J&J ordered to pay $572 million

[clubdeac]

Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $572 Million in Landmark Opioid Trial (Published 2019)

Oklahoma pursued the first case against a drug manufacturer for the national public health disaster, and the ruling may point to what lies ahead in 2,000 more lawsuits.

www.google.com

Interested to hear your guys’ thoughts on this. I feel as though it’s an unfair verdict with the state and lawyers looking for some easy money. I mean they were selling FDA regulated and monitored drugs. It’s not like they were doing anything illegal.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SSdoc33]

agreed. this is a backlash b/c people are "looking for someone to blame". that being said, J&J et al are not without some degree of culpability. i'd say this some goes WAY down on appeal, but they may have to pony up a bit

 

[Mad Jack]

It's not the sale, it's the marketing that was the problem. They were marketed in a way that was not consistent with the evidence to sell as much as possible. They significantly understated or outright neglected the risk of addiction, which led to higher prescribing rates than would have been expected had they emphasized such to the doctors they were marketing to. Basically they told doctors their drugs were safe and had minimal addictive potential, and that long-term prescribing was both safe and effective. As piles of dead bodies show, this was not the case

 

[clubdeac]

It's not the sale, it's the marketing that was the problem. They were marketed in a way that was not consistent with the evidence to sell as much as possible. They significantly understated or outright neglected the risk of addiction, which led to higher prescribing rates than would have been expected had they emphasized such to the doctors they were marketing to. Basically they told doctors their drugs were safe and had minimal addictive potential, and that long-term prescribing was both safe and effective. As piles of dead bodies show, this was not the case

I don't remember any of the ads but I'm assuming they had to follow all the guidelines as all the others with a laundry list of side effects listed at the end of each ad and in small print

 

[hyperalgesia]

Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $572 Million in Landmark Opioid Trial (Published 2019)

Oklahoma pursued the first case against a drug manufacturer for the national public health disaster, and the ruling may point to what lies ahead in 2,000 more lawsuits.

www.google.com

Interested to hear your guys’ thoughts on this. I feel as though it’s an unfair verdict with the state and lawyers looking for some easy money. I mean they were selling FDA regulated and monitored drugs. It’s not like they were doing anything illegal.

I agree, I just think fda is a joke. They approve so much stuff based on garbage studies.

 

[Ligament]

They knew they were drug dealers peddling highly addictive medications. Also, the FDA is a joke. Anyway, if you were around during the opioid peddling golden days you'd remember the pharma companies pushing opoioids as non addictive and vital to health. Whether this deserves a fine is another question, that said they are unethical for peddling these drugs the way they did.

 

[clubdeac]

They knew they were drug dealers peddling highly addictive medications. Also, the FDA is a joke. Anyway, if you were around during the opioid peddling golden days you'd remember the pharma companies pushing opoioids as non addictive and vital to health. Whether this deserves a fine is another question, that said they are unethical for peddling these drugs the way they did.

So if they knew better, were physicians not culpable as well. Did they not know better? Surely they did. And if so then any physician who prescribed over a certain MME for a certain amount of time is equally liable. No?

 

[Ligament]

So if they knew better, were physicians not culpable as well. Did they not know better? Surely they did. And if so then the any physician who prescribed over a certain MME for a certain amount of time is equally liable. No?

I was in training at the time and honestly was confused by the entire situation. Sure, if a physician was aware they were getting patients hooked, they are in the wrong as well.

 

[SSdoc33]

we were taught, actually taught in med school, that if a patient had legitimate pain, they could not become addicted to opioids. you just increase the dose until pain is relieved. made no sense to me them, and makes no sense to me now.

this wasnt just a J&J issue, this was the prevailing thought process at the time.

 

[lobelsteve]

The JCAHO and VAMC made pain control a priority. 5th vital sign. 4/10 prior to discharge. Fine, Passik, Fishman, Portenoy, et al paid millions to push the pharma agenda.

 

[lobelsteve]

Purdue allegedly offering $10-12 Billion to settle all cases.

 

[lonelobo]

5th Vital sign....that was Dumb sh't

 

[lobelsteve]

5th Vital sign....that was Dumb sh't

I’m listening to Fox news the five on my way home and it sounds like they are using my post as talking points . I feel sick

 

[Doctodd]

I’m listening to Fox news the five on my way home and it sounds like they are using my post as talking points . I feel sick

sure you do lol....remember the patient you sent me years ago who was on Oxycodone 80mg/day? She is still my patient and i have her down to OxyIR 30mg/day.

 

[siliso]

They made their bucks and then some while the getting was good, they can disgorge some now that the fallout has fallen. Circle of life. Even if no one was ever purposefully malignant, I don’t have what tears to shed for them.

I see it like cigs back in the day: nobody forced anyone to buy them and they weren’t illegal. OTOH also no one forced anyone to sell them, and they did massive harm. Why should the people who got all the gains from what turned out to be massively harmful, get to keep all those gains plus interest while the rest of society pays for the harms? Participate in the profit, participate in the loss. That’s just.

 

[Mad Jack]

I don't remember any of the ads but I'm assuming they had to follow all the guidelines as all the others with a laundry list of side effects listed at the end of each ad and in small print

It was the way it was marketed to doctors using drug reps, and the manner in which they were trained. They were trained to minimize discussion of addictive potential, to target low prescribers in order to increase prescribing, to oversell their utility for various pain control scenarios, etc. Basically they pitched the drugs to PCPs as harmless alternatives to the older, highly addictive opioids, and if you didn't give them to patients for pain you were falling short of the standard of care. And don't even get me started on the BS that was "pain is the fifth vital sign," a push by pharmaceutical companies to basically force everyone in the hospital to prescribe opioids by linking pain control to quality of care.

 

[Mad Jack]

So if they knew better, were physicians not culpable as well. Did they not know better? Surely they did. And if so then any physician who prescribed over a certain MME for a certain amount of time is equally liable. No?

They didn't know. Doctors were lied to. The companies only published studies that minimized the addictive potential of the drugs and used them to justify telling doctors there was basically no addictive potential unless a patient was already an addict. They pitched this idea in CME, sold it to medical students, made it seem like we had reached a golden age of pain control in which freedom from pain was just one harmless pill away. If you disagreed with this narrative, well, "pain is the fifth vital sign and the Joint Commission says you're not practicing the standard of care." It was a push at every level to miseducate physicians and regulatory bodies to ensure sales remained high and that questions about safety led to misinformation.

 

[callmeanesthesia]

They didn't know. Doctors were lied to. The companies only published studies that minimized the addictive potential of the drugs and used them to justify telling doctors there was basically no addictive potential unless a patient was already an addict. They pitched this idea in CME, sold it to medical students, made it seem like we had reached a golden age of pain control in which freedom from pain was just one harmless pill away. If you disagreed with this narrative, well, "pain is the fifth vital sign and the Joint Commission says you're not practicing the standard of care." It was a push at every level to miseducate physicians and regulatory bodies to ensure sales remained high and that questions about safety led to misinformation.

Oh, and don’t forget pseudoaddiction - they weren’t really addicted; they were just behaving like addicts because they didn’t have enough opioids.

 

[clubdeac]

They didn't know. Doctors were lied to. The companies only published studies that minimized the addictive potential of the drugs and used them to justify telling doctors there was basically no addictive potential unless a patient was already an addict. They pitched this idea in CME, sold it to medical students, made it seem like we had reached a golden age of pain control in which freedom from pain was just one harmless pill away. If you disagreed with this narrative, well, "pain is the fifth vital sign and the Joint Commission says you're not practicing the standard of care." It was a push at every level to miseducate physicians and regulatory bodies to ensure sales remained high and that questions about safety led to misinformation.

Then perhaps states should be going after the government i.e. JCAHO and the VAMC

 

[Mad Jack]

Then perhaps states should be going after the government i.e. JCAHO and the VAMC

You're missing that they made these guidelines based on misinformation and doctored studies

 

[hyperalgesia]

Then perhaps states should be going after the government i.e. JCAHO and the VAMC

God I would pay to watch a lawsuit unfold against Joint Commission

 

[siliso]

Imagine also asbestos. Maybe the asbestos company really didn’t know that their product was going to cause a lot of expensive harm. Nonetheless, it did. So do they get to keep all the money they made selling the harmful product and kick back on their infinity pool floaties carefree? So the rest of us get to pay for it and they get to keep their profits+interest? No, they’re gonna have to barf a lot of that money up to pay for the harm their product caused. And that’s even presuming well-intentioned ignorance, which is far from clear when it comes to some opioid promoters.

 

[Ligament]

They made their bucks and then some while the getting was good, they can disgorge some now that the fallout has fallen. Circle of life. Even if no one was ever purposefully malignant, I don’t have what tears to shed for them.

I see it like cigs back in the day: nobody forced anyone to buy them and they weren’t illegal. OTOH also no one forced anyone to sell them, and they did massive harm. Why should the people who got all the gains from what turned out to be massively harmful, get to keep all those gains plus interest while the rest of society pays for the harms? Participate in the profit, participate in the loss. That’s just.

Most eloquent and efficient use of this word I've ever seen. Bravo.

 

[Ligament]

They didn't know. Doctors were lied to. The companies only published studies that minimized the addictive potential of the drugs and used them to justify telling doctors there was basically no addictive potential unless a patient was already an addict. They pitched this idea in CME, sold it to medical students, made it seem like we had reached a golden age of pain control in which freedom from pain was just one harmless pill away. If you disagreed with this narrative, well, "pain is the fifth vital sign and the Joint Commission says you're not practicing the standard of care." It was a push at every level to miseducate physicians and regulatory bodies to ensure sales remained high and that questions about safety led to misinformation.

This accurately reflects the time. I was there.

 

[emd123]

Johnson & Johnson Ordered to Pay $572 Million in Landmark Opioid Trial (Published 2019)

Oklahoma pursued the first case against a drug manufacturer for the national public health disaster, and the ruling may point to what lies ahead in 2,000 more lawsuits.

www.google.com

Interested to hear your guys’ thoughts on this. I feel as though it’s an unfair verdict with the state and lawyers looking for some easy money. I mean they were selling FDA regulated and monitored drugs. It’s not like they were doing anything illegal.

When are they going to start suing the people that abused these drugs all these years?

 

[Mad Jack]

When are they going to start suing the people that abused these drugs all these years?

Pls be sarcasm

 

[SSdoc33]

Pls be sarcasm

i dont think it was sarcasm....

there is plenty of blame to go around. the patients share in a degree of culpability

 

[Ducttape]

some patients were culpable - for treating doctors like drug pushers that they were.

problem is, most of them are dead now. so they paid their coin to Charon...
or they are addicts.

most patients are not - the victims of the entire scam.

 

[emd123]

Pls be sarcasm

Congrats. Your sarcasm detector is working.

 

[emd123]

In all seriousness though, there does have to be an element of personal responsibility here.

I do believe the drug companies do bear responsibility and should be held accountable. They may get sued out of business, which maybe they deserve. But some new company will pop up and make the drugs and the government will still classify them as “Schedule II, having legitimate medical use.” And it won’t solve the opiate crisis, one iota, anymore than suing the car makers out of business because drunk driving deaths happen would solve the problem of car deaths. Neither will absolving the drunk drivers of all responsibility and letting them off the hook, just because they have a “disease.”

The award money doesn’t go back to “those harmed by opiates.” Only the lawyers win in these lawsuits. It also conveniently leaves out all personal responsibility for people who are lying, cheating, stealing and breaking the law to abuse and sell the drugs in the first place.

Yes, addiction is a disease and needs to be treated, but one must take responsibility for that disease. It’s not someone’s fault for having diabetes, but it is their responsibility to seek treatment and take their insulin. It’s also not ones fault they have epilepsy, but they’re held responsible if they know that, drive anyways and cause societal harm.

I agree, all sides of this debacle bare responsibility and that there’s plenty of blame to go around.

 

[siliso]

Money goes to the state to pay for costs the state incurred due to its citizens being addicted to opioids. Not to individual addicts. Even the lawyers are state employees, generally. State AGs don’t collect contingency fees.

 

[clubdeac]

Money goes to the state to pay for costs the state incurred due to its citizens being addicted to opioids. Not to individual addicts. Even the lawyers are state employees, generally. State AGs don’t collect contingency fees.

actually the lawyers will make around 90 million. I think emd123 said it well. There's plenty of blame to go around including the patients. I honestly would be very interested to know what % of opioid overdoses were caused by patients that were taking their own medications as prescribed. I would bet it'd be miniscule. A vast majority of deaths were due to the combination of opiates with another substance such as a benzo, alcohol or an illicit drug

Private lawyers stand to make $90 million as judge hits Johnson & Johnson with $572M opioid ruling

NORMAN, Okla. (Legal Newsline) - A state judge in Oklahoma has blamed Johnson & Johnson for the state's opioid crisis and ordered it to pay $572 million in damages, extending public nuisance law beyond its traditional boundaries into what may become an all-purpose tool for government lawsuits...

legalnewsline.com

 

[Ducttape]

A vast majority of deaths were due to the combination of opiates with another substance such as a benzo, alcohol or an illicit drug

i think many patients who died of opioid overdose were legitimately prescribed a benzo with that opioid, and many were not told to stop alcohol when on opioids.

i think that assumption you make is wrong.

the fact that the phrase "the holy trinity" even exists begets your assumptions.

 

[emd123]

Money goes to the state

The money goes to "the state." Of course.
Who makes up the state?
A bunch of politicians who are (95+%) lawyers.
If you think they'll use that money for the good of mankind and not find a way to make it benefit them, I've got some land on the Moon to sell ya.

 

[Doctodd]

thankfully most of us were able to think for ourselves and realize there was no benefit to 360mg of Oxycontin per day

 

[siliso]

The money goes to "the state." Of course.
Who makes up the state?
A bunch of politicians who are (95+%) lawyers.
If you think they'll use that money for the good of mankind and not find a way to make it benefit them, I've got some land on the Moon to sell ya.

The state used contractor attorneys, frequently a grifting opportunity I’ll agree.

The state is you and me and everyone we know, though. With funds disbursed through the budgeting process of Our Democracy, and the terms of the judgment, flawed though both may be/are, a different political discussion. What the judgment is not is a payday for individual drug abusers or their families, the ones with the arguable personal responsibility for misusing their prescriptions, as it could be if the suit was “patient vs drug company” rather than “state vs drug company”.

The alternative is the drug company, having profited richly, gets to keep the 5xx million and certainly use it for its own private benefit.

 

[Ligament]

I wonder; does anybody ever realize there is no inherent need for lawyers to be the majority of government? What if we had a government of 1% lawyers doing actual judicial duties, and the rest citizens of other professions making up the rest? What a better place it would be.

 

[siliso]

It kind of makes sense for lawyers who understand laws and how they are written and what they mean and how they’ll be interpreted and used, to write and debate/vote on laws. They’re about 40% of the house and 60% of the senate, federally, so not a monopoly and anyone can run.

There’s similarly no requirement for hospital/medical policy makers to be doctors - but things go pretty sideways when there aren’t at least a quorum of doctors involved.