Was Calpol in 2007 really a sedative?

[Rogerandout]

Let us just stick to clear substantiated facts and anyone who wants to disagree needs to produce evidence to show the falsity of the following statements:

1/ Calpol with only Paracetamol as the effective ingredient is a pain killer and anti-pyretic. It is NOT a sedative in any medical or scientific meaning of the word.
2/ It is widely available without prescription and hardly any children get to 12 years of age without using it at some time.This means it is widely tested in children and there are minimal side effects noted, and none of those side effects are sedative.

Perhaps that will put a cap on the misinformation.

[Rogerandout]

Exceed the prescribed dose, even by a single tablet, in a 24 hour period, and you can risk serious liver damage, or even death.

That is a bit of an exaggeration. Some people will show signs of liver toxicity if they regularly take over 4 grams a day, even just 4225g has been shown in particularly sensitive individuals to produce such initial signs. Even on the maximum dose it is possible to see changes in Liver Function Tests. Overdose with severe risk requires about 10g- 20 tablets in an average sized adult- 2.5 times the daily dose.

It is common to deliver an extra gram in the first day of usage as a loading dose to get blood levels elevated as quickly as possible to therapeutic levels, meaning often people will receive 5 grams in the first day.

[Rogerandout]

Does it assuage pain ?

It blocks an enzyme that is produced when tissue damage or other pain inducing incidents occur. It does not 'assuage' pain, it blocks enzymes that irritate the pain receptors- it stops the creation of a sufficiently high level of 'pain producing chemicals'. It also reduces high temperatures by a similar action on a different set of receptors in the brain. It does not affect the pain transmission function of the CNS, nor 'reduce temperature' but in both cases it inhibits the enzymes causing irritation distally and the signals increasing the temperature of the body centrally.

However opioids such as codeine block the distal pain receptors and stop transmission of 'pain signals' to the Central Nervous system.

This difference explains why Paracetamol is non-addictive whereas codeine is addictive. As codeine is also a CNS depressant, it explains why Codeine results in sedation, but Paracetamol does not.

[Rogerandout]

Does it assuage pain ?

Better way to explain it- the enzymes it inhibits cause pain underneath the skin. Paracetamol has the same effect as external neutralisation of causes of pain- if you have a toxin placed on your skin like an alkali solution such as old fashioned soap solutions it stings initially and then the pain can become severe. If you pour acid (vinegar on it, the pain stops because the toxin is eliminated.

Paracetamol acts like the vinegar externally (neutralising the alkali soap) by neutralising the enzyme in a similar way. As they are neutralised they are not able to cause the pain receptors to react and so no pain signal is sent. They are sort of pre-pain pain killers.

Codeine and other opioids on the other hand block the signals being sent rather than remove their cause.

Paracetamol does have an additional slight anti-inflammatory effect, but nowhere as high as NSAIDS.

[icabodcrane]

If it happened it would be available to me as a Reportable Incident. There is no such report.

No aggression- mere facts I am afraid.

It is almost impossible for a person to have a severe reaction to codeine or any opioid in low doses becasue such opioids circulate freely in the blood stream of ordinary people. The receptors for endorphins are the same as for simple opioiods. Endorphins are chemically similar to such opioids and are produced by the body. Allergy to codeine would only show at levels above natural levels of endorphins, so I severely doubt if it was a single tablet! I do know of cases where administration of opioids at well above normative levels has led to allergic reactions, but cannot see how a single oral tablet would do that. I suspect the story may have become amplified beyond the original. If single tablet administration could cause a severe reaction, then codeine would certainly not have been available over the counter for so long as a non-prescription medication (as it was until the seventies.

Your knowledge must be encyclopedic if,  as you seem to be suggesting,   you would  know  of any and all severe reactions to any drug ever prescribed  ...  right off the top of your head ! 

I take it I could throw up any prescribed medications and you would immediately  remember whether or not severe reactions to it  had been  'reported'   ? 

Does your expertese run only to adverse reactions to active ingredients in the drugs involved,  or are you also aware of severe allergic reactions to non active filler/binders such as lactose  ?   

[Rogerandout]

Your knowledge must be encyclopedic if,  as you seem to be suggesting,   you would  know  of any and all severe reactions to any drug ever prescribed  ...  right off the top of your head ! 

I take it I could throw up any prescribed medications and you would immediately  remember whether or not severe reactions to it  had been  'reported'   ? 

Does your expertese run only to adverse reactions to active ingredients in the drugs involved,  or are you also aware of severe allergic reactions to non active filler/binders such as lactose  ?

Sarcasm is uncalled for. I deal only in facts.

There are many reactions to all medications and their carriers. there is a very effective reporting system for side effects and other anomalous reactions.

If there had been a report of a reaction to a single tablet of codeine, it would have been reported; it has not been.

Added to that, the biochemistry militates against it as codeine has natural near analogues in the normal blood contents and so a strong aversion to minimal amounts of it would be extremely unlikely.

[Rogerandout]

Simple question, simple answer required !
Does Calpol assuage pain ? Yes or no !

No.

It removes the cause of pain as in the alkali/acid example above.

[ferryman]

Better way to explain it- the enzymes it inhibits cause pain underneath the skin. Paracetamol has the same effect as external neutralisation of causes of pain- if you have a toxin placed on your skin like an alkali solution such as old fashioned soap solutions it stings initially and then the pain can become severe. If you pour acid (vinegar on it, the pain stops because the toxin is eliminated.

Paracetamol acts like the vinegar externally (neutralising the alkali soap) by neutralising the enzyme in a similar way. As they are neutralised they are not able to cause the pain receptors to react and so no pain signal is sent. They are sort of pre-pain pain killers.

Codeine and other opioids on the other hand block the signals being sent rather than remove their cause.

Paracetamol does have an additional slight anti-inflammatory effect, but nowhere as high as NSAIDS.

Paracetamol does have an additional slight anti-inflammatory effect, but nowhere as high as NSAIDS.

Interesting.

I didn't know that.

[Redblossom]

No.

It removes the cause of pain as in the alkali/acid example above.

Interesting, not, as this scientific discussion has become and has nothing to do with M M ultimately much
I have to ask out of plain curiosity

How can anything remove the cause of pain without removing the pain?

[Rogerandout]

Paracetamol does have an additional slight anti-inflammatory effect, but nowhere as high as NSAIDS.

Interesting.

I didn't know that.

Until recently it was thought that it had no anti-inflammatory effects, but further careful research has shown that it does have a mild anti-inflammatory effect, but nowhere near that of NSAIDS

[Rogerandout]

Interesting, not, as this scientific discussion has become and has nothing to do with M M ultimately much
I have to ask out of plain curiosity

How can anything remove the cause of pain without removing the pain?

It is a question of whether the pain removal is within the central nervous system or without.

If I stop punching you in the face, that does not make 'stopping punching' an analgesic- it merely removes the cause of the pain.

[Redblossom]

It is a question of whether the pain removal is within the central nervous system or without.

If I stop punching you in the face, that does not make 'stopping punching' an analgesic- it merely removes the cause of the pain.

oh thanks, though I have an inky feeling this is going to be some pointless semantical discussion, so bowing out
 >@@(*&)


stopping punching is some kind of relief from pain i would think, an analgesic in essence! As it removes the cause...

 

[Rogerandout]

Having read back and seen what Pat is on about.

Using everyday meanings of words in particular subject areas always casuse problems.

Dictionaries merely report how words are used, not what they actually mean within a defined subject area.

In common speech one might say that paracetamol assuaged pain- and in fact it does stop pain signals being received, but to then go on to say that anything that 'assuages pain' makes that action or substance a 'sedative' is a logical error.

Using the example above- stopping punching you in the face would allow you to calm down and relax and feel less agitated, but does that make 'stopping punching someone in the face' a sedative. NO.

Sedatives are clearly defined in pharmacology and medicine as actions or substances that reduce reactions to external or internal stimuli.

Some analgesics (pain relievers) ate sedatives as they do that directly.

Paracetamol does not and is not classed formally as a sedative.

It is the difference between informal and formal usage- educated and uneducated as I noted above.

In a clinical environment if a senior doctor said "this person needs sedation, what shall we give him" and the junior doctor suggested paracetamol, she would be rightfully derided because Paracetamol is an anti-pyretic and analgesic, but not a sedative.

[Rogerandout]

oh thanks, though I have an inky feeling this is going to be some pointless semantical discussion, so bowing out
 >@@(*&)

It is simple semantics:

Is paracetamol a sedative?

No, it is not!

[icabodcrane]

Interesting, not, as this scientific discussion has become and has nothing to do with M M ultimately much
I have to ask out of plain curiosity

How can anything remove the cause of pain without removing the pain?

It's a combination of two classic propaganda techniques Red

1 )  Pseudo - intellectual Bull

The use of lots of unusual words in complicated, incomprehensible sentences that sound very educated

2 )  Confuse with Technicalese

Confusing the issue with lots of technical-sounding garbage that means little or nothing


This all reminds of a former  member who has flounced more times than  Ginger Rogers ball-gown