Wouldn't it be ironic if the assertion that Uncle Rushbo had become a drug addled moron because of his addiction to OxyContin was a misperception based on a much loved Republican misstatement of the truth about painkillers?
Republicans are against the use of painkiller pills by the working poor. They cavalierly note that they don't want to condone something that can lead to addiction. The word "addiction" will evoke images of drug users lounging about in a section of San Francisco that became synonymous with the term "flower power." The use of the term "drug" will convey images of heroin users with dirty needles. Pain builds character.
At that point, it is easy for the Republicans to persuade the public that only stern measures provided by red-blooded patriotic American politicians will protect the kiddies on the school playground from the fiends who want to pedal the "one moment of ecstasy; a lifetime of regret" philosophy of instant gratification camouflaged as "painkillers."
There's just one flaw in this picture. Some time ago, a usually reliable source told this columnist that when a person who is in pain is given a dose of painkiller, he or she doesn't get "high," but benefits from the cessation of the pain and nothing else. That aspect of the pain killer story isn't well disseminated.
A person who is not in pain and takes certain substances will get high. Most readers know that. Painkillers act like a "road block" for nerves transmitting pain, and provide two very different results if the recipient is or is not in pain. That obscure bit of medical knowledge indicates that the mainstream media isn't delivering an accurate picture of the situation.
If the pain was sever and if it were recurring, it is easy to see that one might feel more comfortable receiving the "road block" substance and want it whenever the hurt begins? Isn't it like the guiding principle for approving waterboarding? The "I'll do anything to make this stop!" is a powerful motivation for answering an interrogator's questions. Similarly a pill that can make pain stop holds a strong attraction for someone who is in considerable pain. It's not a high they are desperately seeking.
Oxycontin stops physical pain and waterboarding succeeds via the need to stop psychological pain.
Obviously, if a person is not in a considerable amount of pain, then the need for the use of strong painkillers will become questionable.
So for both topics, OxyContin and Waterboarding, making the pain stop is a common thread.
Being a cold blooded sadist and denying the medicine so that the patient won't become addicted to non existent highs is (if my source is correct) not exactly the actions of a conservative Christian. It seems to be more like the modus operandi of a sadist, but if it can be used to win elections why should that stop a politician from playing with a common misconception?
Doing all the journalistic digging to find the sustaining information buried deep in medical publications and scholastic research papers would be a daunting task. If a publication, such as Nation magazine, were to authorize an assignment for a paid article that would make the task seem less daunting and much more appealing.
Taking a month or so to sift through libraries and web sites to compile enough authoritative information to produce a long, long post on a blog to make that point is a very, very intimidating task.
A columnist might tell a personal anecdote about lying in a hospital bed and, motivated by a fear of becoming a junkie, telling the nurses that the doctor would monitor the use of morphine. A columnist might even remember the experience as an exercise in futility saying: "To the best of my ability to recall; the morphine didn't' provide much pain relief nor did it provide any "high.'" Yeah a broken bone hurts but the question "who wants to risk becoming a drug fiend who will do anything to get the money for his next "fix'?" is a powerful motivating factor when it comes to deciding about a chance to get more of a not very effective medicine?
The nurses observed that our attitude was very different from others who would constantly beg for more and more painkillers. Many nurses wanted to tell the babies: "Suck it up, wimp."
Until recently we had not seen or heard anything in the mainstream media that would corroborate this medical assertion, but then we caught an installment of the Korel show on KKGN and he did indeed say flat out pain killers have two distinctly different effects on people. One for those in pain; a different one for those not in pain. We tried to contact him to get some back up fact checking, quotes and sources, but our effort was unsuccessful so we have to use "hearsay" for our evidence.
Now, maybe it's time to start doing the keystrokes necessary to revise and polish a manuscript fondly known as "my memoirs"?