annual deadline to December 1 in the 2018 Support Act, a bill intended to reduce opioid diversion. The DEA also reduced the amount of inventory drug manufacturers are allowed to keep of controlled substances, and agreed to base its quotas on dosages, not the raw supply of drugs.

How has that worked out? Poorly.

The DEA has not only been unable to meet the December 1 deadline, but the smaller inventories have worsened the ability of drug manufacturers to respond to late quotas and emerging drug shortages. 

The pharmaceutical industry warned the DEA that reducing inventories would only worsen shortages and do little to prevent diversion.

“We believe that risks associated with this proposal, including the increased likelihood for drug shortages and market outages, greatly outweigh the negligible benefit this provision will provide,” Larry Cote, an attorney representing a drug manufacturer, wrote to the agency in 2019.

“Given the timing of procurement quota issuance, it will become more imperative to carry increased levels of inventory at year end in order to ensure continued drug supply, as opposed to decreased levels.”

The DEA ignored those warnings and reduced inventories anyway. As a result, analgesic medications needed for surgery and post-op care, such as injectable fentanyl and hydromorphone, have been on the FDA shortage list for years, in part due to low inventories. The two drugs are rarely diverted.

‘Vulnerable to Supply Shocks’

Two pharmacists recently criticized the DEA for its “outdated system” for APQs.

“The current one-size-fits-all system for setting APQs is ineffective and Congress recognized this back in 2018, passing the SUPPORT Act to modernize the APQ setting process and require quota allocations based on dosage form. Yet seven years later, the DEA has failed to implement this law, leaving manufacturers constrained, patients underserved, and the nation vulnerable to supply shocks,” Soumi Saha, PharmD, and Justin Schneider, PharmD, wrote in a recent op/ed published in the Pharmacy Times.   

Saha and Schneider believe many of the quota problems could be addressed if the DEA were to hire a Chief Pharmacy Officer who is familiar with the drug supply system and is put in charge of the quota system.

“It is time to elevate the agency’s clinical responsibility by establishing a Chief Pharmacy Officer (CPO) within the DEA - a role dedicated to ensuring that patient access is not an afterthought, but a core priority,” they said. “A strong CPO would not only modernize quota systems but also bring agility, accountability and patient advocacy to the heart of DEA decision-making.”

To be clear, the DEA is not solely at fault for persistent shortages of opioids and other controlled substances. A 2021 opioid litigation settlement with three drug distributors essentially rationed the supply of opioids at many pharmacies and made pharmacists even more wary of filling new prescriptions. 

In a 2023 PNN survey of over 2,800 patients, 90% said they experienced delays or problems getting their opioid prescriptions filled, mostly because their pharmacy was out of stock. Nearly one in five were unable to get their pain medication, even after contacting multiple pharmacies.

Some generic drug manufacturers have stopped making opioids because of low profit margins and because of concerns they could be targeted by plaintiff law firms in opioid lawsuits that could cost them billions of dollars. 

Bad weather and a heavy reliance on foreign drug manufacturers have also made the supply chain less reliable and contributed to shortages.  

But the DEA’s chronic failure to meet quota deadlines – a problem dating back decades – and its slow-walking of efforts at reforming the quota system, have made a fragile drug supply chain even more vulnerable to disruptions. And it is patients who pay the ultimate price for the DEA’s negligence.

“When DEA repeatedly misses its own deadlines for setting opioid production quotas, that uncertainty reverberates all the way to the bedside,” says Dr. Webster. “Manufacturers pull back, pharmacies ration, and it's the patients – people with cancer, sickle cell disease, or severe chronic pain – who are left wondering if their next prescription will even be filled.” 

Should the DEA hire a Chief Pharmacy Officer? Should deciding what is or isn’t “a legitimate medical purpose” be left to the DEA and DOJ? Only a few days are left to comment on the DEA’s proposed APQs for 2026. You can leave a public comment by clicking here.

DEA Plans Further Cuts in Oxycodone Supply

By Pat Anson

The Drug Enforcement Administration is planning to cut the supply of oxycodone by over 6% in 2026, along with marginal reductions in the supply of hydrocodone, morphine and other Schedule II opioids. 

If the DEA’s plans are finalized after a short public comment period, it would be the 10th consecutive year the opioid supply has been reduced in the United States.

The DEA announced its plans Friday in the Federal Register. Under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the agency has broad legal authority to set annual aggregate production quotas (APQs) for drug makers – in effect telling them the amount of Schedule I and Schedule II chemicals and medications they can produce. 

The DEA is planning another round of cuts in the Schedule II opioid supply because it continues to see declines in the “medical usage” of opioids – an average decrease of 10.5% in 2024 alone. 

It’s important to note that medical usage is different from “medical need.” Doctors simply aren’t prescribing as many opioids as they used to, so while the need for pain relief hasn’t changed and may have even increased due a spike in rates of chronic pain, the number of prescriptions written for opioids has declined. 

DEA expects that trend to continue, based in part on data from IQVIA, a private company that tracks prescription drug use. The agency is also seeing fewer requests from drug manufacturers to make oxycodone.

“DEA projects that the medical usage of these controlled substances will continue to decline in 2026 based on a review of domestic usage data from IQVIA,” DEA said in its Federal Register notice. “Additionally, DEA has observed a significant decline in requests for product development quotas to support manufacturing towards FDA approval of drug products containing oxycodone.” 

DEA Opioid Production Cuts Planned for 2026

• Oxycodone          6.24% decrease

• Morphine             0.559% decrease

• Hydrocodone       0.529% decrease

• Hydromorphone  0.109% decrease

• Fentanyl              0.014% decrease

• Codeine               0.002% decrease

From year-to-year, the cuts may not appear significant. But over the past decade, there has been an historic decline in the nation’s opioid supply. If its current plan is adopted, DEA will have cut the supply of hydrocodone by 72.9% and oxycodone by 70.6% since 2014.

Some of the decline in “medical usage” is driven by scarcity. For example, Endo Pharmaceuticals recently informed the FDA it discontinued production of 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 mg Percocet (oxycodone/acetaminophen) tablets. Major Pharmaceuticals stopped making oxycodone/acetaminophen tablets a few months ago. And Teva Pharmaceuticals, a large generic drug maker, stopped making immediate-release oxycodone in 2023.  

The FDA does not currently list oxycodone products on its drug shortage database, but the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) has since 2023. Limited supplies of oxycodone are available from some manufacturers, according to ASHP, while others have the medications on back order.

Hydrocodone/acetaminophen tablets have also been on the ASHP’s shortage list (but not on the FDA’s) since 2023. Major and Camber Pharmaceuticals have both stopped making them.

Health Canada reported a nationwide shortage of oxycodone/acetaminophen combinations over the summer, a shortage that persists today but is expected to resolve soon.

Why would the DEA be reducing production quotas for opioids that are already in short supply?

DEA sets its APQs after consulting with states willing to share their prescription drug data, as well as federal agencies like Health and Human Services and the Food and Drug Administration. 

DEA also asked for input from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, an agency in turmoil after several months of layoffs, budget cuts and leadership changes. A response to that request “was inadvertently delayed” at CDC, but DEA says it will take it under consideration when or if it ever arrives. 

“DEA remains committed to monitoring drug shortages, limiting their impact, and resolving them as quickly as possible. DEA continues to seek additional information that will assist in accurately forecasting domestic medical usage and export requirements of schedule I or II substances,” DEA said.

Unlike previous years, when there was a 30-day period for public comments on the DEA’s quota proposal, the agency is only allowing about two weeks. You can leave a comment here, but it must be posted no later than December 15. DEA did not explain why it was reducing the amount of time the public can comment. 

Central Sensitization and Hyperalgesia Are Bogus Medical Terms

By Dr. Forest Tennant

Some 15 years ago, “central sensitization” was a term I first started seeing when I was editor of Practical Pain Management. It was defined as experiencing a pain level above what was normally expected from arthritis, fibromyalgia, neuropathy, and other peripheral (outside the brain) pain conditions. 

When central sensitization was present, it was an indication to more aggressively treat the pain with opioids and/or other measures. Unfortunately, this simple, well-meaning term has been transformed by some unscrupulous practitioners to imply that patients with central sensitization don’t need opioids or other treatment.

Central sensitization also became synonymous with the term “hyperalgesia” – meaning the patient was overreacting or feeling too much pain for their condition. What’s more, opioids were supposedly the cause of hyperalgesia, so they need to be stopped. 

Let’s be very clear. Neither “central sensitization” nor “hyperalgesia” are bonafide medical conditions. A medical condition is one in which there is a common set of symptoms and physical findings, and the condition can be confirmed by a diagnostic test such as an MRI or blood test. 

Central sensitization and hyperalgesia are bogus medical conditions that can’t be objectively identified, quantified, or diagnosed. They are simply terms that sound scientific and authoritative, when in reality they have become fraudulent terms used to justify withholding opioids and other treatments.

It is time patients, families, and physicians reject these terms and the medical practitioners who use them.

Central sensitization is not to be confused with the term “central pain.” This is a serious condition that more likely than not requires opioids, along with great care and concern on the part of the medical practitioner.

“Central pain” initially referred to the emergence of pain after a stroke. Strokes can wipe out and destroy brain tissue that contain opioid receptors and the normal biologic apparatus which shuts down and relieves pain. One especially severe post-stroke pain condition is known as the Dejerine-Roussy Syndrome, which damages the thalamus. 

Opioid drugs, sometimes in high or unusual formulations, are required for post-stroke central pain.

Although central pain was first associated with strokes, it soon became appropriate to include brain tumors, hydrocephalus, and scarring from meningitis infections, since these conditions can also wipe out brain tissue and cause pain.

In recent times, central pain has come to include those pain patients who have developed neuroinflammation and tissue destruction in the brain concomitantly with a peripheral pain problem that may involve the joints, muscles, nerves, or spine.

It is interesting to note that central pain in the past was often called “secondary pain” as it tends to occur after someone has developed a peripheral pain condition. 

The first investigator to elucidate peripheral pain conditions with brain tissue destruction was Apkarian in 2004.He and his colleagues found decreased prefrontal gray matter deficiencies in the brain scans of persons with chronic back pain. 

Since that time, a plethora of brain scan and glial cell studies have found that persons with a peripheral pain condition may experience brain inflammation involving glial cells and tissue destruction — akin to what occurs after a stroke. 

Bona fide central pain is clinically typical and obvious. It is characterized by constant (24/7) pain and high pulse rates, hypertension, episodes of excess sweating, and cold hands and feet.

Prescription opioids, including long-acting opioids, may be required to control bonafide central pain. In addition to opioids, central pain has what is called descending pain, which requires dopamine stimulating drugs to adequately control it. 

The cause of central pain that accompanies or follows the development of a peripheral pain condition is now believed to be related to an autoimmune process and/or viral reactivation, especially from the Epstein-Barr virus.

In summary, central sensitization and hyperalgesia are not bonafide medical conditions. To use these bogus labels to justify the withholding of medications is unscientific, fraudulent and inhumane. 

These terms and the practitioners who use them should be summarily rejected. Central pain is a serious condition characterized by severe constant pain which often requires opioids for pain control. 

Forest Tennant, MD, DrPH, is retired from clinical practice but continues his research on the treatment of intractable pain and arachnoiditis. Readers interested in learning more about his research should visit the Tennant Foundation’s website, Arachnoiditis Hope. You can subscribe to its research bulletins here.   

The Tennant Foundation gives financial support to Pain News Network and sponsors PNN’s Patient Resources section. 

OTC Pain Relievers Just as Effective as Opioids After Wisdom Tooth Removal

By Pat Anson

A combination of acetaminophen and ibuprofen works just as well as a low dose of opioids in relieving pain in men and women after wisdom tooth removal, according to a new study in JAMA Network Open. 

The research builds on a previous study of over 1,800 patients, which compared the effectiveness of 400 mg of ibuprofen and 500 mg of acetaminophen to 5 mg of hydrocodone and 300 mg of acetaminophen in the first three days after surgery. That dose of hydrocodone is the equivalent of 5 morphine milligram equivalents (MME), which is considered a low dose under medical guidelines.

"We wanted to determine whether the pain medication's effects were consistent in males and females separately," lead author Janine Fredericks Younger, DMD, an associate professor at Rutgers School of Dental Medicine, said in a press release.

 "And what we found is that in both subgroups (males and females), the non-opioid was superior for that first day and night, and then no worse than the opioid for the rest of the post-op period."

Researchers performed a gender-specific analysis because women often report higher pain levels after surgery, raising questions about whether pain medications work differently for each sex.

"There's obviously different biological mechanisms, different hormones involved," said Cecile Feldman, DMD, Dean of Rutgers School of Dental Medicine and senior author of both studies. "But results confirm that the analgesic effect for both groups is the same."

Pain levels were low whether patients took acetaminophen-ibuprofen or the hydrocondone-acetaminophen combination. Pain ratings over three days were slightly lower for female patients taking non-opioids than those on the low dose of hydrocodone (2.83 vs 2.98). The same was true for male patients (2.24 vs 2.37).

Patient satisfaction and sleep quality were also slightly better in the non-opioid group, which also experienced less pain interference with daily activities.

"The results actually came in even stronger than we thought they would," Feldman said. "We expected to find the non-opioid to be non-inferior, so that at least it was no worse than opioids. We were surprised to see that it was actually superior." 

The first FDA-approved over-the-counter pain reliever that combines acetaminophen with ibuprofen was Advil Dual Action, although the doses are somewhat different than what was used in the Rutgers study.

Each capsule contains 250 mg of acetaminophen and 125 mg of ibuprofen, with up to six capsules per day recommended for toothaches, headaches and “minor aches and pain.”

Patients are cautioned not to take Advil Dual Action with other products containing acetaminophen, as that can cause liver damage. Acetaminophen overdoses are involved in hundreds of deaths and over 50,000 emergency room visits in the U.S. annually.

Wisdom tooth extraction is performed about 3.5 million times a year in the United States. Dental surgery is often the first exposure that a patient has to prescription opioids, although their use after dental procedures has declined in recent years as fears grew about opioid addiction.

Last year the American Dental Association (ADA) released new guidelines recommending that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen be taken alone or in combination with acetaminophen as first-line treatments for acute dental pain in adults and adolescents aged 12 and older. 

NSAIDs and acetaminophen work differently, with NSAIDs reducing pain and inflammation in damaged tissue, while acetaminophen acts in the central nervous system to block pain signals that are not caused by inflammation. Taking the two together is believed to boost their analgesic effect. 

The ADA says opioids should only be used when NSAIDs and acetaminophen don’t relieve pain enough or when NSAIDs are contradicted due to health issues, such as a patient having cardiovascular problems or a bleeding ulcer.     

The risk of long-term opioid use after a tooth extraction is relatively rare. A large study of over 70,000 teens and young adults who had their wisdom teeth removed found that only 1.3% were prescribed opioids long-term after their initial prescription by a dentist. 

"We feel pretty confident in saying that opioids should not be prescribed routinely for dental procedures," Feldman said. "Our non-opioid combination really should be the analgesic choice."

Opioid Prescribing Down Significantly for U.S. Nursing Home Residents

By Pat Anson

Opioid prescribing to U.S. nursing home residents declined significantly over the past decade, the latest sign that efforts to limit access to opioid medication are impacting patients who need them for pain relief.

Researchers at University of California San Francisco (UCSF) looked at health data for nearly 3 million Medicare beneficiaries and found that the likelihood of nursing home residents receiving a prescription opioid fell from 48% in 2011 to 33.5% in 2022. 

The chances of a resident receiving a high daily dose above 50 morphine milligram equivalents (MME) also declined, from 25.1% to 21.9%. 

Over half of nursing home residents have chronic pain from arthritis, osteoporosis, degenerative disc disease and other age-related conditions. The average age of residents in this study was 84.

“We weren’t expecting to see a decline, especially for people who are actually reporting high incidence of chronic pain,” first author Ulrike Muench, an associate professor at UCSF School of Nursing, told the San Francisco Chronicle. “It might be a good thing that opioids are used less, but at the same time it raises concerns about potentially untreated pain for individuals who are in need of pain medications.”

The study is believed to be the first to examine opioid prescribing to nursing home residents after the release of the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline. Although that voluntary guideline was intended only for patients being treated for chronic pain by primary care providers, it essentially became the default guideline for all patients and doctors of every specialty.

Opioid prescriptions to nursing home residents were falling even before the CDC guideline was released, with the decline affecting every racial and ethnic group. 

Opioid Prescribing to U.S. Nursing Home Residents

JAMA INTERNAL MEDICINE

“These reductions parallel national patterns in primary care and may reflect implications of opioid-related policies, such as the 2016 Guideline, extending beyond their intended setting. Some residents may have benefitted from opioid reductions, but others may face barriers to adequate pain control,” researchers reported in JAMA Internal Medicine.    

“We also observed that minoritized residents were consistently less likely to receive opioids and higher daily MMEs, suggesting that prescribing decisions may not be based solely on clinical need.”

White nursing home residents were significantly more likely to be prescribed an opioid for pain than residents who are Black, Hispanic, Asian or Native American, even though minority residents are more likely to have severe pain.   

Previous studies have also documented declines in opioid prescribing to cancer patients, as well as seriously ill patients in palliative or hospice care  – groups that were supposed to be exempt from the CDC guideline.

Rx Opioids Are Not a Cure… and Neither Is Anything Else

By Neen Monty

They deliver it like it’s some kind of mic drop.

“Opioids are not a cure,” they say.

But here’s the important thing: Almost nothing in medicine is a cure.

Insulin doesn’t cure diabetes. But it keeps people alive.

Methotrexate and Xeljanz don’t cure rheumatoid arthritis. They slow down disease progression though.

Intravenous immunoglobulin is not a cure for Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy. But it slows down the demyelination of my nerves.

Prednisone is not a cure for autoimmune disease. But it reduces inflammation, which improves pain and quality of life.

Anti-inflammatories do not cure inflammatory arthritis, but they decrease pain, increase function and improve quality of life.

Metformin, thyroxine, even chemotherapy in many cases… none are cures.

They manage symptoms, reduce harm, and improve quality of life.

That’s medicine’s job.

Medicine is not purely about curing disease. In fact, it’s rarely about curing disease. That does not mean that all the wonderful things that medicine can do are worthless.

So why is pain relief held to a higher standard than every other kind of treatment?

Why are opioids dismissed simply because they don’t cure the underlying disease that causes the pain?

Pain relief is not a moral failing. It’s medicine doing what it’s meant to do: Alleviate suffering and restore function.

That’s what opioids do. Alleviate suffering, restore function and improve quality of life. Those are good things.

If you can move again, sleep again, think clearly again, participate in life again, isn’t that a good thing?

But no. Dismiss opioids because they’re not a cure.

Such a stupid point of view.

Now that we’ve shown that chronic pain patients hardly ever become addicted or overdose on their pain medication, people are really reaching for reasons to demonize opioids. Saying that opioids are not a cure is reaching pretty hard.

Opioids reduce pain temporarily. I am under no illusions. And I do wish there was a cure for my diseases. I really do. But there is no cure. There is only palliative treatment -- with opioids.

And so many people would like to take that pain relief away from me. People who have never experienced severe pain at 1am. So severe that sleep is impossible. So constant that it happens every night. And all day, every day.

Except for the few hours when I have pain medication to reduce that pain – while not curing it.

Opioids don’t cure pain any more than insulin cures diabetes. They treat a symptom. A devastating symptom – severe pain - that profoundly affects function and quality of life.

Reducing that pain, even temporarily, is not a failure.

That’s a treatment working.

It’s the best treatment we’ve got for severe pain, acute or chronic.

To say “opioids are not a cure” is to fundamentally misunderstand what they’re for.

You know, those glasses you wear won’t cure your shortsightedness. Let’s take your glasses away. They’re not a cure!

That wheelchair won’t cure paralysis. You don’t need a wheelchair.

We don’t apply this logic to any other condition or treatment. Only pain. Only opioids.

We don’t tell people with heart failure to throw away their meds because they don’t “fix” the heart.

We don’t tell people with asthma to stop their inhalers because they don’t “cure” the lungs.

We treat to relieve symptoms, to restore life and dignity, because that’s the ethical duty of medicine.

Relief of suffering is an outcome. Improved function is an outcome. But a cure is wishful thinking.

So the next time someone says, “Opioids are not a cure,” remember that neither is anything else we use to keep people alive, moving, and human.

And that’s okay. Because that’s the best we can do, in many situations.

Because the goal of medicine isn’t always to cure. It’s to care.

Neen Monty is a patient advocate in Australia who lives with rheumatoid arthritis and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP), a progressive neurological disease that attacks the nerves.

Neen is dedicated to challenging misinformation and promoting access to safe, effective pain relief. She has created a website for Pain Patient Advocacy Australia to show that prescription opioids can be safe and effective, even when taken long term. You can subscribe to Neen’s free newsletter on Substack, “Arthritic Chick on Chronic Pain.”

How Opiophobia Paved the Way for Tylenol Hysteria

By Crystal Lindell

The dirty little secret about alternatives to opioids is that they are all mostly bullshit.

They’re expensive, sometimes outright dangerous, and perhaps worst of all, ineffective.

So when doctors are telling you that you don’t need opioids to treat your pain, what they are really saying is that you don’t need pain treatment at all.

And that’s exactly the message that people are getting from the Trump administration’s recent guidance to avoid taking Tylenol while pregnant.

Specifically, the administration is now advising women not to use acetaminophen — which goes by the brand name Tylenol — for pain and fever during pregnancy due to claims that it raises the risk of their babies developing autism. 

Aside from the fact that science behind this claim is not definitive, the other major problem is that there is no safe alternative to acetaminophen that a woman can take for pain and fever while pregnant. Over-the-counter pain relievers like aspirin and ibuprofen can damage the kidneys of unborn babies.

President Trump admitted as much during the press conference about the new guidance, putting the onus on pregnant women to “tough it out” by not taking Tylenol

“Sadly, first question, what can you take instead? It's actually, there's not an alternative to that,” Trump said. “And as you know, other medicines are absolutely proven bad. I mean, they've been proven bad, the aspirins and the Advils and others, right?

“But if you can't tough it out, if you can't do it, that's what you're going to have to do. You'll take a Tylenol, but it'll be very sparingly.”

That’s a genuinely inhumane response to the pain pregnant women often endure, because what he’s really saying is that you just should not treat pain while pregnant. It’s also on-brand messaging for an opiophobic country that’s been dismissing everyone’s pain for almost a decade now.

As it turns out, when you tell people that their pain doesn’t deserve to be treated by opioids, then it’s a quick path to the idea that pain shouldn’t be treated by other substances, be they cannabis or kratom or Tylenol. 

In the end, it all really comes down to a fundamental question of whether or not pain is worthy of treatment.

And unfortunately, for many healthcare professionals and government officials, the answer is a resounding “no.” They do not believe that pain is worthy of treatment – as long as it’s not their pain. Because, make no mistake, when these types of policies come out, that’s exactly who they apply to: other people.

They know that they themselves will get to use opioids if and when the time comes that they need them for their own pain. And they don’t expect to have a pregnancy themselves, so of course they don’t care if pregnant women can’t have their pain treated.

It's why Trump can so dismissively say "there's no downside in not taking it." He means there is no downside to him if you don’t take Tylenol.

But for pregnant women, there most certainly is a downside. Failing to treat fever and significant pain can pose serious risks to both the mother and baby, resulting in miscarriages, birth defects, depression, infections and high blood pressure.

Enduring untreated pain can wear you down in ways you can’t even predict. It will destroy your sleep, steal your hope, and even make you mean. When it’s your pain, you’ll do anything to make it stop.

Pain is a medical condition on its own, and “toughing it out” is not an effective treatment. Until we as patients and voters demand better, I fear both the government and our healthcare system will continue chipping away at the pain treatments we still have — until there is literally nothing left but silent prayers and fleeting wishes.

Former Secretary of Veterans Affairs Calls for ‘Opioid-Free VA’

By Crystal Lindell

An alarming new column in The Hill is advocating for an opioid-free Veterans Affairs health system by 2030 – a move that would leave countless veterans and their families without effective pain relief.

Headlined “Whiskey, tobacco, and pain pills: The VA can be an opioid-free health system,” the op/ed was written by David Shulkin, MD, who was Secretary of Veterans Affairs in the first Trump administration, and the VA’s Under Secretary of Health in the Obama administration.

His opening line gets straight to the point he’s trying to make: “There is a time for everything. Now is the time for the Department of Veterans Affairs to go opioid-free.”

His column is promoting a dangerous message, and I fear that Shulkin’s credentials will lead people to take his stance seriously. It’s especially abhorrent because veterans are more likely to have chronic pain and have suicide rates twice as high as civilians, often due to poorly treated pain.

The VA and Department of Defense medical guidelines already discourage opioids from being prescribed for chronic pain, especially for younger patients of military age. The guidelines only allow for short-acting opioids to be prescribed for short-term acute pain.  

Shulkin frames opioids as a sort of magic-spell curse that can ruin lives after just one dose:

“The real opportunity lies in preventing opioid initiation,” Shulkin wrote. “The VA’s comprehensive, integrated system makes it uniquely positioned to lead the nation in eliminating opioid use and become the first opioid-free health system in the country. While it would be inappropriate to abruptly discontinue opioids for current chronic users, the VA could immediately begin limiting opioids for acute pain and adopt new alternatives. 

Shulkin claims that over half of veterans receive opioids for post-operative acute pain, as though that number is too high. But having opioid medication after surgery isn't just common practice, it's the most humane response. And there’s little evidence it leads to opioid addiction.

In fact, I’d go so far as to say that the fact that only half of veterans get opioids post-op is probably too low. Of course, I couldn’t fact check Shulkin’s numbers because the link he uses to validate his claim about how many veterans receive opioids post-op doesn’t even work. It just goes to a “404 error” page not found.  

Shulkin also claims that “roughly 10 percent” of veterans develop opioid addiction after surgery. But the link provided for that misleading claim takes you to a large meta-analysis study of over 4 million chronic pain patients around the world (mostly civilians), which has no relevance to how many U.S. veterans become addicted after surgery.

As noted in the headline to his column, Shulkin also compares opioids to alcohol and tobacco, citing the fact that VA doctors used to recommend both to patients to help make them “more comfortable.”  

“Just as we no longer prescribe alcohol or allow tobacco on VA campuses, the day will come when we look back and wonder why opioids were ever part of routine care,” he writes. 

Of course, there are glaring differences between opioids and those two substances: Opioids require a prescription, while alcohol and tobacco can be bought over the counter. They’re also involved in many more deaths than prescription opioids. 

To be frank, if patients could go out and purchase hydrocodone as easily as they can buy whiskey or a pack of cigarettes, I wouldn’t have a problem with what Shulkin is saying. Patients lacking a prescription from the VA would still have the option to treat their pain how they saw fit — whether or not a doctor approved of the methods would be irrelevant. 

Unfortunately, that’s not the case. And as such, trying to make the VA opioid-free within five years is inhumane. 

‘Additional Advances Are Emerging’

Of course, since Shulkin is advocating for zero opioid prescriptions, one might assume that he would at least offer a list of reasonable non-opioid pain relieving alternatives. But here too, his evidence is lacking. 

His first suggestion is a selective sodium channel blocker called Journavx (suzetrigine), which was recently approved by the FDA, even though it’s no more effective than a low dose of Vicodin. 

According to Yale Medicine, Journavx has very specific limitations. It’s "not a cure-all" and is only meant for moderate-to-severe acute pain, which is short-term pain after trauma or surgery. 

"This means, based on the current evidence, that it would likely be used primarily in the hospital setting and only for a few days," says Robert Chow, MD, a Yale Medicine anesthesiologist and pain management specialist.

Shulkin says "additional advances are emerging” for other non-opioid alternatives, including drugs targeting peptide-receptors that “appear to provide effective pain relief.”

So to recap, Shulkin wants the entire VA system – which provides healthcare to over 8 million military service members, veterans and their families – should go opioid free because we now have one sodium channel blocker and "additional advances are emerging."

Shulkin admits "it would be inappropriate to abruptly discontinue opioids” for long-term patients on opioids. But something tells me that such a warning would be ignored if the VA ever actually did go "opioid free," given the fact that many veterans have already been abruptly tapered off opioids.

I suspect that if Shulkin ever needed opioids for his own pain, he would not hesitate to take them. His is the type of column that is only written about other people’s pain – and other people’s pain is always easy to endure. 

I hope that his proposal is ignored and ridiculed as the nonsense it is. But after witnessing opiophobia for the last decade, I worry that the opposite will happen, and that policymakers will take Shulkin’s ideas seriously. 

Opioids aren’t just helpful – for many veterans they are necessary. And any medical professional advocating for their elimination should not be working in medicine at all. 

If we want to make the world a better place, we need to take pain seriously and treat it as the grave condition it often is. That means giving patients access to opioids when they need them. 

Early Receipt of Opioids Reduces Hospitalization of Children with Sickle Cell Disease

By Pat Anson

Early administration of opioids for pain relief in emergency departments significantly reduces the chances of a child with sickle cell disease being hospitalized, according to a large new study published in JAMA Pediatrics. 

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a genetic disorder that causes red blood cells to form in a crescent or sickle shape, which creates painful blockages in blood vessels. About 100,000 Americans live with sickle cell disease, primarily people of African or Hispanic descent.

It’s not uncommon for someone with SCD to visit an ER a few times each year due to pain or complications such as anemia, stroke, infection and organ failure. Many patients with SCD feel stigmatized when they visit an ER, where their pain is not taken seriously and they are seen as drug seekers. That delays their treatment, even though medical guidelines recommend early treatment with opioids and other pain relievers.    

“If we can stabilize and treat patients’ pain, they won’t need to be admitted to the hospital, where they would miss school, their families would miss work, and it’s disruptive to their lives,” said co-author Elizabeth Alpern, MD, Professor and Vice Chair in the Department of Pediatrics at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine.

Alpern and her colleagues reviewed over 9,000 ER visits by 2,538 children with an uncomplicated SCD pain flare between 2019 and 2021. Their findings offer some of the first evidence that faster pain management with opioids can lead to better outcomes for pediatric SCD patients.

Children who received their first opioid dose within 60 minutes of arrival in the ER were 15% less likely to be hospitalized. The odds of hospitalization dropped even further when a second dose was administered within 30 minutes of the first. 

“We were able to statistically show that if patients receive a timely first dose of opioid medications and a timely second dose of opioid medications, we could drastically reduce the number of hospital admissions within this population,” said co-author Jacqueline Corboy, MD, Assistant Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Emergency Medicine at the Feinberg School of Medicine. “This is the first study that shows concrete evidence, so this is really important.” 

The study was a collaborative effort among 12 pediatric hospitals. Two smaller, single-site studies showed no association between early receipt of opioids and lower odds of hospitalization.

SCD patients have few alternatives to opioids for pain relief. Last year Pfizer took the sickle cell medication Oxbryta off the market over concerns that it could be causing deaths and other complications. A 2022 study also found that SCD patients given corticosteroids are more likely to be hospitalized with severe pain.

Compared to other chronic illnesses, SCD has received little attention from researchers and pharmaceutical companies, resulting in a lag in the development of new treatments. Until 2018, only one drug was approved by the FDA to treat sickle cell patients. Bone marrow and stem cell transplants are currently the only curative therapies for SCD.

It’s Rare for Chronic Pain Patients to Overdose on Opioids

By Neen Monty

The Penington Institute is an Australian non-profit public health and drug policy research organization. Its core mission is to study drug use “in a safe, considerate and practical way. We seek solutions, not scapegoats. We strive for positive outcomes, not negative stereotypes.”

A most worthy cause.

Each year, Penington releases Australia’s Annual Overdose Report, the country’s most comprehensive study of overdose trends and impacts. I am not against the work of the Penington Institute. On the contrary, they serve a very necessary purpose and have a noble goal.

However, for several years running, they have demonized chronic pain patients and twisted the statistics to inflate the harms of prescription opioids. And this is generally what I write about. To correct the record.

Here’s the download page to Penington’s 2025 report. It documents how many overdoses and what substances were involved. The report relates to data from the 2023 calendar year. Paging through it, something jumped out at me immediately.

Naturally, I jumped straight to the ‘Opioids’ section. There is a table, with key facts. One of these key facts is:

“From 2019-2023, there were 163 unintentional drug-induced deaths involving pharmaceutical opioids as the sole drug type.”

That’s an average of nearly 33 people who died accidentally every year when pharmaceutical opioids were the sole drug type. 33 people. In a country with 27.4 million people.

Does that sound like an opioid crisis to you? Does that sound like a reason to deny tens of thousands of patients access to safe and effective pain relief?

Do you know what immediately occurred to me when I realised that less than 50 people per year die from prescription opioid overdose?

I remembered this 2023 report from the Therapeutic Goods Administration (Australia’s version of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration), justifying their changes to paracetamol scheduling. That’s acetaminophen for those of you in the U.S.

Paracetamol pack sizes were reduced to 16 tablets per packet and supermarkets could only sell two packs per person. Larger packs were only available at pharmacies, and some required a pharmacist’s approval.

Do you know why they made paracetamol harder to get?

Because 50 Australians were dying every year from paracetamol overdoses, with rates of intentional overdose highest among adolescents and young adults.

There was an outcry when the changes came into effect. Chronic pain patients were again being harmed by policy because a different patient group was overdosing.

Because 50 people die of paracetamol overdoses per year in Australia.

Do you get what I am saying?

Paracetamol is still available over-the-counter in Australia, albeit in smaller pack sizes. And yet opioids are almost impossible to access.

Fewer Australians die from prescription opioid overdoses than from paracetamol overdoses. This was true long before any changes were made in opioid scheduling in 2020, making opioids much harder to get.

Opioid prescribing was already declining in 2020, so there was no need to change opioid prescribing practices. Certainly no medical need. In fact, this policy change caused a great deal of harm to those who live with constant, severe pain, and has had no benefits. For anyone.

Please think about it. Reflect upon it. Make it make sense. How is this anything other than a witch hunt?

Paracetamol kills more people than prescription opioids, yet it’s still available over the counter. And doctors are torturing people who live with painful, progressive and incurable diseases, by denying us access to safe and effective pain relief.

Because 33 people die of prescription opioid overdoses every year. While 50 people die of paracetamol overdoses.

Does Australia have an opioid crisis? No.

Does Australia have a prescription opioid crisis? Also no!

We never had a prescription opioid crisis. And we were never heading for one. Prescription opioid overdoes have been falling in Australia since 2018. Check the statistics.

Unlearn what you have been told and learn the true statistics.

There was no need to make changes in 2020. Yet those changes caused interminable suffering to people who live with constant, severe pain from illness or injury.

Most chronic pain patients are still suffering. Many have died.

Does this seem fair to you? Does this seem right? Does it seem reasonable?

Does any of this seem like good policy?

To be clear, I am not saying that opioids should be available over-the-counter. Please do not twist my words to imply that.

Opioids for severe, daily pain should be managed as they were before 2020. By general practitioners who know their patients well.

There should be no dose ceilings because there is no evidence that dose ceilings reduce overdoses and death. GPs are more than capable of prescribing an appropriate dose and duration to manage severe chronic pain.

Instead, chronic pain patients in Australia are forced to go to a pain management specialist, who barely knows them and rarely understands their pain.

People who live with severe, daily pain from disease and injury have a right to pain relief. We need help.

And this year’s Penington report shows that we are not the ones who are overdosing.

It is time to restore access to safe and effective pain relief for those who desperately need it. Chronic pain kills far more often than the opioids prescribed for chronic pain do. Patients die from heart attacks, strokes, hypertension, and other stress-induced conditions when their pain is not treated.  

The true cause of most overdose deaths is polypharmacy: multiple drugs, both legal and illegal, that are often mixed with alcohol.

Targeting people who live with painful, progressive and incurable diseases and injuries, denying us access to pain medication, is never going to reduce overdoses by illicit drug users. They are two different patient populations.

It is not chronic pain patients who are overdosing.

Neen Monty is a patient advocate in Australia who lives with rheumatoid arthritis and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP), a progressive neurological disease that attacks the nerves.

Neen is dedicated to challenging misinformation and promoting access to safe, effective pain relief. She has created a website for Pain Patient Advocacy Australia to show that prescription opioids can be safe and effective, even when taken long term. You can subscribe to Neen’s newsletter on Substack, “Arthritic Chick on Chronic Pain.”

5 Myths About Opioids That I Believed, Until I Needed Them

By Crystal Lindell

I had been enduring debilitating pain for months by the time I was given my first hydrocodone prescription for chronic pain in 2013.

At the time, I didn’t even know that hydrocodone was an opioid.

I had only heard of Vicodin being an opioid, and that was only because I lived near the Wisconsin border, where there are lots of Packer fans. The news that former Green Bay quarterback Brett Favre had to go to rehab for his Vicodin use was part of the local conversation.

But I had no idea that hydrocodone was the active ingredient in Vicodin.

It’s been over a decade now, and I have come to rely on opioids to manage the chronic pain I have in my right ribs, which is technically called “intercostal neuralgia.”

Before I needed opioids for pain relief, I used to buy into a lot of common cultural myths about them. Below is a look at what I used to believe, and how my views eventually shifted.

Myth #1: Only People Who ‘Misuse’ Opioids Have Physical Withdrawal

When I got my first hydrocodone prescription, I didn’t know it was a controlled substance with strict limits on how often you can get refills. And I definitely didn’t know that I would go through withdrawal if I stopped taking them abruptly.

My doctor prescribed 10mg pills and the label said: “Take 1-2 every 4-6 hours.”

So, that’s exactly what I did: Two pills every four to six hours.

My pain was (and still is) intense, but at the time I was still trying to keep pace with my pre-chronic pain lifestyle, which meant doing everything possible to push the pain away so that I could work and have a somewhat normal life.

But that meant that I ran out of my prescription early – something I was not aware was even a problem. When the doctor’s office said I would need to wait a couple days for a refill, I didn’t think it would be a big deal. Surely, I could easily ride out a couple of days without hydrocodone, no problem. After all, I had been taking them as prescribed.

Yeah. That’s not what happened. Turns out you actually cannot go from 40 to 80 mg of hydrocodone a day to zero.

I naively went to work that day, and still remember the trauma of spending the entire shift in the bathroom with diarrhea, nausea, horrible flu-like aches, and an odd feeling of anxiety.

Turns out, anyone can go through withdrawal from opioids. There is no magic spell that doctors can cast to give you immunity from it, just because you’re taking opioids exactly as prescribed. Your body doesn’t know the difference.

And that physical withdrawal is also not indicative that you have “a problem.”

In fact, it’s one of the reasons I think the entire conversation around addiction is often more nuanced than people want to admit. Taking a dose to combat withdrawal is often labeled as “misuse” – even though anyone can have withdrawal. 

And anyone who’s been through it knows that you’ll do almost anything to make it stop.

Myth #2: The Best Way to Stop Using Opioids Is Quitting Cold Turkey

There’s a common myth that the best way to stop using an addictive substance is to go cold turkey. That’s usually not true for things like nicotine and alcohol, and it’s also not true for opioids.

I used to believe in the common framing for this. That if you stopped using opioids cold turkey, made it through 72 hours of withdrawal, and then took just one dose, it would reset the whole process. You’d have to go through withdrawal all over again.

That’s not true. In fact, taking a dose after going longer than usual without one is often part of the tapering process that works best for getting off opioids. 

Ideally, you taper off slowly by lowering the amount you’re taking each day. So, if you’re on 40mg of hydrocodone a day, the best way to stop using it is to take 35mg daily for a week or so, then 30 mg, and so on until you get down to zero.

That’s the best way to reach success long-term and actually get off the medication, if that is your goal.

If you’re looking for more realistic tips on how to stop taking opioids, see “A Survival Guide for Opioid Withdrawal” that I wrote for PNN with my partner a few years ago. You can trust the advice because we learned it ourselves the hard way.

Myth #3: Opioid Doses Last as Long as Manufacturers Claim

I was eventually prescribed extended-release morphine pills for my chronic pain, and was told that each one should last a full eight hours. I was also told that hydrocodone should last four to six hours.

Unfortunately, neither of those things are true. So-called “extended release” morphine lasts about four hours, while the short-acting hydrocodone can stop working in just two or three hours.

So, it’s not wise to take another dose whenever your pain comes back. If you do that, you’ll end up running out of your prescription early every month.

Instead, you should expect to go through periods throughout the day when your pain starts to come back – and then you have to count down until your next dose.

Myth #4: Even One Dose of an Opioid Creates a High Risk of Addiction

Before I started taking opioids, I honestly believed the myth that just one 10mg dose of Vicodin could result in life-long addiction.

In reality, that’s nearly impossible. In fact, even among patients who take opioids long-term, the rate of addiction is still incredibly low. Estimates vary widely, but according to experts who have studied it, people who take opioids over long periods have addiction rates of 1 to 3 percent.   

Opioids are often framed as being so addictive that anyone can get hooked, so any exposure to them is dangerous and risky. In reality, low-dose opioids are incredibly safe, and most patients taking prescription opioids never develop an addiction to them

Myth #5: If Someone Is ‘Really’ in Pain, Doctors Will Prescribe Opioids

I am a little ashamed to admit this, but I used to think of a Vicodin prescription as an indicator of whether or not someone’s pain was actually severe.

If a doctor prescribed Vicodin to someone, that meant they were in “real” pain.

Boy, was I wrong.

While dealing with pain myself, I quickly learned that doctors will often ignore severe pain in patients because they don’t want to deal with the hassle of prescribing a controlled substance. That reluctance has only gotten worse since 2013. Much worse.

These days, doctors withhold opioid medication from post-op patients, cancer patients, palliative care patients, and even hospice patients. All of them are still in very real pain though.

Whether or not a doctor validates your pain with an opioid prescription has no bearing on how severe your pain actually is.

There’s a lot of misinformation about opioids and these are just some of the common myths perpetuated about them. While it’s understandable to believe them if you’ve actually never needed opioids, I encourage everyone to keep an open mind. After all, if you wait until you or a loved one needs opioids to see the truth, it may be too late.

VA Researchers Say Opioid Guidelines Should Include Cancer Patients

By Pat Anson

Most medical guidelines that limit the use of opioid pain medication are intended only for patients suffering from “non-cancer” pain. The CDC, for example, says that its guideline “does not apply to patients undergoing cancer-related pain treatment,” because the potential for addiction and overdose “might not be relevant” to patients at risk of dying.

That long-held policy is now being questioned. In a study published in CANCER, the medical journal of the American Cancer Society, VA researchers say cancer patients are living longer and may be at risk of “persistent opioid use.”

The study, led by researchers at the VA Medical Center in Philadelphia and the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, followed over 9,000 veterans who had surgery for early-stage cancer, mostly prostate, colon, bladder or lung cancers. About a third of those patients also needed chemotherapy, immunotherapy or radiation therapy.  

Thirteen months after surgery, about one in ten patients (10.6%) were still prescribed opioids for pain relief. And about 4% of them were co-prescribed benzodiazepines for anxiety, a combination of medications that some consider risky.

Although none of the veterans overdosed from taking opioids, and less than one percent (0.78%) were diagnosed with opioid use disorder, researchers say stronger measures are needed to limit the use of opioids by cancer patients.

“Minimizing opioid exposure associated with cancer treatment while providing effective pain control will decrease long-term health risks among cancer survivors,” said lead author Marilyn Schapira, MD, Professor of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and Co-Director at the Center for Health Equity Research at the VA Medical Center.

“Prescription opioid practices associated with cancer treatment may lead to unsafe and long-term opioid treatment (LTOT) and the related adverse outcomes of opioid use disorder, opioid overdose, and nonoverdose adverse events, including suicide.”

Schapira and her colleagues say medical guidelines that exclude cancer patients from opioid prescribing limits, such as the CDC guideline and the Department of Defense/Veterans Affairs guideline, should be rewritten.

“There may be benefits to extending general guidelines regarding prescription opioids to those facing cancer treatment in consideration of health and well-being during the years of survivorship," researchers concluded. “Efforts should be taken to mitigate long-term opioid use and its potential adverse effects in this population. This is especially true because cancer is increasingly recognized as a chronic condition, and survivors of cancer are living longer.”

Cancer patients with a history of chronic pain, greater comorbidities, lower socioeconomic status, and those who received chemotherapy were said to be at “especially high risk of opioid use in the year after surgery.”

Regardless of what the guidelines say, many U.S. patients being treated for cancer already have trouble getting opioids for pain control. A recent study found a 24% decline in opioid prescribing to cancer patients on Medicare after the CDC’s 2016 guideline. Another study found the number of cancer patients seeking treatment for pain in hospital emergency rooms doubled. About a quarter of the patients had cancer pain so severe they were admitted.  

Other studies have found that cancer patients are getting smaller and fewer doses of opioids, while some can’t get them at all. A recent survey of palliative care doctors in New York City found that nine out of ten (88%) reported frequent obstacles in getting opioids for their patients due to tight supplies at pharmacies. Nearly a third said the shortages resulted in sub-optimal care for their patients.

One of the more egregious examples of a cancer patient being unable to get opioids was the case of April Doyle, a California woman with metastatic breast cancer who couldn’t get her Norco prescription filled at a Rite Aid pharmacy. April recorded a tearful video in the pharmacy parking lot and shared it online, where it went viral. Outrage over the incident led to an apology from Rite Aid and her prescription being filled. April died a year later at the age of 42, leaving behind a 9-year-old son.