SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
Sacklers threaten to scrap opioid deal if they aren't shielded from lawsuits
Lawyers for OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma filed a new complaint late Wednesday threatening that the company's mega-rich owners, the Sackler family, could pull out of a proposed multi-billion-dollar opioid settlement deal if a bankruptcy judge doesn't shield the family from outstanding state lawsuits.
Purdue's lawyers argue that if the lawsuits continue, the Sacklers will have to waste "hundreds of millions of dollars" on legal costs that could otherwise go to claimants in the settlement. The family's lawyers added that in that event, the family "may be unwilling—or unable—to make the billions of dollars of contributions" to the proposed settlement.
State attorneys general, however, argue that the tactic is yet another move designed to shield the Sacklers and their ill-gotten wealth.
"This filing isn't a surprise. It's yet another effort by Purdue to avoid accountability and shield the Sackler family fortune, and we will be opposing it," Maura Healey, the attorney general of Massachusetts, told the New York Times.
Related:
- Makers of OxiCotin, Purdue Pharma, Files Reorganization Chapter 11 "Bankrupty"
- Opioid Talks Fail, Purdue Bankruptcy Filing Expected
(Score: 4, Informative) by Entropy on Sunday September 22 2019, @12:07AM (26 children)
Some people suffer from quite severe amounts of pain. Real painkillers(read: opiates) are the difference between being functional, and being bedridden. It's easy to say pain management, but that costs thousands of dollars and many people can't afford that kind of stuff. It's easy to say insurance, but many people do not qualify for insurance especially since Obamacare made prices about 10x worse.(unless you have a ton of children)
In short: While everyone is saying Opiates are the worst thing ever, for many they are a lifeline. If people abuse them, then they do: Some people like doing drugs, and we're never going to stop that.
(Score: 2) by Username on Sunday September 22 2019, @01:05AM (24 children)
I never really understood the logic behind blaming a personal choice on an inanimate object. Taking away an object doesn't solve the person's dysfunction. It just makes normal peoples' lives more difficult by removing a useful tool. Be it opiates, nasal decongestants, antibiotics, guns, refrigerants, spraypaints, large cups, straws, etc
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Pav on Sunday September 22 2019, @02:09AM (4 children)
Again, for the logic impaired : if you make a choice on pain management based on studies big pharma KNEW were flawed - is that on you? Surely not.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @02:40AM (3 children)
So you're saying ...
... the FDA were asleep at the switch, but because they're "public servants" (whatever the hell that means) they're off the hook?
Great. First place to cut the federal budget starts with those wastes of space.
Oh, wait, it's only private individuals that get fucked by piercing the corporate veil when governments get grabby with cash. Because lord knows they're not actually willing to consider a harm reduction approach. That would give way too many rights back to the muddy little peons who need to step back in line.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @02:53AM
Yes, let's throw the baby out with the bath water.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Sunday September 22 2019, @04:29AM (1 child)
What fault of it is the FDA, if all the mandatory studies handed to them contained flawed or incomplete data?
Or do you somehow think that they told the FDA the truth while lying to all the Doctors?
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday September 22 2019, @12:14PM
It's their job to make sure those mandatory studies didn't contain flawed or incomplete data. After all, who is mandating those studies in the first place?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 22 2019, @04:40AM (18 children)
The average patient to whom pain medicine is prescribed has made no "personal choice". Imagine that you collapse from a medical condition, or you are in an auto accident, or you are mugged, or carjacked and shot. You have no "choices", really. An ambulance arrives, they find all your missing bits, throw you in a basket, and begin life saving procedures, which includes morphine, and they carry your broken ass to the hospital.
Upon arrival at the hospital, you are further doped, while doctors figure out how to put all the broken bits back together again. In post-op and/or ICU, you are prescribed a steady dose of stuff to keep you in a coma, or at least asleep most of the time, while all the broken bits merge back together into a functioning body. When you are permitted to remain conscious, doctors and nurses advise you that you are going to hurt, and all you need do is tell them, so they can make the pain go away. Remember - that advice comes from authority, not some punk ass pusher on the street.
Some of us react differently than others. A few of us are leery of drugs, because we've read a lot, or we've lost friends to drugs, or maybe we just don't like the way we feel on drugs. But, most people? Most people TRUST those wonderful doctors and nurses. They take that advice, and without any real signs of it happening, they are HOOKED.
Scroll back a page or so, and read those accounts of people who were hooked in similar circumstances, then beat their addictions. Marijuana makes a nice substitute, if you need it. Alcohol can be a crutch, but alcohol has it's own hazards. Be humbled at those tales of former addicts. Broken backs? I merely bruised a tail bone decades ago, and it freaking HURT!! I was able to tough that out, but at that point in my life, it was the worst pain I had ever experienced. A broken back must hurt 100 times worse, and you just don't ignore it. Do you think that you could refuse pain medication?
There have always been druggies who have sought out feel-goods. You should not confuse those with the victims of the Sackler's drug pushing campaigns. Few, if any, of those victims had any choice.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @05:16AM (9 children)
You radicals liberals always want to absolve ppl from personal responsibility.
(Score: 4, Touché) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 22 2019, @05:34AM (8 children)
Yeah, I'm the most radical liberal on this site. Just ask Azuma Hazuki, Aristarchus, and the other left-minded members. Grow up, Sonny boy.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday September 22 2019, @04:59PM (7 children)
1) AC was being deeply sarcastic, and 2) Hell, even *you* manage to get something right now and then. I'll be upmodding that post of yours because it damn well deserves it. Why can't you be like this all the time?
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 22 2019, @05:42PM (6 children)
In a word: boring.
In a quote:
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.
F. Scott Fitzgerald
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday September 22 2019, @06:37PM (5 children)
To hold the ideas, not to attempt to believe them. To hold and *believe* two opposed ideas at the same time is less F. Scott Fitzgerald and more George Orwell...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 22 2019, @06:54PM (4 children)
That seems an indication that you didn't understand either Fitzgerald, or Orwell as well as you might have.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday September 22 2019, @10:22PM (3 children)
The essence of Doublethink is holding two contradictory ideas and believing them both at the same time. That's directly from 1984. I'd say you're the one who doesn't know the source material. Come on, you were doing so well before and now you're back to this...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 23 2019, @04:53AM (2 children)
In 1984 Tth problem was, and the plot for the story was, the narrator DID NOT believe. He lost his faith, lost his way, and thus rebelled against the system. Aminotrite?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday September 24 2019, @02:08AM (1 child)
If that's what you took from the story, and if you even dare to set yourself up as some sort of modern-day parallel to Winston..."reading comprehension issues" doesn't even *begin* to delve into what's wrong with that. Holy Boston barbecued baked beans on black bread.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday September 24 2019, @02:17PM
WTF? Compare myself to Winston? FFS, no. Thanks for reminding me of his name. Winston is the office puke type. I've had to hold a desk down a couple times in my life, but I'm most definitely NOT an office puke. Put into Winston's place, I'd be busy assembling a nice firebomb.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by sjames on Sunday September 22 2019, @05:22AM (2 children)
The real crime committed by the Sacklers and Purdue is the fraudulent studies that convinced doctors that addiction was unlikely. As a result, instead of getting appropriate treatment to taper off, patients got cut off cold turkey and ended up turning to street drugs.
Addiction is a significant risk in any opioid, but it is medically manageable and may be a risk worth taking, but it is essential to know how large the risk is in order to make that decision and manage the risk (and possibly the addiction) appropriately.
Good pain management including opioids will improve healing and in some cases may make the difference between recovery or succumbing. Pain induces stress which reduces the ability to heal and weakens the immune system.
The "just tough it out crowd" either haven't experienced anything like truly severe pain (they felt a 3/10 but thought it was a 10) or they haven't had to endure it long.
I'd like to see them just tough it out when the pain level gets high enough to black them out. Truly severe pain blots out consciousness sooner or later.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 22 2019, @12:48PM (1 child)
There's other options too. They might simply be more badass than you, a true ITG. Or not feel pain as strongly. A 10 to you might be a 7 or 8 to them.
I think this is a very good point.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Monday September 23 2019, @08:39AM
No amount of badass is going to prevent the blackout. It will happen even if you can "mind over matter" yourself into not being fully (or at all) conscious of the pain. A good dose of adrenaline due to a true fight or flight situation may delay it, but eventually the adrenaline will stop, blood pressure drops, shock sets in, and down you go.
If you are physiologically less sensitive to pain, then you are EXPERIENCING LESS pain. That is, the same that would on average cause 10/10 pain will make you experience 7/10. If you get to 10/10, down you go.
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Username on Sunday September 22 2019, @08:15AM (3 children)
A prescription is a choice. You can refuse ambulance service, you can refuse any service you want. The only way your anecdote makes sense is if you're unconscious and the drug is administered without your consent.
This just sounds like, "oh, that kid had no choice but to shoot up that elementary school, the NRA made him do it."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 22 2019, @09:15AM (2 children)
I suppose there is truth in what you say. You CAN refuse medical treatment. From experience, when you are lying on the floor, or the ground, helpless, your judgement changes. With or without pain, the helplessness is more than enough to "force" you to accept the help being offered. Add some medium pain, and you are much more willing to accept a medical professional's help, and to trust his judgement. Turn that into severe pain, then all you can think about is the pain. You'll accept almost any offer to relieve that pain.
I believe that you can accept and understand that premise. Let us keep in mind that people are *almost* never addicted when morphine or whatever is prescribed for a short term emergency situation. There is little reason to believe that you are going to be addicted within the span of 12 to 48 hours, under the care of a doctor or hospital staff. The danger comes from longer term care.
Given that you have already placed your trust in your doctor. Given that most injuries and ailments do hurt. Now, you have to consider the patient's history. Does the patient have experience with pain? Does the patient have any coping ability with pain? What is the patient's attitude toward drugs, in general? There's a lot of stuff to consider here - stuff that the doctor should be considering. Among all the other considerations, is, how manipulable is the patient, when healthy and pain free? Now, weakened, and in pain, he is likely to be far more manipulable. When that Voice of Authority suggests pain meds, the patient is likely to go along with Authority.
Some of us who have "problems with authority" find it easier to reject those suggestions of longer term pain medications. Others - not so much.
Really, you have to put yourself in that position, to the best of your ability, before you start judging these victims. Have you never been helpless? If not, I really don't think that you can understand the problem.
As for school shooters - there is not, and cannot be, any defense of them, or their actions. Burn 'em, using your preferred burning methods. I can't care about them or their "problems".
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 23 2019, @08:12AM (1 child)
Almost a year ago, I went to the local ER for a heart attack.
On the 1-10 scale of pain tolerance, I am a ZERO. On the 1-10 scale of pain threshold, I'm a 0.5 on a good day.
When the attending physician wanted to get a helicopter dispatched to take me to a regional hospital, I objected (because: cost).
Weather prevented the (prohibitively expensive) flight. My spouse insisted I be transported via ambulance, against my strenuous objections. By that time, I had received enough morphine for the medics to disregard my protestations. and follow my spouse's directions. I was in intolerable (to me) pain.
While I'm glad I survived, I would MUCH rather they had kept up with the morphine, put me in a room, and let me die with my credit score unaffected.
BTW: there is a collection agency in pursuit of me for the ambulance ride, for which I can't pay.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday September 23 2019, @07:51PM
I'm sorry that you've had such issues, and hope that your life gets better. I'm a little confused by your saying that you wish you had died and yet you're glad you survived. I hope you keep up the hope and mindset that you're glad you survived. Heart pain (and, if you experienced it, that feeling of dread that you know your body is shutting down on you) is something you can't explain to someone who hasn't had it. Because morphine can cloud judgment is why one relies on someone else's (a spouse's) judgment. And it can be hard to know that the morphine is helping when it is. But it's also important to get off the morphine when you doctor advises you to.
That said, I replied because there was one significant piece of advice you didn't ask for and yet I feel compelled to give it: Talk to the collection agency and don't just push them off. If you haven't had a collection bill for the hospital yet, talk to them before they send your hospital bill to a collection agency. The problems won't go away because you ignore them, and if you talk to them (both hospital and agency) you might be able to work out an arrangement that is acceptable. You may require a very long term arrangement (most places an ambulance ride can be between $1,500-$3,000) just to hospital, and transports more, but it's better to give $20 or $50 a month seemingly forever than have a lawsuit take a bigger chunk. Sometimes you can negotiate the bill downward as well so that you've rehabilitated the debt in 3-5 years. And you won't hurt yourself any more for having talked to them than what can be done if you ignore it. FWIW, IANAL, YMMV, and may it all work out for you.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Informative) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Monday September 23 2019, @07:38PM
You make some good points, although there are a few inconsistencies, like: You don't give someone who is unconscious morphine. You don't give someone drugs without telling them what drugs you're giving them (if they are conscious). If a patient *absolutely insists* they don't want a drug and has decision making capacities, giving it to them anyway is neither legal nor ethical - even if such a drug will save the persons life and they will surely die otherwise. If you're going to be placed into a medically induced coma (not so often these days but it can happen), it's much more likely that Propofol would be the drug of choice which is not physically addictive per se - I'm not saying it can't be abused or that a person develops psychological dependence on it (RIP Michael Jackson). Ketamine and the benzos are physically addictive, but they aren't opioids.
I'm not denying your basic point - that people get exposed to addictive drugs via treatment, that they continue using after the medical professional has called a stop to it (hopefully), or that the Sackler's didn't attempt to deliberately induce usage at higher doses without good medical causes / concealing facts and advice. Just that the process of addiction is a little more complex than what came across from your post, and physicians often face difficult choices about whether a patient should have a given drug or not. (And sometimes they choose 'not' and the patient must live with some degree of pain.) Then again, to do the subject justice would probably require a book to be written (as I am sure they will be).
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 22 2019, @02:35PM
Could we please stop making up lies about Obamacare? It did not make prices 10x worse. If your rates went up that much, you didn't have real health insurance in the first place. You were nominally insured and probably wouldn't have gotten benefits if you got sick in any meaningful way. The insurance rates had been going up more slowly after Obamacare, that is until the GOP systematically went about dismantling as much of it as possible.
The cost savings that were supposed to come from it were always going to take years to materialize as the savings from preventative care and full inclusion phased in.