Purdue Plea Deal

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

PharFromNormal

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2013
Messages
712
Reaction score
478
I’m extremely intrigued how this government controlled public benefit company will operate and how it will make business decisions to continue to provide the medications the government says have legitimate use but better curtail abuse. I’m not suggesting Purdue was innocent in the slightest but what are success measures for this new organization?

Ive long felt the government bears a considerable amount of blame on the opioid crisis as the DEA has access to more data on the distribution of these products than anyone yet what did they do besides pass blame onto others without any real solutions? Is this the endgame we just nationalize the producers of oxy so any profit motive is at least the benefit of the taxpayer rather than private companies? I have mixed feelings on that but either way I don’t it solves the opioid epidemic to any degree at all.

thoughts?

Members don't see this ad.
 
all about da money $$$$

right?

so for the legitimate patients that need these products... should we think of any cost that’s paid above the manufacturing and company overhead involved in continued production and distribution of these products as a tax that is funding the payoff of liabilities of those found guilty? Interesting
 
Members don't see this ad :)
After reading the article, my feelings are mixed. On one hand, Purdue deserves to go bankrupt and the reins handed over to more disciplined individuals. But does the punishment go far enough though? The people at the top successfully avoid jail time even though the government could have put them there. These people probably realized they had screwed up by instigating the epidemic and needed a way out once they squeezed as much profit as they could. They could care less about Purdue or the general public now.

On the other hand, who should the government target next with all this extra funding? What about the doctors that essentially accepted bribes to make people become addicts? How about the pharmacies and pharmacists that dispensed all these opioids and could have chose not to. If they are found guilty, what should their punishment be? Ultimately, I think this raises more questions than answers.
 
After reading the article, my feelings are mixed. On one hand, Purdue deserves to go bankrupt and the reins handed over to more disciplined individuals. But does the punishment go far enough though? The people at the top successfully avoid jail time even though the government could have put them there. These people probably realized they had screwed up by instigating the epidemic and needed a way out once they squeezed as much profit as they could. They could care less about Purdue or the general public now.

On the other hand, who should the government target next with all this extra funding? What about the doctors that essentially accepted bribes to make people become addicts? How about the pharmacies and pharmacists that dispensed all these opioids and could have chose not to. If they are found guilty, what should their punishment be? Ultimately, I think this raises more questions than answers.

Are you sure about that? Every article I read today about this says that Purdue executives and the Sackler family are not exempted from future criminal prosecution by this settlement.
 
How is this not fascism?

idk but in other related news Walmart is suing the DOJ and DEA to try to clarify the pharmacists responsibility because they are believed to be facing a huge lawsuit too.

Eager to see what if anything comes of that...I can see it range from nothing to having large implications on learned intermediary doctrine which would more broadly effect pharmacist responsibility beyond controlled substances.
 
To solve the opioid epidemic you have to solve white despair. GL with that

Why do you think Trump got elected?
 
To solve the opioid epidemic you have to solve white despair. GL with that

Why do you think Trump got elected?
If Biden becomes president actually really Kamala becomes president, I guess Purdue gets pardoned.
 
Are you sure about that? Every article I read today about this says that Purdue executives and the Sackler family are not exempted from future criminal prosecution by this settlement.

They could be put in jail in the future, yes, but this was a good chance to do it now and get it over with and then they didn't. If they avoid jail time once, chances are, they will avoid it again unless new evidence comes to light.
 
I get that this is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, but what ever happened to personal responsibility? Unless patients are being strapped down, and injected with opioids against their will until they become addicted, they are responsible for their own actions and decisions. I always hated the trend of going after healthcare providers in this “opioid crisis”. I feel less bad about manufacturers, but still. All these lawsuits and criminal charges drive up healthcare costs, and don’t address the real problem. People just want a scapegoat.
 
This wouldn't be happening in the first place if there weren't pill mill docs writing these prescriptions, and pharmacies filling them.
 
I get that this is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, but what ever happened to personal responsibility? Unless patients are being strapped down, and injected with opioids against their will until they become addicted, they are responsible for their own actions and decisions. I always hated the trend of going after healthcare providers in this “opioid crisis”. I feel less bad about manufacturers, but still. All these lawsuits and criminal charges drive up healthcare costs, and don’t address the real problem. People just want a scapegoat.

The reason Purdue is in trouble, is that they purposely LIED to doctors and pharmacists. There internal documents show they knew Oxycontin lasted 8 hours, not 12 hours. But they marketed it to doctors as 12 hours. When patients complained that it was wearing off too soon, Purdue reps told doctors never to prescribe it q 8 hours, but to just keep increasing the dose.

Normally, I would agree with you about personal responsibility, but when Purdue is purposely lying about the pharmacokinetics to doctors and pharmacists, then use, they are guilty of fraud, and it was a fraud that led to opioid addiction.

edit to change doctors to documents
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How is it?


Ok, I was confusing my fascism and my communism. So this would actually be communism (government running a company), where as fascism would be Purdue running the government (which is what it previously would have been.)
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
I get that this is probably going to be an unpopular opinion, but what ever happened to personal responsibility? Unless patients are being strapped down, and injected with opioids against their will until they become addicted, they are responsible for their own actions and decisions. I always hated the trend of going after healthcare providers in this “opioid crisis”. I feel less bad about manufacturers, but still. All these lawsuits and criminal charges drive up healthcare costs, and don’t address the real problem. People just want a scapegoat.

I would generally agree with you on arguements about people being responsible for their own actions and decisions. However, when it comes to healthcare and information/guidance about that I think it becomes a blurry line. If an individual inquired about side effects or adverse consequences of a medication or if that individual should have been told of these proactively by a medical professional through a legal requirement of those professionals and they received incomplete, incorrect, or an otherwise diminished version of the reality, it’s hard to place the entirety of blame on the individual. Some may have tried to seek information from a source that they (and the public and licensing bodies) trust but that information may not have been complete, accurate, or devoid of misrepresentation.

Additionally, it is also hard to expect people in need of healthcare to be fully rationale decision makers in the moments they are in immediate need of care. For instance if a patient had multiple gun shot wounds and no insurance, I don’t think it’s that reasonable for the patient to be expected to shop around for the cheapest ambulance and the cheapest ER because they know they will have to pay a super high bill after they are discharged. They just need to be treated ASAP.
 
Top