James Brydon

Professor Zuba
Eng 1304
20.04.2010
Flight Risk: Pilots Should Fly on More Medicines
Its a fear that many people have, flying at 32,000 feet over the Atlantic Ocean when your
pilot suddenly has a heart attack and dies. An autopsy later reveals that if he had been on
medication for high blood pressure he would have survived. This isnt a what if scenario, it has
happened several times in the past, as recently as last October when an American Airlines
captain died on a flight from London to Boston. The captains death renewed the debate over the
stringent Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) guidelines that govern what medicines pilots
can and cannot take. If the captain had taken the high blood pressure medication that his doctor
had prescribed to him, he most likely would have been alive today. His choice to risk his life to
keep his career is a dilemma that many pilots face, and has many people in the aviation
community asking, why cant pilots be allowed to take more medications?
The biggest reason given by most pilots and lobbying groups to allow access to more
medications is the fact that not being on prescribed medication causes much larger risks than the
drugs themselves. In extreme cases, pilots have died because they didnt want to risk their
careers if they were caught, but more common effects are depression, issues caused by
ADD/ADHD, seizures, and heart problems. All of these can be cured through medication, but all
are banned by the FAA, including all ADD/ADHD medicines, all but two anti-depressants, and
most blood pressure medication. Although it is possible to get an aviation medical while on these
medicines, the process is long and arduous, so most pilots either refuse medicine or take it and
Brydon 2

risk losing their careers if caught during a random urine test. This crusade on medicine has
caused many more issues than it has solved, and almost all industry insiders agree that the
current standards do more harm than good to the aviation community.
Although the medical communitys arguments are convincing, perhaps the best argument
for allowing a wider range of medication comes from the FAAs European counterpart, the Joint
Aviation Association (JAA). Following sweeping reforms in 1983, European pilots are allowed
to take many more medicines than pilots in the United States, including ADD/ADHD,
antidepressants, and almost all blood pressure medications. To this date there has only been one
accident, Lufthansa 1302 in 1991, that has been attributed to side effects caused by the pilots
medication.
The main argument made by the FAA for their stringent standards is that the current list
of banned medication can cause side effects that impair a pilots ability to safely operate an
aircraft. This claim has been refuted numerous times by aviation medical examiners (AMEs),
and publications both inside and outside of the aviation community. The most severe side effect
caused by most of the banned medicines, like Ritalin, Concerta, Wellbutrin, and Lipitor is minor
nausea and headaches, and these subside very quickly once the body begins to tolerate the
medicine. Besides a handful of extremely rare reactions, there have never been any documented,
widespread effects that would inhibit a pilots ability to operate an aircraft.
A pilots ability to safely operate an aircraft is not impaired while on most medication,
and evidence from multiple studies, medical journals, and the JAA calls into question the
effectiveness of the FAAs current medical standards. Continuing to ban harmless medicenes
only puts pilots and the flying public in general at risk. Although reforming the current policies
Brydon 3

will not solve every problem, it will be a major step in the right direction for a system that has
been failing for years.