Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Email: Password:
News (Media Awareness Project) - US WSJ: To Control 'Meth,' Authorities Decide To Clamp Down On
Title:US WSJ: To Control 'Meth,' Authorities Decide To Clamp Down On
Published On:1998-08-26
Source:Wall Street Journal
Fetched On:2008-09-07 02:36:33
TO CONTROL 'METH,' AUTHORITIES DECIDE TO CLAMP DOWN ON COLD PILLS

Over-the-counter cold remedies have emerged as the latest villains in the
war on drugs.

Local lawmakers are stepping up efforts to restrict sales of dozens of
decongestant brands -- including such medicine-cabinet staples as American
Home Products Corp.'s Dristan; Warner-Lambert Co.'s Sudafed and Actifed;
Johnson & Johnson's Tylenol Cold; Procter & Gamble Co.'s NyQuil; and
SmithKline Beecham PLC's Contac. Many of the medicines sold under these
brand names contain ingredients that underground laboratories use in making
methamphetamine, an illegal stimulant that is the recreational drug of
choice in some circles.

For example, in San Diego it is illegal to buy more than three packages of
most over-the-counter cold and allergy medicines in a 24-hour period.
Similar legislation has passed or is pending in more than a dozen other
cities and counties in California, where authorities believe much of the
nation's supply of methamphetamine is synthesized.

Stocking Up

"We have stories of people going into supermarkets or drugstores and coming
out with shopping baskets full of these medications," says San Diego's
mayor, Susan Golding, who pushed for the ban. It went into effect July 31.
"No one buys a shopping-bagful because they have a cold," she says.

At issue are the legal chemicals ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, effective
decongestants that are found in dozens of sinus medications as well as in
some diet pills and energy-boosters. Amateur chemists turn them into
methamphetamine, their close chemical cousin, by whipping them up with a
foul cocktail of other readily available ingredients, such as battery acid
and red phospherous from road flares.\

A third cold-remedy chemical, phenylpropanolamine, can be converted into
the stimulant amphetamine, which is less readily absorbed by brain tissue
than the more potent methamphetamine.

First synthesized by a Japanese chemist in 1919, methamphetamine produces a
long-lasting high. It allowed Japanese factory workers and soldiers to work
through the night with little food during World War II. Today, despite its
outlaw status, it is popular as a stimulant among teens and other
club-goers and even as an extreme weight-loss aid. Its low price and long
highs have made "meth" more popular in some places than crack or marijuana.

Misused Medicines A sampling of over-the-counter cold and sinus medicines
that contain ingredients that criminals use to make the illegal stimulant
methamphetamine:
Phenylpropanolamine
* Alka-Seltzer Plus Cold
* Contac 12-Hour Cold
* Dimetapp Cold & Allergy
* Traminic Syrup Pseudoephedrine
* Actifed
* Advil Cold & Sinus
* Dristan Sinus
* PediaCare Infants' Drops
* Sudafed
* Triaminic Infant Oral Decongestant Drops
* Tylenol Cold
Source: WSJ

It isn't clear exactly how much the people who make methamphetamine rely on
over-the-counter products for ingredients. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Drug
Enforcement Administration, Rogene Waite, says among the nation's thousands
of small meth labs, OTC products are the most common source of
pseudoephedrine.

But most meth is made in "super labs" in Southern California and Mexico. In
the past, these facilities haven't had to rely on over-the-counter drugs
because they have had access to bulk shipments of powdered ephedrine and
pseudoephedrine. According to the DEA, it takes about 14,000 60-milligram
tablets of pseudoephedrine -- the rough equivalent of a case of cold
medicine -- to produce 1.1 pounds, or 450 grams, of methamphetamine. Meth
sells at prices ranging from $50 to $150 a gram.

Retailers and drug makers are in a bind: If they endorse legislation
restricting sales of cold remedies, they tacitly acknowledge that their
products contribute to meth production and potentially hurt their own
sales. But if they oppose restrictions, they are open to accusations of
profiting from illegal drugs as well as to the fury of local politicians.

'Blister Packs'

Already, retailers must report to the DEA bulk sales of products that
contain the chemicals if they believe they will be used to synthesize meth,
under the federal Comprehensive Methamphetamine Control Act of 1996. The
same law requires drug makers to put products containing the chemicals in
"blister packs," which encase pills individually and hamper attempts to
gather large quantities.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc. announced in April 1997 that if a customer tries to
exceed limits ranging from three to six packages of cold medicine per
transaction, the register will shut down.

Some pharmaceuticals makers say the new laws restrict the wrong parties.

"The regulations should be aimed at illicit manufacturers and not
legitimate consumers or legitimate retail outlets," says Carol Dornbush, a
spokeswoman for American Products' Whitehall-Robbins unit. She says, "We do
recognize it's important to target the drug abuse that's been happening."

At Johnson & Johnson, spokesman Ron Schmid worries that local legislation
could become a mess. "I think you could see how that would put us in a very
difficult position if you had 20,000 different local ordinances," he says.

Warner Lambert, based in Morris Plains, N.J., says it is working on a
chemical additive that will impede the meth-making process, but declined to
provide details. "We don't want [retailers] to say, 'My store clerks can't
take the liability,' " company spokesman Stephen Mock says. "Our major
concern is that they will do away with the product."

California's recent restrictions have stirred up interest elsewhere:
Similar measures have been considered in Kansas, Arizona and Minnesota.
Some states, including Idaho, Illinois, Utah and Nebraska, have either
stiffened penalties for possessing or trafficking in methamphetamine, or
have placed more stringent controls over the chemicals used to make it --
but haven't placed limits on sales of over-the-counter cold medicines to
the general public.

In the meantime, local authorities are getting more aggressive. Last year
in Missouri, law-enforcement officers in Kansas City and Jackson County
raided more than 10 stores selling bulk quantities of OTC drugs containing
ephedrine or pseudoephedrine and arrested store clerks. "We went
proactive," says Mike Shanahan, chief of the Jackson County Drug Task Force.

Missouri was the state with the highest number of illegal-lab seizures by
the DEA in 1996 and 1997. After Aug. 28, it will be a felony in Missouri
for store clerks to sell cold medicine if they have knowledge that it will
be used to make methamphetamine. An earlier version of the legislation
would have required customers to present photo ID to buy cold medicine, but
industry lobbyists say they fought it successfully.

'We Had to Do Something'

"We saw all of the ordinances out of California and it made us realize we
had to do something," says David Overfelt, a lobbyist for Missouri retailers.

Local legislators "are viewing all these products as a possible source,"
says a SmithKline Beecham spokeswoman. She asserts they aren't "a major
source of the problem."

California retailers, meanwhile, are befuddled by the state's wave of
restrictions. The city of Chino, for example, limits cold-medicine sales to
one package of more than 24 pills or two packages of 24 pills or less a
day. Chino is in San Bernardino County, and county law limits sales to
three packages or 100 pills a day.

In a move to pre-empt even tougher limits on sales, the California
Retailers Association helped draft a bill now winding through the state
legislature that would make the limit a uniform six packages per
transaction. William Dombrowski, president of the retailer association,
says, "It's a reluctant action on our part-restricting ourselves."

Procter & Gamble says while it is generally opposed to any state laws that
restrict sales of its over-the-counter medicines, it has "no plans to stand
in the way" of the California proposal. "We believe it is preferable to the
multitude of local laws within the state that ... make compliance for
retailers vary difficult," a spokesman says.

Checked-by: Mike Gogulski
Member Comments
No member comments available...