Bryant Asks for List to Clarify Proposal

Lt. Gov. Phil Bryant says he asked a pharmacists association to provide a list of over-the-counter medicines that would and would not be affected by Mississippi's proposed new law on pseudoephedrine.

A measure in the state House and Senate seeks to make some current over-the-counter cold medications available only by prescription, because they contain pseudoephedrine, a key ingredient used to make illegal methamphetamine.

“Misinformation is being used to try and defeat legislation that would strike a blow at manufacturing crystal methamphetamine in Mississippi," said Bryant.

SB 2339 and HB 512 are currently on the calendar to be taken up in both chambers.

Bryant said he asked the Mississippi Independent Pharmacists Association to provide a list of those drugs that would be affected by the legislation and those products that will continue to be available on the shelf without the need for a prescription.

Pseudoephedrine products found in a typical retail pharmacy that would require a prescription if made a Schedule III Drug:

1. Advil Cold and Sinus
2. Aleve D
3. Bronkaid
4. Claritin D
5. Mucinex D
6. Nyquil D
7. Primatene
8. Sudafed
9. Tylenol Sinus Severe Cold
10. Zyrtec D

These products would not require a prescription:

1. Tylenol Sinus Congestion and Pain
2. Tylenol Sinus Day/Night
3. Comtrex Cold & Cough Night
4. Alka Seltzer Plus Cold & Cough
5. Alka Seltzer Plus Night Cold
6. Dayquil Cold & Flu
7. Mucus Relief Sinus ( generic Mucinex D)
8. Theraflu Severe Cough/Cold
9. Theraflu Severe Day & Night
10. Theraflu Flu & Sore Throat
11. Sinutab
12. Sine Off Multi Symptom
13. Sine Off Sinus/Cold
14. Sine Off Max Strength
15. Comtrex Severe Cold & Sinus
16. Contac Cold & Flu
17. Tylenol Cold Multi Symptom Severe
18. Dristan Cold
19. Sudafed PE Sinus Headache
20. Sudafed PE Nasal Decongestant
21. Sudafed PE Severe Cold
22. Theraflu Multi Symptom
23. Zicam Multi Symptom Cold & Flu
24. Robitussin Night

(Source: Independent Pharmacist Association)


You must be logged in to post comments.

Username:
Password (case sensitive):
Remember Me:

Read Comments

Comments are posted from viewers like you and do not always reflect the views of this station.
  • by Anonymous on Jan 29, 2010 at 12:31 PM
    Would someone just stop for a minute and realize that if folks can't get what they need to make meth, they will just come up with some other drug formula that they can make. I really thought that the legislature had more important issues right now than this. The budget situation is desperate, there are more cuts coming and with them state agencies are going to cut positions which means cuts in services or at least longer waits for any kind of service.
  • by TO MANY METH USERS on Jan 29, 2010 at 07:03 AM
    I THINK ITS GREAT THAT THEY HAVE DONE THIS ... WE HAVE ENTIRELY TO MANY METH LABS IN MS. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT WAY TO MAKE IT HARDER FOR THESE PEOPLE TO MAKE THIS STUFF THAT IS RUINING THEIR LIVES AND SO MANY OTHERS AROUND THEM... WITHOUT THIS SUDAFED THEY CANT MAKE IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • by Dr. Do Right on Jan 28, 2010 at 06:30 PM
    Isn't it great that the Pharmacists and Docs are for it...they will make at least $2.50 on the dispensing fee and the Docs will get paid for the Doctor visit. Nice to know they are in support, I wonder why? It's all about the money.
  • by Don't Blame Me on Jan 28, 2010 at 06:21 PM
    How can the MS legislature even think about this if they don't have a fiscal note on the bill? This may cut down on the number of meth labs in MS but it will not cut down on the number of meth losers in the state.
  • by Dawn on Jan 28, 2010 at 01:56 PM
    Just another way for law abiding citizens to have to pay more. No matter what they do drug users will find what they need, while we keep getting screwed.
  • by Karl Location: Meridian on Jan 28, 2010 at 12:40 PM
    It is already hard enough to get doctor appointments, now their workload will increase even more. Oh, lets just take what the cops and idiots think and make it law without thinking first. Infections will rise because people won't be able to afford to take care of it with decongestant that works. Drug resistance. Where are the pharmaceutical lobbyists right now? This will cut their sales. Most users will not be able to afford the time lost from the workplace and the cost of the doctor visits. Heck a lot don't have insurance that would cover this anyway. I guess you know my feelings on this. This is wrong.
  • by Karl Location: Meridian on Jan 28, 2010 at 12:34 PM
    For those of you that think your health insurance will cover these, you had better check now. Most insurance companies, state or federal, cover medications from only the federal drug lists. If Uncle Sam made this a requirement, your Sudafed would be covered, but since Uncle Haley requires it, most will not. So you are out the regular cost and a doctor visit for each patient. If you have a box you use for your whole family as needed, and you share the prescription of Sudafed, you will violate the law and can get in trouble. This is a bill with good intent but bad application. Money is tight now. This will only add to the problem. There are seatbelt laws and weapons laws that people don't pay attention to now. Now they add regular family consumables to the same and cause a definite impact on finances. Medicaid people will now have to go to the doctor to take care of something else ensuring healthcare costs rise more. Thanks Jackson Idiots for something else that is wrong.
  • by Frankie on Jan 28, 2010 at 10:43 AM
    NEW POLL: Mississippi Voters Strongly Oppose Making Pseudoephedrine-Containing Cold and Allergy Meds Rx-Only Citing Big Inconvenience and Cost Most Say E-Tracking a Better Way to Fight Meth Washington, D.C. -- Almost two-thirds of Mississippi voters surveyed oppose making common cold and allergy medications containing pseudoephedrine (PSE) available by prescription (Rx) only, and 74 percent agree that an Rx-only requirement would create an "unnecessary burden" for law-abiding citizens. According to a new poll conducted by David Binder Research and released today by the Consumer Healthcare Products Association, a large majority of respondents agree that an Rx-only mandate would place an unnecessary burden on families, significantly increase consumer costs, and hurt the state's finances at the worst possible time. http://www.streetinsider.com/Press Releases/NEW POLL: Mississippi Voters Strongly Oppose Making Pseudoephedrine-Containing Cold and Allergy Meds Rx-Only Citing Big Inconvenience and Cost/5277585.html
  • by Anonymous on Jan 28, 2010 at 10:30 AM
    i personally think that it will only put more harship on the ones that can't afford to go to the DR. just keep the list on line of how often people buy and set a limit on the # people can buy in a given perioid.
WTOK-TV 815 23rd Ave Meridian, Ms. 39301 Phone: (601) 693-1441
Copyright © 2002-2016 - Designed by Gray Digital Media - Powered by Clickability 82944357 - wtok.com/a?a=82944357
Gray Television, Inc.