Treatment Research (Part 3)

I have been doing some reading in Wikipedia on Modafinil (which, we are told is approved by the FDA for the treatment of EDS in narcolepsy, as opposed to methamphetamine which is not, though we know it is very efficacious for the treatment of EDS) and there is no clear statement anywhere as to modafinal’s effectiveness. The closest one gets to an affirmation is in Stanford’s website which accords it with a “long duration of action”. However, from the blogs I have read by narcoleptics I have the distinct impression Modafinil is used mostly by persons who have not contracted narcolepsy in its most severe form, as I did. For instance, I recently read a blog in which the author who was fulsome in his praise of Modafinil suffered from only the mildest form of cataplexy lasting for seconds with only slight feelings of weakness and limp muscles but without the danger of total body collapse. It seems likely too in his case that the severity of his EDS was somewhat attenuated.

Interestingly, Wikipedia in its sub-article on narcolepsy lists for the treatment of EDS the amphetamines and methamphetamines before adding “or modafinil a new stimulant with a different pharmacological mechanism”. Why is the least efficacious treatment the one that is approved by the FDA for narcolepsy when the obviously most efficacious treatment is not only disapproved but given a scheduled II status and banned? Not that I doubt that amphetamines and methamphetamines are capable of providing highs to persons who do not suffer from narcolepsy and to which they may become addicted, as also to alcohol, cigarettes, and marijuana, but like marijuana I believe its alleged propensity for creating addiction is grossly exaggerated in the case of methamphetamine.

Having brought up the subject of marijuana let me step onto my soapbox and express my opinion on the subject as it relates to human rights. Let me first make it clear that except for one “experiment” during my youth I do not use Ganja (marijuana) in any form because its use and possession is illegal in Jamaica. Whatever steps a take to combat narcolepsy my legal practice and my acceptance of the legal system in which I practise, I have made it my self-imposed duty to abide by my country’ laws. That being said, as a human rights advocate it is my duty to speak out against laws whose obvious effects and possible intended design have an inequitable impact, especially on the poor.

Despite its illegality, marijuana, is freely consumed by the upper echelons of society in both England and the USA (ask any president) and I have been in very elite circles in England in which marijuana was consumed as a matter of course. It is only the poor and man on the street who suffer the harsh boot of the criminal law for its use. In the case of methamphetamine we begin see a similar pattern developing in which the FDA and other official anti-drug abuse agencies continue to wildly exaggerate the harmful effects of these drugs and bring the full force of the law down on the head of the man on the street on the pretext of saving him from himself. Leaving aside the so-called hard drugs, such as cocaine and heroin, which definitely appear to have the capacity to create powerful addiction with extreme withdrawal symptoms it is hard to resist the conclusion that the vicious assault by these official agencies on marijuana and methamphetamine stem from the fact that that they are cheap and therefore easily available to the common man; which raises the question. Why? If one cuts through the claptrap one is faced with the glaring question - why is officialdom so determined to stamp out a drug which it describes as “producing pleasurable effects, including an enhanced sense of self-confidence and energy… feelings of peacefulness, acceptance and empathy” and to the point of denying its availability to others for whom its use is not just beneficial but borders on the essential? It’s about time that society challenged the arbitrary and irrational use of their extraordinary powers by these bodies.