Cogswell: It's not necessary, I do get enough sleep every night (which is around 7 hours), and so I don't think a doctor would prescribe it to me.

I'm just trying to get a better sleeping pattern, sleep longer and have a deeper sleep so my body can release more Growth Hormone and repair/recover more readily after weight lifting.

I'd like to sleep for about 9 to 10 hours a night, starting from like 11pm, instead of the 1am bedtime I have now.

joker97: 

you cannot make cheap melatonin!

nakedmolerat:

Beccara: Look i'm not going to go round for round with you, All drugs have an on-label use and criteria for said on-label prescription when approved by MedSafe/FDA/etc/etc. Zop's is short term use only (8 weeks or less) among other contraindications.

This is incorrect. Zopiclone is RECOMMENDED for short term use. Recommendation and what the medications are approved for is completely different.

Beccara: You said you'd only get a 3-month script if you were older than 55 and it was for short term use, This is factually incorrect simple as that. Under 55's have and do get 3 month scripts for it

Regular medications, anyone even 1 month old baby can have 3 months script. In this thread we are discussing about melatonin!

 MELATONIN IS AVAILABLE ON PRESCRIPTION ONLY

Melatonin 2mg Prolonged Release tablet (CIRCADIN®) was approved in New Zealand in 2011, as monotherapy for the short-term treatment of primary insomnia in patients who are aged 55 or over. 

 Requirements for unapproved indications

Melatonin 2mg tablets are currently registered in New Zealand for primary insomnia in those over 55 years. 

For other patient groups or conditions, the patient should be advised that it is an unapproved indication. Unbiased efficacy and safety information should be discussed with the patient, together with other treatment options, to be assured that it may offer benefit and not harm. If the use of melatonin is regarded ‘experimental’, signed consent must be obtained from the patient, as per The Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights. Agree with the patient on how monitoring for safety and efficacy will be arranged. The unapproved use of a medicine would be considered to be experimental if there is limited documented evidence supporting its use.

Source: Waitemata DHB

edit: formatting

Beccara: Your talking out a hole in your head, My partner has been on 3+ months of Melatonin  when trying to get off Zop and is well under 55.

Your last point even says you can get it under 55, On-label is 55+ short term, Off label can be whatever the doctor and patient agree on given.

KiwiNZ: This clearly about illegal import and use of prescription drugs as well as stupidity

LennonNZ:
If a doctor will not prescribe it to you then why do you think what you are trying to do is good for you. Yes its advertised "on the net" for people for weight lifting for exactly what you have said but do you know 100% its good for you? There will be a good reason why its a restricted drug.

Have you talked to your gym/trainer/family/doctor about why you are thinking to take this. I am pretty sure everyone will say no.

Cogswell:

KiwiNZ: This clearly about illegal import and use of prescription drugs as well as stupidity

It's a simple over-the-counter drug in America - it's not a dangerous drug nor does it have many bad side effects.

LennonNZ:
If a doctor will not prescribe it to you then why do you think what you are trying to do is good for you. Yes its advertised "on the net" for people for weight lifting for exactly what you have said but do you know 100% its good for you? There will be a good reason why its a restricted drug.

Have you talked to your gym/trainer/family/doctor about why you are thinking to take this. I am pretty sure everyone will say no.

Because I understand myself more than anyone else understands me.
For example, I've seen a couple of counsellors about my unresolved childhood problems, and none of them helped even after a few dozen sessions. Sometimes, you just have to do things yourself, and solve things yourself.

How will a doctor know it'll be right or not right for me? He doesn't know my sleeping patterns or how sleepy I get at certain parts of the day.
I live right, I eat right, I exercise regularly, I am self aware, I always try to fall asleep before midnight, and yet I always do one of the following:
Wake up at 8am (alarm) and go about my day, but then I feel really tired at 5pm and sleep for a few hours, and have a really late dinner.
Or I wake up at 11am (or whenever I feel like it) and then I won't be able to sleep til way past midnight. I decided to sleep til noon since it was Sunday, and now I can't sleep 

I do not see why it's a restricted drug here in New Zealand. It's not dangerous, overdosing won't kill you, and it hardly has any bad side effects. It's simply a natural hormone that your body produces anyway (which maybe I'm not producing enough of).

I lift weights with friends and don't have a personal trainer, I don't have a personal doctor, and I'm not on well speaking terms with my family. There's aren't many people I can talk to about this, and so I have to do my own research.

Fred99: Melatonin is pretty interesting (IMO) from a legal/ethical perspective.

Medsafe have rejected (indefinitely) an application by the maker of "Circadin" to have it reclassified from prescription only to restricted / OTC / pharmacist only.
The application included a statement by the maker that 5% of US citizens are taking melatonin supplement (2002).   That's 15 million people - quite a lot IMO. It's probably more now, as it''s being used as an additive in neutraceutical foods, which they probably shouldn't be able to "get away with" if it's an additive - as it lacks FDA GRAS status, but OTOH if it's a component of ie cherry juice, and carefully labelled, then there's probably little that FDA can do.
Tablets / doses are commonly higher than the 2mg Circaden tablets.
Anyway, if there was the likelihood of serious long term harm, it should have probably shown up by now.  Oh crap, now I can picture a doctor advertising cigarettes, a bottle of Bayer Heroin, and an executive from Ethyl Corp drinking petrol anti-knock additive.

The problem seems to be that it's "recommended use" involves therapeutic claims.  But it's a naturally synthesized compound produced in our bodies, which happens to be classified as a "hormone" - as opposed to say a "vitamin".  Now in the case of vitamins - making specific therapeutic claims would likely land the seller in very deep water with medsafe, despite the fact that we know that vitamin C prevents/cures scurvy etc - known diseases of deficiency  - that's not why people buy it - and not how it's sold. Some vitamins (A/D/E in particular) can be toxic.  For some of those vitamins, there's no real consensus what a "good" level should be (above the level to avoid diseases of deficiency).  Sods law would say that even if some method to determine the "ideal level" existed, then it would be different for every individual and practically impossible to determine.
Some are synthesized in our bodies, some aren't.  Over the counter medicines for which therapeutic claims are made and are not "naturally occurring in our bodies" are freely available in supermarkets, yet the margin of error between a correct therapeutic dose of paracetamol and a lethal dose actually isn't very high. Aspirin also - safe most of the time, but...  

IMO it's a bit of a mess, sometime seems ad-hoc, sometimes seems as if the medical fraternity like to protect their territory.

joker97:

Fred99: Melatonin is pretty interesting (IMO) from a legal/ethical perspective.

Medsafe have rejected (indefinitely) an application by the maker of "Circadin" to have it reclassified from prescription only to restricted / OTC / pharmacist only.
The application included a statement by the maker that 5% of US citizens are taking melatonin supplement (2002).   That's 15 million people - quite a lot IMO. It's probably more now, as it''s being used as an additive in neutraceutical foods, which they probably shouldn't be able to "get away with" if it's an additive - as it lacks FDA GRAS status, but OTOH if it's a component of ie cherry juice, and carefully labelled, then there's probably little that FDA can do.
Tablets / doses are commonly higher than the 2mg Circaden tablets.
Anyway, if there was the likelihood of serious long term harm, it should have probably shown up by now.  Oh crap, now I can picture a doctor advertising cigarettes, a bottle of Bayer Heroin, and an executive from Ethyl Corp drinking petrol anti-knock additive.

The problem seems to be that it's "recommended use" involves therapeutic claims.  But it's a naturally synthesized compound produced in our bodies, which happens to be classified as a "hormone" - as opposed to say a "vitamin".  Now in the case of vitamins - making specific therapeutic claims would likely land the seller in very deep water with medsafe, despite the fact that we know that vitamin C prevents/cures scurvy etc - known diseases of deficiency  - that's not why people buy it - and not how it's sold. Some vitamins (A/D/E in particular) can be toxic.  For some of those vitamins, there's no real consensus what a "good" level should be (above the level to avoid diseases of deficiency).  Sods law would say that even if some method to determine the "ideal level" existed, then it would be different for every individual and practically impossible to determine.
Some are synthesized in our bodies, some aren't.  Over the counter medicines for which therapeutic claims are made and are not "naturally occurring in our bodies" are freely available in supermarkets, yet the margin of error between a correct therapeutic dose of paracetamol and a lethal dose actually isn't very high. Aspirin also - safe most of the time, but...  

IMO it's a bit of a mess, sometime seems ad-hoc, sometimes seems as if the medical fraternity like to protect their territory.

Yo how has that got to do with medical fraternity? This problem is the same as the Herceptin issue. the lawmakers are the ones that decide what is legal/illegal, what is funded/not funded, what is OTC/prescription! not docs!

Cogswell:

KiwiNZ: This clearly about illegal import and use of prescription drugs as well as stupidity

It's a simple over-the-counter drug in America - it's not a dangerous drug nor does it have many bad side effects.

LennonNZ:
If a doctor will not prescribe it to you then why do you think what you are trying to do is good for you. Yes its advertised "on the net" for people for weight lifting for exactly what you have said but do you know 100% its good for you? There will be a good reason why its a restricted drug.

Have you talked to your gym/trainer/family/doctor about why you are thinking to take this. I am pretty sure everyone will say no.

Because I understand myself more than anyone else understands me.
For example, I've seen a couple of counsellors about my unresolved childhood problems, and none of them helped even after a few dozen sessions. Sometimes, you just have to do things yourself, and solve things yourself.

How will a doctor know it'll be right or not right for me? He doesn't know my sleeping patterns or how sleepy I get at certain parts of the day.
I live right, I eat right, I exercise regularly, I am self aware, I always try to fall asleep before midnight, and yet I always do one of the following:
Wake up at 8am (alarm) and go about my day, but then I feel really tired at 5pm and sleep for a few hours, and have a really late dinner.
Or I wake up at 11am (or whenever I feel like it) and then I won't be able to sleep til way past midnight. I decided to sleep til noon since it was Sunday, and now I can't sleep 

I do not see why it's a restricted drug here in New Zealand. It's not dangerous, overdosing won't kill you, and it hardly has any bad side effects. It's simply a natural hormone that your body produces anyway (which maybe I'm not producing enough of).

I lift weights with friends and don't have a personal trainer, I don't have a personal doctor, and I'm not on well speaking terms with my family. There's aren't many people I can talk to about this, and so I have to do my own research.

joker97:

Fred99: Melatonin is pretty interesting (IMO) from a legal/ethical perspective.

Medsafe have rejected (indefinitely) an application by the maker of "Circadin" to have it reclassified from prescription only to restricted / OTC / pharmacist only.
The application included a statement by the maker that 5% of US citizens are taking melatonin supplement (2002).   That's 15 million people - quite a lot IMO. It's probably more now, as it''s being used as an additive in neutraceutical foods, which they probably shouldn't be able to "get away with" if it's an additive - as it lacks FDA GRAS status, but OTOH if it's a component of ie cherry juice, and carefully labelled, then there's probably little that FDA can do.
Tablets / doses are commonly higher than the 2mg Circaden tablets.
Anyway, if there was the likelihood of serious long term harm, it should have probably shown up by now.  Oh crap, now I can picture a doctor advertising cigarettes, a bottle of Bayer Heroin, and an executive from Ethyl Corp drinking petrol anti-knock additive.

The problem seems to be that it's "recommended use" involves therapeutic claims.  But it's a naturally synthesized compound produced in our bodies, which happens to be classified as a "hormone" - as opposed to say a "vitamin".  Now in the case of vitamins - making specific therapeutic claims would likely land the seller in very deep water with medsafe, despite the fact that we know that vitamin C prevents/cures scurvy etc - known diseases of deficiency  - that's not why people buy it - and not how it's sold. Some vitamins (A/D/E in particular) can be toxic.  For some of those vitamins, there's no real consensus what a "good" level should be (above the level to avoid diseases of deficiency).  Sods law would say that even if some method to determine the "ideal level" existed, then it would be different for every individual and practically impossible to determine.
Some are synthesized in our bodies, some aren't.  Over the counter medicines for which therapeutic claims are made and are not "naturally occurring in our bodies" are freely available in supermarkets, yet the margin of error between a correct therapeutic dose of paracetamol and a lethal dose actually isn't very high. Aspirin also - safe most of the time, but...  

IMO it's a bit of a mess, sometime seems ad-hoc, sometimes seems as if the medical fraternity like to protect their territory.

Yo how has that got to do with medical fraternity? This problem is the same as the Herceptin issue. the lawmakers are the ones that decide what is legal/illegal, what is funded/not funded, what is OTC/prescription! not docs!

joker97:

Fred99: Melatonin is pretty interesting (IMO) from a legal/ethical perspective.

Medsafe have rejected (indefinitely) an application by the maker of "Circadin" to have it reclassified from prescription only to restricted / OTC / pharmacist only.
The application included a statement by the maker that 5% of US citizens are taking melatonin supplement (2002).   That's 15 million people - quite a lot IMO. It's probably more now, as it''s being used as an additive in neutraceutical foods, which they probably shouldn't be able to "get away with" if it's an additive - as it lacks FDA GRAS status, but OTOH if it's a component of ie cherry juice, and carefully labelled, then there's probably little that FDA can do.
Tablets / doses are commonly higher than the 2mg Circaden tablets.
Anyway, if there was the likelihood of serious long term harm, it should have probably shown up by now.  Oh crap, now I can picture a doctor advertising cigarettes, a bottle of Bayer Heroin, and an executive from Ethyl Corp drinking petrol anti-knock additive.

The problem seems to be that it's "recommended use" involves therapeutic claims.  But it's a naturally synthesized compound produced in our bodies, which happens to be classified as a "hormone" - as opposed to say a "vitamin".  Now in the case of vitamins - making specific therapeutic claims would likely land the seller in very deep water with medsafe, despite the fact that we know that vitamin C prevents/cures scurvy etc - known diseases of deficiency  - that's not why people buy it - and not how it's sold. Some vitamins (A/D/E in particular) can be toxic.  For some of those vitamins, there's no real consensus what a "good" level should be (above the level to avoid diseases of deficiency).  Sods law would say that even if some method to determine the "ideal level" existed, then it would be different for every individual and practically impossible to determine.
Some are synthesized in our bodies, some aren't.  Over the counter medicines for which therapeutic claims are made and are not "naturally occurring in our bodies" are freely available in supermarkets, yet the margin of error between a correct therapeutic dose of paracetamol and a lethal dose actually isn't very high. Aspirin also - safe most of the time, but...  

IMO it's a bit of a mess, sometime seems ad-hoc, sometimes seems as if the medical fraternity like to protect their territory.

Yo how has that got to do with medical fraternity? This problem is the same as the Herceptin issue. the lawmakers are the ones that decide what is legal/illegal, what is funded/not funded, what is OTC/prescription! not docs!