It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ameritox Urine Drug Test has destroyed my doctor/patient relationship... literally.

page: 8
67
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
The digital record law has mad this much more serious. Anything on your chart can be veiwed. Go to Er... your Dr can see it before you've even been discharged. Another thought, most drs prefer you see a mental health provider or at least have the proper test to back up why they wrote the Rx. The medicine commercials we see so many complaints about are causing the drs issues as well.




posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

That's funny with the tramadol because I had to take my dog to the vet recently to get a tumor removed. They gave me tramadol for her and no one even thought twice about it or made any sort of deal about it or anything. They were 50 mg pills too, not some small ones for dogs, and plenty of them.

To the OP: Sounds like you're starting to get results, that's great to hear.

I'm glad the only medications I'm on are for blood pressure and I don't have to deal with any of this nonsense. This may not be an appropriate thread to mention it in, but this whole thing just makes me think if marijuana were legal there would be less issues with prescription medication abuse.

Just an article to back my statement up:

www.newsweek.com...


edit on 14-5-2015 by Pimpish because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mugly
a reply to: new_here

im going to read this entire thread but i wanted to respond.
i was at a family doc the other day and i heard a nurse on the phone telling someone their adderall script was ready but before they could get it they had to sign a contract and submit to a drug test.

a lot of people are getting cut off



May I ask what state?



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

And here's what I don't get...
The drug reps cozy up to the doctors to get their pills prescribed.
Now, enter the urine testing companies (like Ameritox) who cozy up to the doctors to sell their services, which ends up in patients either getting 'fired' like me, or otherwise simply deprived of certain medications due to perceived 'noncompliance.'

...It seems like the powerful drug companies would go after the urine testers, because they're cutting off some of their market. I just don't get it.

I wonder what happens when a drug rep runs across an Ameritox sales rep in a doctors office? Seems like they are on opposite sides of a sick game, with the patients in the crossfire!



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: new_here

Yes, I am really a pharmacist. Don't really post that often, I usually just lurk, but felt I should tell you that(from my perspective) this is total BS what they did. Pretty much every patient of mine that goes through UA tests for their meds have signed a contract with the office and were made aware of the penalties for violating said contract.





edit on 14-5-2015 by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pimpish
a reply to: tigertatzen

I'm glad the only medications I'm on are for blood pressure and I don't have to deal with any of this nonsense.



Well, I hope you never do. See, companies like Ameritox suggest random sampling in a practice, so that no one feels 'singled out.' Then they test to make sure you're not taking illicit drugs, and not taking anything you are not prescribed. This thing could snowball and eventually effect every single one of you!



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:57 PM
link   
a reply to: new_here

Ok, this might explain your physician's reasoning behind the shady activity:


Twelve of Medicare's top 20 prescribers of Schedule 2 drugs in 2012 have faced disciplinary actions by their state medical boards or criminal charges related to their medical practices, and another had documents seized from his office by federal agents.


controlled substance

It still doesn't explain why A) you were told that therapeutic drug monitoring can be done via urinalysis, B) your physician is out-sourcing to a company that does not publicly disclose that they monitor anything other than opoid pain medicine C) you were not asked to sign a consent and contract authorizing them to perform drug testing and D) you were not given a copy of that office policy prior to your visit.

None of this really makes a whole lot of sense until you bring Medicare into the equation, but even their notorious denial of payment for the tiniest little reasons only serves as an explanation for patients who actually have Medicare. And absolutely does nothing to explain why they are apparently lying to your face about what they're up to.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Every single Politician that voted for Obamacare must pay with their jobs.

This monstrosity needs to be removed root and branch.

It's no big deal until it happens to you....And it will.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:01 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

I'll tell you why...

Half of America is on Hydrocodone.

That may be an underestimate.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:02 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

This is a MAJOR concern of a lot of doctors these days. I am from a small town in Pennsylvania, and in just the past 2 years I can think of 5 Dr's who have had their license yanked for prescribing to many narcotics.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

Pretty much half of my patients have been on vicodin at one time or another, but not as many are on it long term, especially since it went schedule II. Dr's have been getting around this by prescribing large amounts of Tramadol or Tylenol #3 or #4 as to avoid it showing up on the narc report.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

As other people have already said during the thread, this has nothing to do with the affordable care act aka Obamacare. This was happening well before that went into effect.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
a reply to: new_here

Yes, I am really a pharmacist


second



Then may I ask you if 44 ng/mL of amphetamine in my urine sample per IA screening is a reasonable figure if my last dose was 10mg at 24 hours prior to the sampling, and my other urine data was:

Specific Gravity: 1.003
pH: 6.9
Creatinine: 13.0 mg/dL
General Oxidant: Negative

I'm not asking you if I'm telling the truth. I know I am. I guess I'm asking, if 44 is too low, what did they THINK it should be.

Just as a side note, when the nurse called me back, I was in the restroom. Would have 'held it' had I any clue they needed a sample. So she had me sit there and drink a bunch of water in order to create more urine.

Nice to have a medical professional afoot!

edit on 5/14/2015 by new_here because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: tigertatzen

Yeah, I'm not on Medicare, so I don't know how that problem would impact me.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Oh...I see. They drug test you to see if you're taking the drug and not just selling the prescriptions, right?

I was wondering why they'd be drug testing you. This seems like a messed up way to keep prescription drugs off the streets.


Adderall is a controlled substance, a schedule II. It is abused and sold to abusers on the black market. The government has been pushing UDTs for all users of controlled substances and your physician could use his license if he prescribes controlled substances if he does not meet state and federal prescribing regulations to include random pill counts and urine drug screens. The concern with medication not being seen in your UDS is that you are selling it. It is unusual to "fire" a patient for one low reading though and if they come in for a pill count and have all the pills they should with the explanation that they cut back due to other reasons, that is usually sufficient to meet the regulatory standard.

Yet another reason why people (not aimed at the OP) think they want more government until they get more government.


The OP's situation is not actionable by lawsuit however, as a practitioner is not obligated to prescribe schedule II medications if he does not want to--for any reason.

edit on 14-5-2015 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Pimpish




As other people have already said during the thread, this has nothing to do with the affordable care act aka Obamacare. This was happening well before that went into effect.



It was, most definitely, but I think Obamacare has reinforced it.



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: annoyedpharmacist
a reply to: tigertatzen

This is a MAJOR concern of a lot of doctors these days. I am from a small town in Pennsylvania, and in just the past 2 years I can think of 5 Dr's who have had their license yanked for prescribing to many narcotics.


I get that. But I'm not on any narcotics. And just to remind everyone, I personally asked the doctor over the past 5 years to lower my dosage of Adderall because I told her I didn't need 30mg 3X/day. Twice I requested it be lowered. Hardly the behavior of someone diverting/selling medication.
edit on 5/14/2015 by new_here because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc




The OP's situation is not actionable by lawsuit however, as a practitioner is not obligated to prescribe schedule II medications if he does not want to--for any reason


Is that true regardless of therapeutic level? What if sudden cessation resulted in adverse physiological effects and put the patient at risk versus weaning them off the meds gradually...wouldn't that violate the rule of doing no harm to the patient?



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:32 PM
link   
a reply to: new_here

Negative cutoff for this medication is less than 50 ng/ml. You being at 44ng/ml were VERY close to having it be classified as positive. Doesnt look like you were dilute either........normal SG for urine is 1.000-1.030. It is possible you are one of the fast metabolizers through a CYP450 2D6 mutation, but who knows.

edit on 14-5-2015 by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-5-2015 by annoyedpharmacist because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 14 2015 @ 01:34 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

I would have gladly done a pill count. What they would have seen was a surplus in the way of bits and pieces where I had not taken whole tablets.

Concerning this:



The OP's situation is not actionable by lawsuit however, as a practitioner is not obligated to prescribe schedule II medications if he does not want to--for any reason.


Yeah, I get that. But what about the false/damaging letter in my file that say "urine drug test that SHOWS you are not taking the controlled substance prescribed."
Not "implies" or even "shows your are not taking it AS prescribed." It says in black and white that I am not taking it at all. That is categorically false and damaging to my ability to secure another doctor. That is Libel.

And forget the fact they won't prescribe any Adderall. They won't even SEE me to check on the status of my BP issue in which they were in the process of trying to regulate the dosage. The day I got the urine screen, it was still high. Nothing was done to alter the dosage of Lisinopril, even though at the previous visit, the doctor specifically said, "We have a lot of wiggle room to increase the dosage, but it hasn't been long enough to tell if this dosage is going to work for you or not. I'll put a note here for the nurse, that when you come in next month for your 'nurse visit' if it's still high, she will let me know, and I'll up the dosage."

Fast forward and I'm drinking a bunch of water for the urine test, and I tell the nurse what the doctor said, and she says, "Oh no, you'll have to see the doctor for any change. If we do it this month, it will look like the nurse made the change." ???

Now they refuse to schedule me an appointment, I have no doctor. Is that not 'patient abandonment?'
edit on 5/14/2015 by new_here because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
67
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join