Is regulating the Human Growth Hormone this strictly necessary?
My sister brought to my attention a bill sponsored by Chuck Shumer which would classify HGH as a Schedule III drug and clamp down on prescriptions written for illicit purposes. This is relevant to her because my adorable niece Maggie does have a pituitary deficiency which HGH has effectively combatted, allowing her to grow 10 inches in the last two years to a height comparable to other children her age. My sister is passing around a petition which objects to this bill because of a fear that turning HGH into a Schedule III drug will impact the ability of parents who have children like Maggie to get the drug prescribed. Here is an excerpt from the petition:
ATTENTION MAGIC FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN USING OR IN NEED OF GH TREATMENTS
Congress has almost completed its work on new legislation which will place REALLY tight restrictions on GH prescriptions to the point it could make it even more difficult for our children to receive the medical treatments they need.
Please take the time to read the actual text of the bill. You can get to it by clicking on the following link:
Related Bills: S.877It is very important that you contact your state senators and representative to voice your concerns. Here is a link to find email addresses for your local Senators.
The following statement is an example of the needs to be addressed when writing to your senator. Please act on this today. It can affect the future of many children on growth hormone and for those in future need of growth hormone.
Dear Senator: I am very concerned about Senate efforts to pass S. 877, a bill that would make hGH (human growth hormone) a controlled substance and negatively affect my family. As the parent of a child with [fill in diagnosis] my family strongly opposes this measure. From what we understand, the interests of patients and healthcare givers have to date been completely ignored in this process, and we urge Congress to take no steps that preclude a full public discussion. As the parent of a child who uses hGH regularly, we would be happy to tell you about our positive experience with this drug and why abusers like major league athletes should not be allowed to make our access to this drug more difficult.
Now I obviously share my sister’s concern that HGH be readily available and prescribable for children like Maggie. On the other hand, here is the description of a Schedule III drug:
Schedule III drugs have less potential for abuse or addiction than drugs in the first two schedules and have a currently accepted medical use. Examples of Schedule III drugs include Anabolic steroids, Codeine, Ketamine, Hydrocodone with Aspirin, and Hydrocodone with Acetaminophen. Schedule III drugs may be available with a prescription, but not all pharmacies may carry them.
The same note is attached to all the drugs, even Schedule IV, that not all pharmacies may carry them. Schedule V drugs in general do not require a prescription, and of course there’s few guarantees that a particular store will have in stock what you’re looking for. So Schedule III, while requiring prescription, is a fairly weak classification that doesn’t strike me as a problem for any parent with a child diagnosed with a pituitary problem. I really do not understand after reading everything I’ve been given how Maggie will have any more difficulty getting the drug than she did before. She sees one of the two specialists in Iowa that deal with this problem, and surely nobody will accuse this doctor of prescribing my niece HGH so that she can hit home runs.
That said, I don’t see what this is about other than this baseball fracas and efforts to regulate athletics. There are some negative side effects from abuse, but most worries relate to fraud and incorrect dosages.
Overall, I’d have recommended HGH be a Schedule IV drug that required a prescription, but the difference seems to be largely negligible. I can’t say this is a serious issue one way or the other.
-jb
February 29th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
How about BGH? Got milk?
February 29th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
I emailed my senator earlier today after reading the email I received about this because I was a little concerned about the wording of the bill. I thought it sounded as if Maggie would not be affected, but then I read the part that said that it would be illegal for people to use it for non-legitimate purposes and “other reasons.” What do you think, jb?
February 29th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
I still don’t see anything there that intersects with her. The use of HGH for growing children is well-known as one of the most important and legitimate uses for the drug. It’s for people who aren’t growing, dig? If the drug were banned for everything but one use, that purpose would be helping children grow.
Schedule III drugs are widely prescribed, and doctors don’t need to jump through all the hoops that they have to for Schedule I and II drugs.
Naturally, if I felt there were the slightest risk my niece would be targeted by this bill, I would go nuclear and the streets would run red with blood. But so far I see no “there” there, to use a cliche.
February 29th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
For a simple comparison, I was prescribed Percocet to recover from my recent surgeries. Doc wrote me two prescriptions for each surgery; I had them filled in 20 minutes at the local pharmacy. Percocet is a Schedule II drug, much more tightly regulated than Schedule III drugs.
February 29th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
HGH certainly has a legitimate use, but it’s obvious that there are a lot more illegitimate uses, and that’s what brings the attention of the regulators.
Your niece was very short for her age? OK, I can see that — though you didn’t specify that she’s have actually been unnaturally short — but what about the parents of a normal sized boy, who decide that his future would be enhanced if he could wind up 6′ 9″ tall? Don’t think stuff like that doesn’t happen!
We now have pills for every sort of “imperfection” imaginable: we’ve got Viagra if you can’t perform like a porn star, we’ve got eight million kinds of diet pills, we’ve got chemicals to change your hair color, you name it, we’ve got it. It’s the kind of culture which says, “If we can help our kid excel through pharmaceuticals, why not?”
February 29th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Well, my niece’s diagnosis was quite legit. I do think doctors and patients are over-eager for medications, and indeed our society does yearn for a pill for every problem. HGH being prescription-only isn’t something I’d argue with. But Dana, aren’t you the choice man? If I want to pump my kid full of drugs so that he’s a seven-foot tall juggernaut, don’t you think I should be able to?
BTW, you don’t need Viagra if you can’t perform like a porn star, you need it when you can’t perform at all. Are you making excuses for a weak willy?
February 29th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Jeromy, I’m the guy who wants to jail people for using recreational pharmaceuticals, not just selling them.
As for my willy, well, Mrs Pico keeps coming home every night, even after 28 years, nine months and ten days.
February 29th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Good man!
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
if you think that every pharmacy stocks HGH or will you are taking too many perocets. many of these children and adults cannot miss one dose of the medicine. to go the local pharmacy and find it is unavailable is not an option.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Hi,
My 5 year old is also on GH because of both a prebirth and post birth diagnosis that the FDA approves for GH use. People think GH is only about height. GH can not “overgrow” a person than their genetically programmed height. When medical situations shortcircuit the growth track it causes other issues. My daughter has increased muscle tone since taking GH – hopefully reducing her 4-10x higher chance of having type II diabetes and cardiovascular disease. GH has put her in a height category comparable to her peers since she started treatment at age 3. Her blood sugars have normalized and one throw up epdisode doesn’t put her in the ER to have an IV with dextrose (sugar). Getting GH is HARD (unless you are a famous athlete). WE already run a marathon for our kids to get approval with insurance, coverage, then we have to work with specialized mail order pharmacies (oops! if the drug is reclassified it may not be able to be sent in the mail) if it is approved. Also, they are stating we have have to go every 30 days to get a new written prescription. I work 2 jobs, the 2nd to help pay copays for all her meds and specialists, and having to miss work every 30 days to physcially drive to an office to pick up an RX would not work out well for me at work. It is March and I have already used 1.5 days of my personal time – solely on DR. visits! Although FDA approved, insurance companies will use this to deny approval for GH. I know it is hard for you to imagine our lives…I wouldn’t have either! I certainly never would have thought I would have to inject my daughter every day …I just pray we can get through the next few years when we shoudl be able otget my daughter off GH. It makes me sad because there are kids with other disorders that require GH every day of their life to live…
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Hi, Megan. I certainly appreciate your situation, but I do have some questions. Schedule III drug prescriptions are able to, from what I’ve read, be refilled five times in a six month period. It’s Schedule II drugs that must be re-written every thirty days. May I ask where you heard otherwise?
You also say, “insurance companies will use this to deny approval for GH.” Why do you believe a child with a legitimate diagnosis would be denied HGH simply because it is a Schedule III drug?
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Mr. Pico should note the the culture he decries – that of Big Pharma – is the direct consequence of his beloved deregulated free market
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Sweet jiujitsu!
March 7th, 2008 at 7:51 am
My name is Adam and I am a freshman at the University of South Florida. I wrote my second project for my composition II class on the topic of human growth hormones. Our topic for the paper was biomedical ethics and I did not know where to begin my ideas for the project. I started to think about the side effect of the human growth hormone treatments. My neighbor is using these treatments and I have directly seen the results but I do not think that the side effects that come from the treatment greatly outweigh the positives, thus creating it unethical to give the treatments to children. One of the most major and severe only side effects from giving children these drugs is CJD which attacks the child’s or adults brain. CJD is like a modified form of mad cow disease that attacks the patient’s brain. Although I do agree that the HGH treatments do help children I still feel that the treatments should not be allowed in all cases, and maybe even not be a option for treatments.
March 7th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
Well, Adam, let me not be the first to tell you that before you work on your paper you beef up your grammar a bit. “Creating it unethical,” you say? Were I a professor, I’d return a paper written so with a note for you to re-write it.
Also, HGH that is developed synthetically does not transmit CJD. The problem is when it is taken from cadavers. I found that out in about five minutes of research, so you might want to beef up that skill as well.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/7194.php
March 12th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
“You also say, ‘insurance companies will use this to deny approval for GH.’ Why do you believe a child with a legitimate diagnosis would be denied HGH simply because it is a Schedule III drug?”
Because they (the insurance companies) ALREADY deny coverage for hundreds, if not thousands, of children who do have a proper diagnosis… and that’s WITHOUT the Sched. 111 classification! My daughter was diagnosed with Turner Syndrome in June, and it took until November for our insurance company to approve and pay for the shots. It took daily and weekly emails and phone calls to wrangle back and forth between us, endocrinologists and mail order pharmacies (the corner Walgreens don’t carry these specialized shots) to get it all approved. And this was WITH A GENETIC DIAGNOSIS. It was a nightmare! These HGH shots can cost up to $13,000 a year, and these children have to be on them until puberty (so for my 2-year-old that’s almost $160,000 worth of medication, not even including the estrogen replacement she’ll have to start taking in addition). Insurance companies will do everything they can not to pay for GH. This bill will only make it harder.
March 13th, 2008 at 12:48 am
It really pains me to keep being skeptical here.
But while you did a fine job of pointing out the evils of insurance companies…you didn’t explain to me how the Schedule III classification will change anything.
I just want to know the facts here on how a Schedule III classification could actually impact my niece. And what I keep hearing is a lot of emotion borne of the desire to protect these children, as if I haven’t already explained that I feel the same desire to protect my niece. But I’m still waiting to have my initial question answered.
At this point, I’m going to have to assume that nobody really knows, that primal fear is driving this. On the other hand, I would prefer we didn’t try taking a chance children would miss out on this drug just so some people can rest assured that their favorite sports figures aren’t enhancing their performances.
March 13th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Schedule III just makes it one step harder for people in need to get hgh. Human Growth Hormone does not posses the addiction qualities or dangers of other drugs in this schedule.
There are already laws on the books that make it a felony punishable by up to ten years to distribute hgh to people without prescriptions.
That and the expense should be enough to keep things in check.
Why pass another law when there is no need. A recent article in Sports Illustrated showed that very few kids in high school have any interest in trying groth hormone. The small percentage that were interested would go away when they discovered that the cost per week for the dosage necessary to achieve performance enhancement in athletes under the age of 20 is at least $1,000 per week for at least three months.
The schedule III designation has done little to stop the availability of steroids. All that it has done is increase the amount of counterfeits for sale.
I agree, we should do nothing to harm the needs of children or adults who have legitimate medical needs. Congress can take a few months to draft better legislation and the country will not fall apart.
March 14th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
Jeromy, maybe you’ll believe a detailed position paper on the issue rather than just a mom and her “primal fear.” What a bastard thing to say.
http://www.magicfoundation.org/www/docs/992.1639
March 14th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Thanks for the paper. You might have noticed that the paper was exactly what I was asking for that you didn’t give the first time. So you realized your fault and corrected it. Maybe next time try to do that without a bitchy emotional comment, which was more about your rhetorical failure than it was your child or any insensitivity you think I expressed towards him/her. If you hadn’t noticed, I have family at risk here as well, so you know where you can stick your self-righteousness.
If you’re going to scream, “You heartless son of a bitch!” every time somebody tries asking you a serious question about legislation you do/don’t want passed, you’re going to hurt your own cause. Start out with the facts, and then see who’s still resisting to know who the bastards are.
June 10th, 2008 at 2:53 am
Thanks for bringing this bill to my attention. I have emailed my senators and Schumer. All this bill looks like to me is window dressing to support the fiasco of wasted tax payer dollars in the congressional hearings on baseball. So it looks like they are doing something.
Yeah.. doing something to fix a “game” whilst hurting the average American who can benefit from HGH (which treats quite a few things very effectively). Aside from making it harder to get, it gives the insurance companies another reason to say “no”.
thanks for the information.
June 10th, 2008 at 9:48 am
You’re quite welcome!