- Thread starter krfenn222
- Start date
traveling with medication
Not likely to be allowed in unless you visit a doctor here and get a prescription for it.
If US customs finds it, that's what they'll ask for. If you don't have one, the excuse that a prescription is not needed in the DR will prompt a response, "one is a requirement here" and then you get to watch your medication get dumped into the bin. Now if they don't find it then no one is the wiser. A largish quantity of "drugs" is usually spotted though cause that's what they're looking for.
If US customs finds it, that's what they'll ask for. If you don't have one, the excuse that a prescription is not needed in the DR will prompt a response, "one is a requirement here" and then you get to watch your medication get dumped into the bin. Now if they don't find it then no one is the wiser. A largish quantity of "drugs" is usually spotted though cause that's what they're looking for.
I bring back medication all the time and nobody says anything. Youre fine unless you think you're holding enough drugs like Pablo Escobar (and you act really nervous) but they're used to foreigners importing medication
There is always someone who takes good fortune and tries to quantify it as a right... Usually setting someone else up for problems.
Prescription medications should be in their original containers with the doctor's prescription printed on the container. It is advised that you travel with no more than personal use quantities, a rule of thumb is no more than a 90 day supply. If your medications or devices are not in their original containers, you must have a copy of your prescription with you or a letter from your doctor. A valid prescription or doctors note is required on all medication entering the U.S.
https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/1160/~/traveling-with-medication
Prescription medications should be in their original containers with the doctor's prescription printed on the container. It is advised that you travel with no more than personal use quantities, a rule of thumb is no more than a 90 day supply. If your medications or devices are not in their original containers, you must have a copy of your prescription with you or a letter from your doctor. A valid prescription or doctors note is required on all medication entering the U.S.
https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/1160/~/traveling-with-medication
We travel back and forth with oodles of prescription meds in our carry ons. Ziplock gallon sized bags, usually 3-4 of them. One has controlled stuff “just in case”. We have never, EVER, been asked anything in either country.
when i worked in the pharmacy we had clients buy the goodies here and take them back home to US/canada. usually boner pills but there were other meds too. only once i heard someone comment they had their stash confiscated at the border, it was a large box of amoxicillin or ampicillin, 1000 capsules. apparently seized by canadian authorities. so i's say the odds are stacked in your favour.
Oh stop the fear mongering. When I lived in a border town in Arizona people would literally walk over into Mexico, buy their prescription drugs, and literally walk back into the states with the bags in their hands. This happens everyday. Live a little
Unless you bring exorbitant amounts no one would care, specially being in your checked bags.
1000 capsule of amoxicillin means they were definitely selling those bad boys. Yeah that deserved to be confiscated
There are certain posters that cannot help themselves from warning against anything and everything. The odds of being stopped with a normal amount of prescription drugs are about one in 1,000 or even higher. In fact, how many times have you even had any customs officer search your bags. They are way too busy now.
Not anything and everything, just the wanton push to encourage others to disregard authority and the law. If you ever wonder why society is breaking down, this is probably one of the contributing factors. There are certain posters who can't help themselves from advising others to break the law and skirt the rules.
Some of the same posters rail away against moto drivers in the DR who don't follow the rules of the road but then turn around and ignore every inconvenient rule they come across themselves. My only real issue is when a poster openly advises someone else that it is ok to break the law. If you wish to risk having your medication seized by CBP that's fine with me. When you advise others to do the same, it moves beyond what I consider to be good form and public conduct.
The OP asked "I was wondering if anyone knows the rules about traveling from DR back to US with medication." I answered them with an authoritative link to the appropriate rules. Right on queue, the antidisestablishmentarianists jump right in saying go ahead, do what you want.
The OP has the information they requested and I hope they use that to make an informed decision for themselves rather than succumb to the temptation of adopting a manner of callous disregard that is so often advocated from behind a cloak of anonymity here on DR1.
I tend to agree with the premise that a rule that is not enforced is not really a rule until it is one time in a thousand. I also tend to think that those advocating anarchy wouldn't be so quick to do so if they risked being identified just like no one is willing to post their info to complain about a company on this site. These posters are just duplicitous hypocrites and I have some faith that those trying to live a ethical life can see these posters for what they are, closet anarchists.
Some of the same posters rail away against moto drivers in the DR who don't follow the rules of the road but then turn around and ignore every inconvenient rule they come across themselves. My only real issue is when a poster openly advises someone else that it is ok to break the law. If you wish to risk having your medication seized by CBP that's fine with me. When you advise others to do the same, it moves beyond what I consider to be good form and public conduct.
The OP asked "I was wondering if anyone knows the rules about traveling from DR back to US with medication." I answered them with an authoritative link to the appropriate rules. Right on queue, the antidisestablishmentarianists jump right in saying go ahead, do what you want.
The OP has the information they requested and I hope they use that to make an informed decision for themselves rather than succumb to the temptation of adopting a manner of callous disregard that is so often advocated from behind a cloak of anonymity here on DR1.
I tend to agree with the premise that a rule that is not enforced is not really a rule until it is one time in a thousand. I also tend to think that those advocating anarchy wouldn't be so quick to do so if they risked being identified just like no one is willing to post their info to complain about a company on this site. These posters are just duplicitous hypocrites and I have some faith that those trying to live a ethical life can see these posters for what they are, closet anarchists.
Last edited:
You provided a link - the rest of folks have provided empirical evidence and their experiences traveling with medications to the US and Canada.
Now the OP could make an informed decision.
Why are you upset?
First & Last sentence first paragraph. I believe such conduct to be a disservice to those legitimately asking for information they will then use to make an informed decision.
An example of a much better reply of this type:
https://dr1.com/forums/showthread.php/174575-traffic-fines-to-go-up?p=1941234&viewfull=1#post1941234
Harley, in his last sentence states what the law is then suggests that it is not enforced...much. A complete answer or thought on the subject offering the two sides of the same coin.
In this thread had some posters chosen to acknowledge the existence of very specific rule(s) and then go on to suggest that these are not enforced (often), I'd have much less concern that someone might read the thread, go to the pharmacia, buy a bunch of pills and later lose them to customs. There is a big difference between saying "such-and-such has never happened to me", or suggesting that some activity is perfectly fine to engage in and "such-and-such won't happen to you" or it is safe to ignore the rule(s) without the "at your own peril" part that should be clearly stated.
"I'm not a <insert profession here> and I don't play one on TV." If you do as I suggest, your results may vary, a little or a lot. Money for bail not included, zero life long consequences not guaranteed, individual results may vary
Back on topic b4 the axe falls.
An example of a much better reply of this type:
https://dr1.com/forums/showthread.php/174575-traffic-fines-to-go-up?p=1941234&viewfull=1#post1941234
Harley, in his last sentence states what the law is then suggests that it is not enforced...much. A complete answer or thought on the subject offering the two sides of the same coin.
In this thread had some posters chosen to acknowledge the existence of very specific rule(s) and then go on to suggest that these are not enforced (often), I'd have much less concern that someone might read the thread, go to the pharmacia, buy a bunch of pills and later lose them to customs. There is a big difference between saying "such-and-such has never happened to me", or suggesting that some activity is perfectly fine to engage in and "such-and-such won't happen to you" or it is safe to ignore the rule(s) without the "at your own peril" part that should be clearly stated.
"I'm not a <insert profession here> and I don't play one on TV." If you do as I suggest, your results may vary, a little or a lot. Money for bail not included, zero life long consequences not guaranteed, individual results may vary
Back on topic b4 the axe falls.