asked the Minister for Health whether the recently published claim that Irish people consume 100 million pain killing tablets a year is true; how this compares with other countries; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Drug Consumption.
1.
The vast majority of popular, pain-relieving proprietary branded drugs are available "over the counter" in pharmacies, family grocers, supermarkets, etc. A prescription is not required for purchase. My Department have no information on the sales volume of these product lines.
The information available relates only to those pain relieving drugs which are obtained under the GMS scheme, which covers some 37 per cent of the population. Nearly all of these drugs require a prescription for purchase. The latest available figures relate to the calendar year 1983. Some 61,876,000 pain killing tablets and capsules were dispensed under the GMS scheme in that year. I am sure that Deputies will find this figure quite extraordinary.
There is a general agreement that an unnecessary degree of psychological reliance on drugs has developed here over the last 20 years or so, reflecting similar trends in other European countries.
The Minister is assuring the House that we are no different from other countries in the fondness we have developed for pain killing drugs.
We are as bad as other European countries and worse than the Americans. That is bad enough. We swallow them by the ton.
Does the Minister consider that it might be desirable to take some steps to control this? I do not know if that is possible. Would he consider that there may be grounds for controlling it because of the easy availability of these drugs over the counter, in supermarkets etc? Judging by the level of consumption under the GMS scheme consumption by the entire population must be in excess of 100 million.
A great many of the drugs are entirely useless. People spend a great deal of money and many pharmaceutical companies make a great deal of money. The drugs do not do the slightest good one way or the other.
Has the Minister carried out a comparative analysis of the type of pain-killer prescribed under the GMS since the removal of various items from the scheme including very limited pain-killers and analgesics. Is the Minister satisfied that more potent analgesics are not being used now?
I am generally satisfied that the cover under the GMS scheme is reasonable for pain-killing tablets and analgesics. Pain-killing tablets and capsules were prescribed on 969,720 occasions under the GMS scheme in 1983. One million people are covered by the GMS. There were 1 million occasions on which prescriptions were issued. The cost of those tablets was £6½ million. The coverage is adequate. I have not received any great volume of complaints.
I asked if more potent analgesics are now being used as a result of removing simple analgesics from the GMS list?
That suggestion has been made but the General Medical Services Payment Board do not agree with the allegation. My main preoccupation is with the fact that too many drugs are being prescribed. The trouble is that people who go to a doctor, particularly if they have a medical card, do not seem to be happy — nor do the doctors — unless they are given a prescription for something. I am thinking of supplying a lot of coloured water and sugar to a lot of doctors.
It is probably like a constituent wanting a letter from a Deputy. Does the Minister see any function for the Health Education Bureau in encouraging people to reduce their intake of tablets?
I do. The advertising of proprietary brands in one medical journal amounts to millions of pounds per annum. We must do something about the advertising on radio and television which encourages people to swallow what is basically a load of rubbish. There is no need for it at all. The Health Education Bureau and the media who live off the advertising will have to change the whole structure of what is going on.
Arising out of what the Minister said in his second last reply, in view of the level of usage of prescriptions under the GMS, would the Minister consider introducing a basic charge for prescriptions of say 50p or £1?
That is a separate question.
It arises directly out of the Minister's reply. He may have thoughts on the subject which he might like to let us in on.
I do not like the idea of charging people 50p or £1, particularly persons on low incomes. They would still be convinced that by paying 50p or £1 they would be getting something which would do something for them. A great deal of the dispensation of drugs is unnecessary.