Wellness Exchange: Health Discussions
Dramatic 43% Surge in Lifesaving Narcan Use by Bystanders
(upbeat music) - Welcome to Listen2. This is Ted. The news was published on Monday, October 14th. Joining us today are Eric and Kate. Let's dive right in. Our topic today is the recent increase in layperson use of naloxone, an opioid overdose antidote. A new study shows a 43.5% rise in non-medical individuals administering this life-saving drug. Eric and Kate, what's your take on this development? - Well, Ted, I gotta say, this is a real game changer in the fight against the opioid crisis. That 43.5% jump, it's not just a number. It's proof that our public health efforts are hitting the mark. We're basically giving everyday heroes the power to save lives right on the spot. It's like we're building an army of first responders out of ordinary folks. - I hear what you're saying, Eric, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. Sure, it looks good on paper, but-- - This isn't just about looking good on paper. We're talking about real lives being saved here. The study shows that in just two years-- - Eric, please, you're missing the forest for the trees. Yes, lives are being saved, but at what cost? We're slapping a band-aid on a gushing wound-- - Let's take a step back for a moment. The study mentions that 744,078 patients received naloxone across the US in that two-year period. That's a significant number. Kate, you were saying? - As I was trying to say, we're ignoring the root causes here. This naloxone boom, it's just a quick fix for a much bigger problem. We need to be asking why people are overdosing in the first place, not just how we can revive them faster. - I get where you're coming from, Kate, but we can't ignore the immediate crisis while we're working on long-term solutions. Every life saved is a chance for someone to turn things around. It's not just about the numbers, it's about giving people another shot at life. Let's discuss the accessibility of naloxone. It's now available over the counter at about $45 for a two-dose carton. How does this impact its use? - This is fantastic news, Ted. It's like we're democratizing life-saving capabilities. Anyone can walk into a pharmacy and pick up a tool that could save a life. And the best part, it's as easy to use as a nasal spray. We're not asking people to become doctors overnight just to be ready to help if the worst happens. - But hold on a second, $45 is still a pretty penny for a lot of folks. We're creating a situation where only those can afford it. - Kate, compared to the cost of a life, $45 is a drop in the bucket, plus many organizations are working to distribute naloxone for free and high risk areas. - But my point still stands. We're treating the symptom, not the disease. All this focus on naloxone is distracting us from what really matters. Prevention and addiction treatment. We're putting a band-aid on a bullet wound and patting ourselves on the back for it. - Interesting points from both of you. Eric, you mentioned earlier about the impact of these efforts, can you elaborate? - Absolutely, Ted. The CDC reported a 3% decrease in overdose deaths in 2023, the first annual decrease since 2018. Now, I'm not saying naloxone is solely responsible, but it's definitely playing a role. We're finally seeing the tide turn, even if it's just a little bit. - Oh, come on, a 3% decrease that's barely a blip on the radar. We've been watching opioid overdoses skyrocket for years. One tiny dip doesn't mean we've solved anything. It's like celebrating losing a pound when you need to lose 100. - The study also mentions that EMS documented naloxone administration rates fell 6.1%. What does this indicate? - That's actually a good sign, Ted. It means more people are getting help before EMS even arrives. In overdose situations, every second counts. If we can get naloxone to someone faster, we're increasing their chances of survival dramatically. - Or it could mean fewer people are calling EMS at all. They might be relying on untrained individuals instead of professional help. That's a recipe for disaster. We're playing with fire here, and people's lives are at stake. - Let's look at a similar historic event. The widespread distribution of AEDs, automated external defibrillators in public spaces. How does this compare to the current naloxone situation? - That's a brilliant comparison, Ted. AEDs hit the scene in the '90s for public use, and by 2010, you couldn't go to an airport, mall, or school without seeing one. The impact was huge. Studies showed they boosted survival rates from cardiac arrest by up to 74% when Joe Public stepped in to help. It's a perfect parallel to what we're seeing with naloxone. - But that's apples and oranges, Eric. AEDs are for heart attacks, which can strike anyone anywhere. - Kate, that's a harmful stigma you're perpetuating. Opioid addiction doesn't discriminate. It affects people from all walks of life, just like with AEDs. - Don't twist my words, Eric. The situations are fundamentally different. Heart attacks aren't a choice, drug use is. We should be focusing on preventing drug use, not just cleaning up the mess-- - Both of you raise interesting points. How did public perception change with AEDs and how might that apply to naloxone? - Great question, Ted. Initially, people were scared to use AEDs, worried they might hurt someone, but with education, that fear melted away. We need to do the same with naloxone. Teach people it's safe, easy to use, and literally life-saving. It's about breaking down barriers and empowering people to act in emergencies. - You're oversimplifying, Eric. The situations are night and day. AEDs don't enable continued dangerous behavior. Naloxone might give users a false sense of security, encouraging even riskier drug use. It's like giving someone a bulletproof vest and telling them it's okay to run into gunfire. - Kate, that's a mischaracterization. Addiction is a disease, not a choice. Both AEDs and naloxone are about saving lives in critical moments, regardless of how the person got there. We don't judge heart attack victims, so why judge overdose victims? - But AEDs are a one-time thing, Eric. Naloxone often needs repeated use. We're not addressing the recurring nature of addiction. It's like treating a symptom while ignoring the disease. - That's precisely why naloxone is so crucial, Kate. It gives people multiple chances to seek help and recover, just like how AEDs give heart attack survivors a chance to improve their health. Naloxone gives addicts opportunities to turn their lives around. - But without proper follow-up care, we're just creating a revolving door of overdoses and revivals. It's not a solution. It's a stopgap measure at best. - Looking ahead, how do you see this trend of layperson naloxone use unfolding? Eric, what's your vision for the future? - I'm optimistic, Ted. I see a future where naloxone is as common as first aid kits with increased education and availability. We could see layperson administration rates skyrocket, potentially to 50% or more of all naloxone uses. Imagine a world where anyone can be a lifesaver at a moment's notice. - That's pure fantasy, Eric. You're completely ignoring the complexities of addiction and the dangers of untrained people administering drugs. - It's not fantasy, Kate. Look at the 43.5% increase in just two years. With over-the-counter availability and continued education, we could save countless lives. - But at what cost, Eric? We could be enabling addiction and diverting resources from more effective long-term solutions. It's not as simple as you're making it out. - Kate, what's your alternative vision for addressing the opioid crisis? - We need to focus on prevention and comprehensive treatment, Ted. I envision a future where we've addressed the root causes of addiction, poverty, mental health issues, over-prescription of opioids. It's not a quick fix, but it's the only way to truly solve this crisis. - Kate, I agree. Those are worthy goals, but they're long-term solutions. What about the people dying right now? We need both immediate intervention and long-term solutions. It's not an either or situation. - But by focusing so much on naloxone, we're not putting enough resources into those long-term solutions. It's a zero-sum game, Eric. Every dollar spent on naloxone is a dollar not spent on prevention and treatment. - That's not true, Kate. The study shows EMS and naloxone use decreased while layperson use increased. We're actually freeing up resources, not depleting them. It's a win-win situation. - But we're not seeing a significant decrease in overall opioid use or addiction rates. We're just keeping addicts alive longer without solving the underlying issues. It's like bailing water out of a sinking ship without patching the whole. - Kate, keeping people alive is the first step. You can't treat addiction if the person is dead. Naloxone gives people a chance at recovery. It's not the whole solution, but it's a crucial part of it. - Thank you both for this insightful discussion. It's clear that addressing the opioid crisis requires a multifaceted approach, balancing immediate life-saving measures with long-term solutions. As we've seen, naloxone plays a critical role, but it's just one piece of a complex puzzle. The debate continues, but one thing is certain. Every life saved is a victory in this ongoing battle.