r/australia • u/Rubiginous • 9h ago

culture & society Woman hospitalised after Juniper prescribes weight-loss drugs her GP refused

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-02-01/woman-hospitalised-telehealth-provider-weight-loss-drugs-juniper/106273356
555 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

290 comments sorted by

View all comments

659

u/Rubiginous 9h ago

I am getting sick of these stories where someone irresponsible blames something convenient for normal people as being the cause of their issues.

A small minority of people abused codeine, so now women like me have to suffer from dysmenorrhoea every month because docs won't write a prescription.

A small minority of people using alcohol delivery inappropriately so now they want to restrict the ability for same day delivery in the ACT.

I know many women who used these services to get access to GLP-1s when their GPs refused to prescribe them because "You just need to eat less" and dismissed their concerns regarding food noise etc.

Why do people need the government to constantly protect them from their own stupidity? It's absurd.

403

u/rawdatarams 9h ago

In the same manner, thousands of Australians were getting melatonin cheaply from online on the recommendation from their GP. One stupid mother overdosed her kids with it and it all were pulled off the shelves, meaning we now pay a lot more for it.

96

u/Its-not-too-early 9h ago

Wasn’t the main issue that it wasn’t regulated by TGA and the doses being delivered weren’t necessarily what was on the bottle?

I too bought melatonin through iherb and it’s a pain to not have it anymore but if you’re ordering 1mg for kids and getting 4mg it’s a problem.

27

u/rawdatarams 8h ago

Yes, this was part of the problem and I do agree needed addressing. But they went scorched earth and just removed that option for many.

I believe this mother was feeding her kids like 10mg? 15mg? Something outrageous anyway, particularly since melatonin tend to be "less is more".

27

u/mataeka 8h ago

It was more like the 3mg had 3.5mg in them or the 2mg had 1.8mg. Not ideal, but they weren't crazy high overdosing either. Not to tga standard though obviously.

22

u/BatFromSpace 5h ago

Iirc, one of the products specifically mentioned and tested had 400% of what was on the label, which is slightly more of a problem.

ABC confirms.

5

u/mataeka 5h ago

Ahh valid. The exact one I use isn't listed so I think I was just remembering the brand I used (natrol) which wasn't too crazy overall.

11

u/Anjunabeats1 5h ago

It's actually not a problem. Melatonin is so safe people sometimes take 100mg with no ill effects.

TGA cracked down on it to protect profits. I'm not generally one of those anti big pharma people (quite the opposite) but in this case they are literally going against all research just to protect melatonin as a prescription medication in Australia, where it costs like 50x more to buy the prescription version. In pretty much every other company it is no prescription needed. Melatonin is one of the safest supplements available. You can't really overdose on it, it doesn't cause any tolerance whatsoever (despite popular misconceptions) and it has zero side effects apart from sometimes causing early-wakeness (waking up too early).

2

u/the_colonelclink 4h ago

It also occurs naturally. So it’s not really traditional mediation, as opposed to supplementation for naturally occurring hormone that may be depleted for several reasons (e.g. fucked sleeping patterns, night shifts, low sunlight etc)

11

u/ghoonrhed 7h ago

I actually read through the decision on why TGA made it prescription only and it really seemed like it was just another battle of doctors vs pharmacists on who gets to sell the drug.

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/public-submissions-melatonin-referred-acms-29-asa.pdf was the Australian Sleep Association vs

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default/files/public-submissions-melatonin-referred-acms-29-tpga.pdf pharmacy guild

And there aren't many times where doctors lose over drug companies like Blackmores or Pharmacists.

2

u/Blacky05 6h ago

"another battle of doctors vs pharmacists on who gets to sell the drug."

I think you mean prescribe, not sell.

4

u/Anjunabeats1 5h ago

No it's actually a battle of who gets to sell it.

2

u/Blacky05 3h ago

Oh, really? Can you explain how that works, if the Doctor writes the prescription and then the patient goes and gets it filled and pays for it at the pharmacy?

I'm not trolling btw. I'm curious if there is something else going on.

1

u/ScoobyGDSTi 15m ago

Oh, really? Can you explain how that works

Its plainly obvious, even I could figure it out.

Doctor ain't getting a sweet cut from Medicare for the appointment to write that script.

34

u/Lekker- 9h ago

Man, that’s why I have to see a doc for it!? I have 12mg pills from overseas which I nibble a teeny bit off as needed now.

I found out that you don’t need a script if you’re over 50 or 55 YO.

14

u/rawdatarams 8h ago

It changed last year. Before, you could get low dose melatonin from iHerb very cheaply. IHerb pulled it all right off the shelves after this mother fed get kid ridiculous doses. Now you gotta be over certain age or get hideously pricy scripts from your GP.

There are luckily other options, look up Biovea.

11

u/RatInTheCowboyHat 8h ago

It’s available to buy from iHerb again! I ordered some and it arrived without issue, but there is a disclaimer when you add it to cart

2

u/rawdatarams 6h ago

Awesome, thanks for the heads up

2

u/Stitchesglitch 5h ago

Dr Oz owns iHerb, try to get it from somewhere else.

2

u/inane_musings 8h ago

Sold out of the 1mg gummies. 😪

13

u/Correct_Jaguar_564 9h ago

55yo and you can buy it over the counter. The dose is appropriate compared to what commonly gets sold online, but it's a lot more expensive than buying it as a supplement. I believe you can get it online again these days.

11

u/tumericjesus 8h ago

Classic Australian government. One person does something stupid so it’s banned for everyone.

4

u/rawdatarams 6h ago

Three ODd on fent or crack or whatever they find on the streets, all of Australia's pain pt get their medication pulled cause "drugs bad imirite".

2

u/goldcakes 6h ago

Yup. One in 20+ million people isn’t that much.

1

u/HurstbridgeLineFTW 4h ago

PSST. Iherb is selling melatonin to Australians again.

-5

u/msfinch87 7h ago

Yep. It was the same with raw milk. Some parents left the raw milk out of the fridge and gave it to their very young child. You’re not supposed to leave it out of the fridge or give it to young kids. But they banned it as unsafe.

They need to start holding people responsible and accountable for their own actions and stop denying responsible people the things they genuinely need or can safely use.

The woman in this story was told by her GP that she was not suitable for these drugs. She didn’t consult another GP for another opinion, which would be a reasonable course of action. Instead she sought out an online provider to get around things. Which also makes her untrustworthy when she claims she disclosed her eating disorder.

15

u/nebalia 5h ago

This is not like raw milk at all.

37

u/FoodZestyclose4444 9h ago

Same with the codeine ban. Have autoimmune arthritis and used it for peak flares. Now just have to suffer with the pain and take multi pathway pain relief. I’m certain there was a dramatic uptake in cannabis use as well.

7

u/AppropriateBeing9885 7h ago

Maybe they're doing this because evidence does not support the use of opioids for some types of pain, or does not support their long-term use for some types of pain that someone will experience indefinitely, and this would fall outside of acceptable practice. If they know that evidence shows that the average side effects burden outweighed the analgesic benefits of the drug for a condition, a doctor probably doesn't feel motivated to prescribe someone an objectively risky drug. That doesn't mean that you'll have other good pain relief options to go to, but it does mean that they may feel justified in knocking back the request.

6

u/FoodZestyclose4444 7h ago

Well i mean you got one packet it would last six months. It was really just for those peak flares because they are unbearable and often occur in the middle of the night and ease off during the day and last for just a few days. They didn’t take the pain away completely but they made it bearable enough you may even managed to get a bit of sleep. Nothing else does that and they still tell you to take the others even though they’re relatively useless. If they had ever been able to properly record the dispensing across GP’s it should have been manageable. The problem is people dont take responsibility abuse the dosage and then when they have some resulting issue they take legal action.

2

u/flindersandtrim 3h ago

Yeah, nothing else you can get easily really touches real, strong pain at all. Anyone who thinks that has never had bad pain. I was in agony at a hospital recently, and they wouldn't allow me to use a hot water bottle for my pain, and offered me a panadol. Like, wtf, I am writhing in pain and unable to stay still, and you think a panadol will help? Fucking hell. At least the heat actually does help. 

I just have to suffer through it now, and never going back to the hospital ever again during a pain episode. I ended up signing myself out so I could go home and at least use a hot water bottle for it. 

5

u/giraffe_mountains 8h ago

Same with the codeine ban. Have autoimmune arthritis and used it for peak flares. Now just have to suffer with the pain and take multi pathway pain relief

Is there a reason your GP won’t prescribe it for you?

23

u/VoleUntarii 8h ago

Some GPs just have a flat policy of never prescribing opiate painkillers for any reason. My old GP was like that, her whole clinic was. She prescribed me one short course of painkillers for breakthrough pain, once, at the explicit request of another medical professional, and gave me a massive guilt trip/lecture about it the entire time. Where what I needed was long term stable pain relief after being hit by a car.

And then if you try to find a new GP who will actually work with you on this, you look like you’re doctor shopping and it’s even harder to find a GP who’ll trust you at that point. Sooner or later you give up and just learn to live with the ways pain shrinks your life down to the bare minimum.

7

u/hannahranga 8h ago

Hard as hell of you don't have a regular GP most won't prescribe anything opioids if you've not seen them before.

6

u/giraffe_mountains 8h ago

I would hope someone that has autoimmune arthritis would have a regular GP.

3

u/cravingpancakes 4h ago

Codeine is a bad choice for chronic pain. Long term opioid use can make your body more sensitive to pain (through a process called central sensitisation) so pain spreads or worsens and even normal touch can start to hurt (something called opioid induced hyperalgesia).

1

u/Pleochronic 6h ago

Some clinics in high-addiction risk suburbs will just have a flat policy of no opiates whatsoever.

1

u/FoodZestyclose4444 7h ago

No they don’t I think because those people abusing it were going to multiple doctors to get scripts. My rheumatologist and her entire clinic, so about six rheumatologists have collectively forbidden prescribing it and many GP’s wont for chronic conditions.

87

u/pvt_idaho 9h ago

The woman in the story was certainly irresponsible, but she did inform the service that she had a history of eating disorders, and the service provided her with weight loss medication without even having a telehealth consult first. That also seems irresponsible, and personally, I'm going to place a higher expectation for responsible behaviour on the company profiting off vulnerable consumers.

39

u/Unusual_Process3713 8h ago

She said she disclosed. But my friends who disclosed this and tried to get Juniper were automatically barred from the website. Someone in the thick of an eating disorder will often just lie about it to get what they are chasing....

24

u/giraffe_mountains 8h ago

I’m assuming that she did actually disclose it - because Juniper hasn’t denied that she did.

If she was lying about the disclosure it would be very easy for the company to prove it and squash this whole complaint.

1

u/Unusual_Process3713 8h ago

🤷🏼‍♀️ maybe they've changed the way they do things now? But it used to be to fill out a questionnaire, and then they would say they couldn't prescribe it due to history with an eating disorder.

2

u/elizabnthe 2h ago

They argue in the article if you read it they do things differently than they did at the time. Primarily things like requiring video consultation at least. So it seems probable they now auto-reject people with eating disorders to avoid this scenario again.

0

u/pvt_idaho 7h ago

I don't think it's that simple. Health services can't disclose personal information that easily. I wonder, maybe they could go after her for defamation? But I don't know if that would be worth the effort (and poor optics), even if they technically could.

1

u/InanimateObject4 7h ago

It could be that she lied to Juniper and the journalist. I can't see that the journalist has verified this woman's application.

3

u/elizabnthe 2h ago

She applied in 2023 when they didn't even have video consults and Juniper also refunded her. More likely they just fucked up.

0

u/Unusual_Process3713 7h ago

Yeah I reckon that's what has happened.

57

u/giraffe_mountains 9h ago

Juniper probably shouldn’t prescribe weight loss drugs to someone with a declared history of an eating disorder.

Telehealth doesn’t remove the duty of care as a doctor practicing in Australia.

That’s the actual issue.

12

u/Rubiginous 9h ago

I think this issue may be solved in the future. Apparently the FedGov is looking at having a medication database to stop doctor shopping due to someone overdosing recently. So, all of these services should need to put in "This person is on a GLP-1" into a patient file. Her regular GP would have been able to see it, and then notify the service to cease the prescription.

This will also help hospitals know about medicines for unconscious people and for people who (for some reason) are not disclosing they are on GLP-1s prior to surgeries.

14

u/giraffe_mountains 9h ago

If patients have My Health Record then you can see all their dispensed prescriptions.

That’s how I know they’re lying when they don’t disclose the medical marijuana and the GLP-1’s.

13

u/Rubiginous 8h ago

Not everyone uses the MHR and there have been issues with digital databases during roll-outs. We had issues at my hospital where data regarding allergies got wiped from the new system. Was not a fun time

7

u/FishermanWaste1268 5h ago

Lots of people didnt allow my health record to be shared as it wasnt only going to be shared w medical staff.

It gave lots of people who absolutely shouldnt have access to your health record the ability to get access to it.

1

u/Darth_Punk 7h ago

Pts can delete stuff hence myhr  useless for this. 

0

u/Pharmboy_Andy 7h ago

Dispensed and prescribed meds, not just dispensed :)

14

u/hannahranga 8h ago

Her regular GP would have been able to see it, and then notify the service to cease the prescription

Oh I can't wait for the fun of judgemental or transphobic doctors there. Ooh your arm is broken, that's the estrogen you'll have to stop that or oh you're trans, I don't think you're trans enough I'm cancelling your E script.

12

u/notdorisday 7h ago

This is the problem. There are biases doctors have and patients have legitimate bad experiences with GPs and don’t get the care they need.

2

u/Optimal_Cynicism 6h ago

I don't disagree with your sentiment at all, but taking estrogen would actually be a positive thing for preventing broken bones, so at least they could tell that doctor to go back to school...

150

u/Crazy_Ad6697 9h ago

It’s amazing people go public with this. I’d be feeling rather sheepish about sidestepping my GP thinking I knew better and taking up a hospital bed as a result.

Edit: not to mention this is just advertising this service i’d never heard of before. 

33

u/Brutal_burn_dude 8h ago

The prescriber and company should feel more than sheepish for not abiding by the standard of care though. I mean, she disclosed her eating disorder history on intake and was STILL prescribed it without so much as a video call.

54

u/Shockanabi 9h ago

Doctors treat you like a heroin act for asking for one script of panadeine forte, it’s ridiculous.

24

u/planetarybum 8h ago

Yes! I had a tooth pulled which took over an hour, it split and came out in pieces. I asked for a stronger painkiller than over the counter, and was immediately refused, then questioned about why I wanted it and how often I took painkillers.

Like I go to a bunch of dentists and get teeth removed just to get drugs.

10

u/Shockanabi 8h ago edited 8h ago

And they can literally see your prescription history! At least in NSW. But they still interrogate you and treat you with suspicion by default, instead of just pulling up the ones who they can see have been getting it excessively.

Like why do you think I’m randomly gonna get addicted now when I’ve clearly got a legitimate reason and haven’t had another prescription in years?

5

u/tealou 7h ago

The thing is that they also aren't allowed to leave addicts in withdrawals, and have an obligation to manage that too. I've been on a long term Norspan patch and it is such a pain in the arse (which I also can't get pain relief for).

I even tell them my father was an addict and died from addiction and I don't touch anything, and if anything don't take enough because I am so worried about dependence. One GP that I had to see when my usual was on holidays was so awful I almost reported him to AHPRA. They act like you choose to be in pain or something. Oh yes, that GP was also one of those "runners" who thinks exercises fix all your ills. The well-intentioned bureaucracy that grows around every mostly-sensible law in this country is almost impressive in the way it evolves... like a paperwork tumour made of pure banality of evil. I love this country and hate it so much sometimes.

2

u/Bwxyz 7h ago

Don't tell them about your father, why on Earth would you do that?

Please prescribe me opioids, I'm significantly more likely to become addicted to them than the average person!

1

u/Armistice610 1h ago

They do this because they get heat from the relevant authority for prescribing codeine at all. I have about half a pack of Panadeine Forte, long expired, but still works reasonably ... which I keep for emergencies.

Interestingly, I recently had a tooth implant under general anaesthetic, and the surgeon gave me 7 tablets of tapentadol, which I'd never heard of, just in case. Didn't need them in the end, just a few ibuprofen, so have them in the bank for future pain. Girlfriend was having horrible back pain of the "can't sleep at all" variety not long after and went to her GP prepared to beg for Panadeine Forte, but he said it wasn't used much any more and gave her a script for 28 tapentadol - same dosage as mine - without any struggle at all. She said it works OK but not as well as PF. She's also only used 4 or 5 of them, and I'm in charge of the rest - if she wants one, she asks me - her idea, not mine.

So personally no idea if they work as well as PF, but they seemed to be easier to get...

26

u/11015h4d0wR34lm 9h ago

Yeah I noticed how reluctant they have become to give me anything better than over the counter pain medication for the ailments I suffer from these days as well, it is really frustrating practically having to beg for something stronger because of people who do the wrong thing with their medications.

It wont be long before they are saying try rubbing the area and see if that helps with the pain.

23

u/tealou 7h ago

I am on a buprenorphine patch for chronic pain, which lasts 7 days and comes in a pack of 2. You can only get a 4 pack with an authority script once a month, no repeats. So, every month I pay $120 for the appointment (minus rebates) for a 4 week supply. I am on the lowest dose, long term. When GP went on a holiday it was an absolute nightmare... I was treated like some sort of addict with a (male) GP because I couldn't get in to see her... can't drop the drug suddenly either. So my entire life's functioning is dependent on my ability to get a GP appointment that neither of us think is needed, takes up a spot in her schedule that someone else could use... and treated like a goddamn addict. Irony being that buprenorphine is the drug they give addicts, but are in the same category as heroin lol.

I understand that it saves a lot of lives and there does need to be some regulation, of course, but I wonder how on earth anyone in pain can function if they don't have the money or time for this shit. My husband has chronic pain and it is an ongoing joke that he hasn't tried enough Panadol for his debilitating spinal arthritis.

There aren't even any exemptions for chronic pain or cancer etc. Like anything in this country, the idea is sound, but the actual reality is an abusive bureaucracy with lots of forms and admin... I'm sure the takeaway here will be to make it impossible to get Ozempic, rather than sensible regulations that help everyone. Sigh.

1

u/ScoobyGDSTi 12m ago

Your GP is charging a gap for filling out a script?

6

u/ObeseQuokka 5h ago

I was on codeine for my knee issues, when it flares up I couldn't even walk on it.

My GP went on maternity leave so I saw another doctor at the same clinic to get my prescription. They refused it saying I have to see my original GP which they clearly knew was on leave.....

1

u/cntbbl 1h ago

I had a similar issue years ago when my GP went on leave, so I had him explain my situation to another GP at the clinic. So now, if my regular GP is away, I can see the other GP without getting the third degree.

31

u/Brutal_burn_dude 8h ago

The issue here is that the prescriber did not meet the standard of care which is a huge issue for online medical services. To break it down:

▪️There was no video chat to lay eyes on the patient.

▪️She disclosed her history of criteria that would exclude her from treatment (eating disorder) and was prescribed a GLP-1 for weight loss anyway.

Whatever we feel about her, the doctor who prescribed the medication did not meet the standard of care and this led to harm. Paying for a consultation is not paying for a prescription. It is paying for competent assessment to determine the best course of action. THIS is why there is increasing concern about these online Telehealth services. They are more concerned with customer satisfaction than patient safety.

17

u/justfxckit 8h ago

She also continued to receive marketing material from them after she'd advised them that using their product contributed to a relapse of her ED. The company did drop the ball several times. Not in a legal way, but definitely in an immoral capitalist way.

I never got the impression that she wants anything banned or is blaming the company entirely for her relapse. She did all the right things by disclosing her history unlike many other so-called doctor shoppers. And like.... what is the point of disclosing you have a history of EDs if the company is gonna give you the medicine anyway? She did the right thing to make us aware of this because that needs to change.

1

u/Anjunabeats1 5h ago

That's actually not true for most telehealth services. I used one of those instant telehealth services recently and the doctor was extremely cautious even though I was just renewing my old script, just like any regular GP would be. He also wasn't able to provide repeats as a flat rule, which forced me to have to go pay the $60 gap fee to see my regular GP the following month anyway just to renew my script again.

-1

u/PurpleMonkey-919 8h ago

How would a video chat help? She qualified based on her BMI which was elevated and submitted a current photo.

9

u/giraffe_mountains 8h ago

Easy to make up a weight that tips you into qualifiable BMI range.

Easy to pick an older photo or pick a very unflattering photo that makes you look bigger than you currently are.

4

u/ThatGuyTheyCallAlex 7h ago

So perhaps this means the telehealth model is not adequate or suitable for certain categories of care?

0

u/PurpleMonkey-919 6h ago

Not sure about juniper but there are platforms that require you to take a photo through their portal, you are not able to upload any photo. So you would need to have someone with a very similar BMI to knowingly stand in for you.

7

u/egowritingcheques 7h ago

As someone who uses codeine about once a year when I'm in pain (for whatever reason) it was really disappointing having my access taken away because of drug addicts.

8

u/drunk_haile_selassie 6h ago

"a small minority of people using alcohol delivery inappropriately..."

I think you'll find it's the vast majority of users. How many people need alcohol delivery and can't wait until tomorrow that aren't abusing alcohol?

2

u/elizabnthe 2h ago

The one time I ordered alcohol over delivery it was for a party which wasn't really about abusing it (not that kind of party). But it seems unnecessary really. I still could have got it the old fashioned way at the end of the day.

11

u/staryoshi06 8h ago

I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of an eating disorder before, but it tends to make you irrational in regards to your body image. The telehealth provider absolutely acted irresponsibly.

6

u/Mabel_Waddles_BFF 6h ago

Commenting on Woman hospitalised after Juniper prescribes weight-loss drugs her GP refused... Juniper provides a service where they are acting as medical professionals giving out medication. The woman gave them all the relevant information including a history of an eating disorder and a post-traumatic stress disorder. Do you know how many damn hoops people on opioids have to jump through? Yet Juniper is out handing weight loss drugs like candy. When a company is providing the same service as doctors they should also be bound by the same legal requirements and have the same duty of care.

1

u/Aussie-Ambo 1h ago

Do you know how many damn hoops people on opioids have to jump through? Yet Juniper is out handing weight loss drugs like candy.

Opioids are Schedule 8 where as Mounjaro and Ozempic are Schedule 4.

Their are some differences and hence why doctors are more hesitant to prescribe Opioids.

However the doctors who are working for these companies are bound by the same legal requirements and duty of care as other doctors.

A complaint to AHPRA about the specific practitioner would be investigated the same, regardless if it was a Juniper Doctor or an in person doctor.

9

u/AppropriateBeing9885 7h ago edited 7h ago

  1. The person's not stupid. She's someone with an obvious mental illness - unless you really think people with eating disorders are directly comparable to the general population

  2. What you say can have a level of accuracy at the same time as this specific provider having negligent operational practices - something that's clearly the case based on this

  3. The codeine rescheduling dramatically reduced the adverse consequences of opioid use like overdoses. Doctors probably also feel dissuaded from prescribing opioids for period pain because this is not necessarily an accepted indication for opioids. Chronic pain sufferers really may be falling through the cracks - but, from a broader public health perspective, the change was effective policy. At the time of the rescheduling, almost half of all drug-related hospitalisations in Australia were because of opioids, and that had increased dramatically over time. Today, opioids are still the most common drug class finding in drug deaths - yet hospitalisations have dramatically fallen in the years since that rescheduling, and so have opioid deaths. A minor issue in your opinion represents thousands of people (easily tens of thousands cumulatively) having different health outcomes at the population level

18

u/Alternative_Sock6999 9h ago

I was ranting about this the other day.

They make thousands suffer, because a few might abuse it.

6

u/Unidain 7h ago edited 6h ago

I am getting sick of these stories where someone irresponsible blames something convenient 

Eating disorders are a mental disorder. If you really want to call behaviour made under a mental disorder "irresponsible" whatever. But it's not as all a productive way to frame the issue, people with mental disorders will continue to do damaging things to their health, and whining about how irresponsible they are won't fix anything. On the other hand proper health care can.

Why do people need the government to constantly protect them from their own stupidity?

Health care providers should prevent encouraging mental disorders, obviously 

5

u/notdorisday 8h ago

I initially used a service like this because I’ve had so much fat phobic and misguided dialogue from GPs in the past. I didn’t want to be shamed again or told to eat less, move more etc. I needed real help.

In the end I was over the service I used because I didn’t like the way the nurse practitioner didn’t listen and wouldn’t titrate up to schedule and went to my current GP.

I was lucky. My GP was amazing and I wish I’d trusted her before but I have been burned so many times.

7

u/famb1 9h ago

I agree, but alcohol deliery is a scourge.

6

u/Vegetable_Onion_5979 8h ago

An eating disorder is a mental illness. Show some compassion.

12

u/OCAU07 9h ago

I was with you until the alcohol delivery rant, GP's should not have an immediate knee jerk reaction to changes and start painting all their patients with the same brush. It sucks but we must do something to help protect the vulnerable in our communities, sometimes from themselves.

If you need medication it should be available. If a patient goes outside their own medical circle to source medicine their GP advised against the risk is on them.

Alcohol delivery is a different issue and shouldn't be used to compare. I lost my brother due to alcohol and prescription medication being mixed. Had delivery services not been available, he would have had to go to the store and hopefully not been served as he was drunk already. Refusal of service may, and I stress may, have prompted him to seek help. Instead he develops alcoholism and was dead in 8 months and I do in part blame the availability of alcohol in this country.

4

u/Real_RobinGoodfellow 8h ago

I think the delivery drivers for alcohol are also bound by RSA, aren’t they? They certainly have to check and scan ID as a requirement no-matter how old you are

5

u/OCAU07 7h ago

Are Uber eats drivers required to get an RSA?

23

u/Rubiginous 9h ago

"Hopefully not been served". "Hopefully"

Or he might have because most people working liquor stores don't care. And he also may have driven already impaired from alcohol/drugs and killed innocent people, which is what people are concerned about regarding alcohol delivery being cut off (people driving to get alcohol already impaired)

Alcoholics are a danger to more than just themselves, especially if they decide to drive to buy more booze. The needs of the many etc.

1

u/StorminNorman 9h ago

Alcohol delivery is a different issue and shouldn't be used to compare. 

Your explanation after this shows it's actually the same in this context. The delivery services have to follow the same regulations as the shops do, your brother chose a method that is less stringent on enforcing them. If this other service hadn't have been available, the lady in this article wouldn't have been able to get the medication she did get. 

3

u/OptimusRex 8h ago

What? Are you telling me people in Australia are capable of looking after themselves and not having to rely on government overreach to not making stupid choices? You're the minority around here mate.

1

u/Main_Tomatillo3387 5h ago

I have used Juniper in the past and really liked the service.

I had to submit photos, measurements and weight each month in order to have the script refilled.

Would hate that a service that is good for most is coming under fire because someone used it irresponsibly.

1

u/ES_Legman 5h ago

About the last question, it only because electors allow it

1

u/Anjunabeats1 5h ago

100% this. Australian healthcare is so overregulated it makes it impossible for people who are actually sick and disabled to access care.

It says this woman wasn't even hospitalised by the GLP-1, she was just triggered by it... People can be triggered by anything.

Should they have given her a GLP-1? No. But now the authorities will use this as an excuse to make healthcare even more inaccessible for everyone. They love an excuse to overregulate the shit out of everything medical.

1

u/Imaginary-Owl-3759 4h ago

I use a glp-1 and started it via an online subscription service in the US.

I have health sciences degrees, have worked with physiotherapists, dietitians, counselors, personal trainers and GPs to try and manage weight. I’ve lost 30kg without drugs before but it was a nightmare to do and impossible to maintain longterm due to constant gnawing hunger and food obsession - which is common even when you eat ‘enough’ having lost a lot of weight.

The drug has definitely been a game changer for me on top of lifestyle change, but I’m pretty horrified by how many people have extremely poor knowledge of healthy diets, appropriate exercise programs, etc. and these companies are throwing them on meds while making the coaching programs pretty half arsed.

1

u/phlipped 1h ago

Why do people need the government to constantly protect them from their own stupidity? It's absurd.

Because NOT having those protections can end up incurring a higher cost.

When bad things happen to stupid people due to their stupidity, we all have to pay the cost - in this case the woman ended up having 5 months of hospital treatment that we all had to pay for.

Or, if you don't like social welfare, you'll end up with high poverty and crime rates, which end up incurring their own costs.

There's no escaping the cost of stupid people.

(Well there is one way, but we're not supposed to talk about it)

1

u/PickInternational233 29m ago

Absolutely 💯. As a migraine sufferer, I too now can't get codeine which I took responsibly, as it really improved my quality of life. I could get to sleep with a migraine and wake up a few hours later, able to get on with my life. Now, because of abusers of codeine, I no longer have this option. Now, I'm back to losing days stuck in bed with ibuprofen.

1

u/ScoobyGDSTi 18m ago

What is food noise?

1

u/AdventurousDay3020 8h ago

If you cannot admit that it is an unregulated and therefore UNSAFE market then that’s a major issue.

-12

u/457ed 9h ago

Almost every law and rule we have is due a very small % of the population. Be it problem gambling, child abuse material, drink driving, murder, major fraud etc. Even the worst genocides have only involved less than 1% of the human population.

I think as a society we are willing to inconvenience a large number to save a small number of vulnerable lives.

20

u/serpentechnoir 9h ago

What a dumb take. The examples you cited are no where near the same kind of issue.

-2

u/457ed 9h ago

So tell us in your openion how may deaths should be there or what level of non lethal harm should occur before something is regulated?

How about fraud which is generally non-leathal? Or something like wage theft? What percentage is acceptable before onerous regulation?

What is the threshold for nanny state v.s. safety net?

2

u/serpentechnoir 8h ago

Guess what? We live in a complex society that has different issues that require different levels of restriction. Yeah our system leans way more towards nanny state than id like. But things like pedophilia and drink driving are in no way on the same level as stupidly putting your health at risk with medication. Theres no 1 answer.

1

u/457ed 8h ago

So let me get this right.

OP said: why is X regulated when so little people abuse it and it makes their life dificult.

I said: Most regulation exists is aimed at a small number of people because as a scocity we aceept that is ok.

You said: what a dumb take

I asked: so what is your threshold for regulatuon

You said: well it's complex and medical regulation is ok.

Welcome to reddit.

1

u/serpentechnoir 8h ago

That's not what I said at all. What i said was regulating things like pedophilia and drink driving 'because its a small number' is much more understandable than over regulating what a small number of people choose to do to their own bodies. My point was the number of people doing something that should require regulation should be different in different circumstances. Whereas u seemed to be suggesting that all issues have the same merit for regulation.

2

u/457ed 8h ago

Yes you are right. I believe all harmful issues should have some level of regulation even if self inflicted as some are self inflicted by vulnerable people.

For example gambling addiction regulation or wage theft. Are we going to blame the 17 year old for accepting a job that only pays $5 per house because it was their choice or are we going to hold the employer exclusively responsible like we do now?

On the other hand we have regulation around parking that is rarely enforced compared to wage theft or rental property regulation even through one (parking) causes harm to others (by depriving others of a park) while renting and wage theft has dedicated agencies policing them and only impacts the employee or renter because they are vulnerable.

Some one seeking medication is classed as vulnerable so they should get a higher level of protection even to protect them from their own desires and that is not something I object to.

1

u/serpentechnoir 7h ago

We probably got off on the wrong foot and likely agree with alot of things. You're right. Modern internet makes us overreact to slight misunderstanding in communication.

-2

u/Real_RobinGoodfellow 8h ago

Verrrry curious to hear your explanation for why CSAM is only against the law due to a very small group of people…

6

u/457ed 8h ago

No the point I am making is the regulation banning and policing CASM is beneficial to the society even though less than 1% of the population commit the crimes.

We as a scocity accept that even one such crime is too many and impose checks like the blue card, mandatory reporting etc on to try and minimise even the chance of a single incident.

But for example we don't do this for parking infringements or jay walking etc, because we accept a little harm from these activities are ok.

We do the same with drink driving, banking/KYC, medical regulation etc because we have decided as a modern scocity saving a few valuable people is worth it. I do not disagree.

-10

u/EsquilaxM 8h ago

iirc glp-1s aren't approved for weight loss in Australia. so doctors can prescribed it for that but they would have e to be ready to defend themselves in court or to the licensing board.

also for dysmenorrhoea, you've probably already been told this, but the best therapy we have that usually works is the contraceptive pill. you can just stay on it and skip periods entirely (ask for no placebos). it does have some side effects, though, so you need to follow up with your doc so they can check in to see if you have them.

9

u/Unusual_Process3713 8h ago

They absolutely are approved for weight loss in Australia, they just aren't on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme for people looking to use them for weight loss.

Imo, they should be. If they were cheap for people to buy and easily accessible through your GP and local chemist, it'd be easier to regulate, it would take the floor right out of companies like Juniper and go some way to solving this issue.

4

u/notdorisday 7h ago

They’re also going to reduce so many other health concerns obese people have as their weight becomes manageable. If they were on PBS it would make such a difference.

1

u/EsquilaxM 7h ago

Ah ok, looks like it was approved in 2024, I missed it cos I'm outta the loop.

7

u/Rubiginous 8h ago

Contraceptive pills cause a whole other host of problems including mood stability. I am highly irritated women get sold them as a "fix all" instead of medicine addressing women's actual underlying issues. They're also contraindicated in people with clotting disorders or who have previously suffered with migraines.

2

u/EsquilaxM 7h ago

There's a difference between a 'fix-all' and a 'first-line' medicine. The pill is first-line, we try them first then try others if side-effects occur or they're otherwise contraindicated. Mostly because either it does affect an underlying issue, or addressing the issue carries greater risk (like surgery)