Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The limitation in availability of over-the-counter paracetamol is
never
going to prevent premeditated and deliberate attempted suicides, but I
suspect that there was never any intention that it should. From my
(admittedly limited) experience, impulsive or accidental overdoses make
up the vast majority of cases seen. A reduction in the average number of
paracetamol tablets present in a house at any one time seems to be a
sensible way to attempt to reduce the average size of the overdose taken
impulsively or accidentally. The restriction also serves as a reminder to
the purchaser that there is a danger associated with overdose of this
otherwise
safe drug.
However, as has been pointed out by Cranney et al, restriction of
availability
will lead to higher prices and significant inconvenience to those who
regularly and appropriately use the drug. In addition to the points
already made, it appears that the smaller number of tablets are often
supplied in a blister pack rather than a child-proof container, thus
rather undoing some of the good work of the restriction. Is it too much
to ask that patients be expected to present their old child-proof bottles
at
pharmacies for reuse, neatly removing the need for additional packaging
and presumably therefore reducing the cost of the drug?
Pros and Cons of Limitation of Availability of Paracetamol
The limitation in availability of over-the-counter paracetamol is
never
going to prevent premeditated and deliberate attempted suicides, but I
suspect that there was never any intention that it should. From my
(admittedly limited) experience, impulsive or accidental overdoses make
up the vast majority of cases seen. A reduction in the average number of
paracetamol tablets present in a house at any one time seems to be a
sensible way to attempt to reduce the average size of the overdose taken
impulsively or accidentally. The restriction also serves as a reminder to
the purchaser that there is a danger associated with overdose of this
otherwise
safe drug.
However, as has been pointed out by Cranney et al, restriction of
availability
will lead to higher prices and significant inconvenience to those who
regularly and appropriately use the drug. In addition to the points
already made, it appears that the smaller number of tablets are often
supplied in a blister pack rather than a child-proof container, thus
rather undoing some of the good work of the restriction. Is it too much
to ask that patients be expected to present their old child-proof bottles
at
pharmacies for reuse, neatly removing the need for additional packaging
and presumably therefore reducing the cost of the drug?
Competing interests: No competing interests