OREGON'S DRUG DEBATE

A bill that has wide support in the Oregon Legislature would take
another step in fighting the scourge of crystal methamphetamine, the
home-cooked drug made with popular over-the-counter cold medications.

The question is whether Oregon, if this particular law is passed,
would take the wrong step in its efforts to restrict access to
medications that contain pseudo-ephedrine, a key ingredient of crystal meth.

The state House of Representatives this week approved, by a 55-4
vote, a measure to require people to have a doctor's prescription if
they want to buy medicine that contains pseudo-ephedrine. Observers
expect the bill to pass the Senate, and the governor also supports it.

Other supporters of the prescription-only bill include one
representative who said the current laws -- restricting
pseudoephedrine medications to pharmacies, keeping them behind the
pharmacist's counter instead of on shelves and requiring buyers to
show identification -- are not tough enough. The lawmaker said he and
three colleagues shopped for cold medicines on Monday and in one hour
got their hands on enough of it to make crystal meth to last four
users for several weeks.

Should the bill become law, it will be an interesting test of how
much inconvenience the public is willing to put up with in the fight
against drug abuse. It seems unlikely that many people in Oregon who
come down with a cold will bother to go get a prescription for their
Sudafed from a doctor. It would be much easier, quicker and less
expensive to go buy a different medication that remains available
over the counter.

Enter the drug companies, who have recognized the problem
pseudoephedrine is causing and already are marketing replacement
medicines, which feature a substitute for the drug that cannot be
used in meth labs.

While at least one drug company is running radio advertisements in
Portland against the bill, the overwhelming vote in the House signals
that lawmakers have already made their decision.

But if Oregon is going to take such drastic measures to fight crystal
meth, it would seem wiser for lawmakers to just go on and ban
medication with pseudoephedrine from being sold in the state. Any
unscrupulous doctor or pharmacist could be bribed to prescribe or
sell the medication, and make a hefty profit by doing it.

If drug companies are devising alternatives, better to insist on the
sale of those medications instead of tempting meth addicts with pseudoephedrine.