Chain Store Age Magazin

May, 2005

By Tim Hammonds

Certain states and US Congress are rushing to severely restrict sales of common cold medicined containing pseudoephedrine, which can be used illegaly to produce the highly addictive drug methamphetamine. They are passing laws that put these products behind the pharmacy counter with little regard for the impact on consumers and retailers.

These restrictions mean that retailers without pharmacies can no longer sell up to 250 medicines that consumers need to treat a wide range of ailments. These are no pharmacies in more than 70% of the nation's supermarkets and none none in the nearly 130,000 convenience stores.

Arkansas, Iowa, Kentucky, Oklahoma and Tennessee enacted laws restricting sales of some of these products to pharmacies, in some cases by classifying them as Schedule V drugs under the Controlled Substances Act. Oregon issued a regulation. Many more states, along with cities and counties, are considering similar measures-some of which may be passed by the time you readthis article. Before Congress is the Combat Meth (S. 103, H.R. 314), which would place such products on Schedule V nationally. If enacted this law would trigger a requirement in 17 states that these common over the counter (OTC) drugs be dispensed only with a doctor's prescription.

Such limits would curtail a relatively small part of the meth supply. Law enforcement experts tell us that about 20% of the meth available is cooked by small time abusers in homes, trucks, motel rooms and other make shift labs. The remaining 80% comes from superlabs that obtains ingridients in bulk-not from supermarkets- and gangs distribute it in rural and, increasingly, in urban America.

We recognize that shutting down and cleaning up these small labs consumes considerable police resources. To help law enforcement, retailers are willing to limit sales of these medicines by putting them behind a courtesu counter, restricting how much customers can buy, requiring photo IDs and otherwise controlling sales.

This March, the Food Marketing Institute, in a joint study with the the National Consumers League, asked what consumers think about restricting sales of such products. We commissioned Harris Interactiveto conduct a survey, and nearly 3,000 US adults responded. The results showed clearly that many consumers do not approve of limiting the sales of such medicines to pharmacies. More than 4 in 10 (44%) said it would be a hardship, and more than 6 in 10 (62%) deemed it unreasonable. These figures were even higher among mothers with childrens.

The survey found that consumers are far more receptive to less severe restrictions. Large majorirties regard the following solutions as \"somewhat\" or \"very reasonable\" :

- Limit the quantity of such products that people could buy - 84%

- Restrict the age of purchasers - 74%

- Put such cough, cold and allergy products behind a \" a counter, not a pharmacy counter\" - 71%

- Lock them in a dis[play case - 62%

The most important message from this survey is that consumers, like retailers, want to be part of the solution. We want to help police limit the medicines used to produce meth.

The most effective strategy would begin with a national law that preserves access to those who need it - and denies access to those who abuse it. Piecemeal city, county and state laws only move the  problem to other locales. A nation solutions would help law enforcement focus its full strength on those who supply 80% of the meth in our country today.

Only in this way can we make real progress.

To visit our drug testing products on-line store, CLICK HERE, Please!