METH GROWTH PROMPTS SUDAFED CHANGES

Pharmaceuticals giant Pfizer has announced a change to its popular Sudafed
line in response to pressure from drug enforcement officials seeking to
thwart the growing illegal methamphetamine trade.

Phizer announced Friday it would begin U.S. sales of a decongestant
product, Sudafed PE, Jan. 10. The product, which has reportedly been
available in Europe for years, substitutes the drug phenylephrine for
pseudoephedrine, the active ingredient crucial to the manufacture of
methamphetamine.

The company has been criticized for resisting legislation placing tighter
restrictions on its over-the-counter cold medicines. The drugs have become
prime targets for criminals who purchase or shoplift the products for meth
cooks, who then extract the pseudoephedrine from the binding agents in
tablets or capsules using a dangerous and highly toxic process.

Pfizer said it will continue to market its original Sudafed formula along
with Sudafed PE, leading some officials to wonder how effective the move
might be in reducing the drug's availability for criminal use.

By broadening its line, however, Pfizer has positioned itself to withstand
a growing movement among legislatures throughout the country to restrict
the sale of over-the-counter medicines containing pseudoephedrine.

Both drugs work similarly to reduce nasal congestion by constricting blood
vessels in nasal passages, according to information provided by the
National Institutes for Health.

Oregon and Oklahoma have already passed sweeping laws requiring retailers
to place such drugs behind sales counters, collect signatures and IDs from
customers at the time of purchase, and proof that purchasers are at least
18 years old.

Oklahoma has passed the most restrictive legislation, mandating that
Sudafed and like medicines be placed behind pharmacy counters. Oklahoma
officials claim as many as 27 other states have shown keen interest in the
effectiveness of their program with an eye toward adopting similar laws
themselves.

The trend toward restricting access to the popular cold and allergy
remedies has attracted criticism from pharmaceutical and retail industry
lobbyists who argue such laws are harder on legitimate consumers than on
criminals.

The National Association of Chain Drug Stores (NACDS) has argued that laws
such as Oklahoma's primarily affect legitimate customers using the products
for medicinal purposes, such as treatment of colds, allergies or sinus
infections and does not address the larger issue of illegal pseudoephedrine
use by criminals.

"Without a multi-pronged approach to combat meth, it's like giving an
aspirin to a patient with a broken leg -- it may be a step in the right
direction, but it's not enough to solve the problem," Mary Ann Wagner,
president of the NACDS told the House Subcommittee on Criminal Justice,
Drug Policy and Human Resources last month.

"We strongly encourage Congress and the subcommittee to explore all avenues
before proposing final solutions." Wagner cited DEA statistics that trace
the lion's share of the illicit meth supply to "super labs"--- labs
producing more than 10 pounds of meth in one 24-hour cycle -- located most
often in California and Mexico.

Wagner noted that both Oklahoma and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) officials
acknowledge that pseudoephedrine products have been sold by the caseload
out of the back doors of rogue convenience stores and gas stations to such
criminals.

In further testimony, Wagner encouraged stronger state and federal laws. On
the state level, she called for tougher restrictions and penalties for
those convicted of meth-related offenses. On the federal level, she
advocated for the potential creation of federal laws against meth-related
offenses.

No place in North Carolina has been harder hit by the growth of the illegal
meth industry than Watauga County.

District Attorney Jerry Wilson and Sheriff Mark Shook have taken creative
steps to stem production of the drug.

Wilson attempted to prosecute meth lab operators under laws meant for
producers of weapons of mass destruction.

His strategy, based on the toxicity of the labs and their inherent danger
to first responders like firefighters and police, was foiled when a
superior court judge ruled the charges unconstitutional.

Shook, meanwhile, has been cooperating with federal authorities to direct a
handful of the worst offenders through federal courts. The move, he says,
lessens pressure on local courts and jails, while exposing offenders to
longer sentences if convicted.

A bill passed in the state General Assembly this year and enacted Dec. 1,
stiffens penalties for meth production and adds to its list of precursor
chemicals -- common household agents typically used by meth cooks to
extract pseudoephedrine from over-the-counter medicines.

Methamphetamine laboratories produce five to seven pounds of toxic waste
for every pound of methamphetamine produced, according to the National Drug
Intelligence Center. Most toxic residue from methamphetamine production is
dumped near the laboratory, contaminating soil and groundwater and killing
vegetation.

Methamphetamine laboratory cleanup costs can range from several thousand
dollars to millions of dollars, imposing a strain on state and local agency
resources.

Methamphetemines have been a problem in the U.S. since the mid-1980s wand
the spread had been mostly confined to the West and Midwestern states. It
did not make a significant appearance in North Carolina until about 2000.

The N.C. Attorney General's office has reported that the State Bureau of
Investigation investigated only nine meth-related labs in 1999. By 2003,
that number had risen to 177.

Phizer has not addressed questions of why it waited until now to introduce
the new pseudoephedrine-free formula in the U.S. The company has said the
new phenylephrine-based product has been used "safely and effectively" in
Europe for years.

Neither has it explained why it would continue to provide the original
formula so essential to the manufacture of illegal methamphetamine. The
prices of both formulas are comparable.

Information available from the Food and Drug Administration indicated that
many of the side effects linked to the two drugs are similar.

Pseudoephedrine is listed by The American Academy of Pediatrics as
"compatible" with breastfeeding, while phenylephrine has been linked to
birth defects in animals, and authorities cite a lack of information
regarding its secretion in breast milk.

Calls to Phizer were not returned before publication of this article.