6 ms·
> The industry of addiction treatment is haphazardly regulated, poorly understood and expanding at a rapid clip, bringing in $35 billion a year. Why not focus
by quantumofmalice 9y ago
> The industry of addiction treatment is haphazardly regulated, poorly understood and expanding at a rapid clip, bringing in $35 billion a year.
Why not focus on the root company and family actually getting rich off selling the damned opioids (Purdue Pharma and the Sacklers, respectively)?
I don't understand how this company and family haven't been sued into the ground yet.
- minikites 9y agoFew people actually have the resources to pursue legal remedies and given the demographics of those affected by opioid addiction, I'm completely unsurprised.
- danmaz74 9y agoIsn't this a perfect situation to use class action?
- macintux 9y agoI'm not sure how you'd identify participants. Medical privacy rules would prevent you from taking the typical "this consumer product causes warts so we'll find everyone on record of having bought one" approach.
- moduspol 9y agoHave you or a loved one been diagnosed with mesothelioma? Received a vaginal mesh implant? Taken the drug Risperdal? They've been able to do it before.
- macintux 9y agoI guess as someone who doesn't own a TV I've not been exposed to much of that, but I do wonder whether the success rate of such an initiative would be lower among opioid addicts. "Please step forward, admit to the world you're addicted, and in 10-15 years you might get a coupon for free drugs." Also, what are we really looking for? Do addicts really know whether they were overprescribed? Is being addicted sufficient cause for a lawsuit? Anyway, I'm not saying it's unsolvable, but I can imagine some tougher hurdles than the class action suits I've been privy to.
- malchow 9y agoThe family are all Democrats. That isn't the sole reason, but if you compare the "shadowy financier" tone of many stories about right-of-center families to the stories about opioids, you'll see that the "shadowiness" component of the reporting suddenly disappears.
- brohoolio 9y agoIt's not all democrats. Rep. Tom Marino, the main force behind the bill limited the DEA's ability to fight against these companies is a republican. Also Trumps nominee to become the next drug czar. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/dea-drug-industry-congress/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/investigations/...
- QAPereo 9y agoPlease explain this... https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-tha...
- quantumofmalice 9y agoWhat bothers me is that this can be interpreted as a "New York thing", to quote Lorne Michaels, and I don't like going down that road.
- happyrock 9y agoWhat do you mean? EDIT: I googled it, I see where you're going with that...
- fzeroracer 9y agoThis seems objectively false after even a brief cursory search and I'm curious as to why you think it has anything to do with this topic.
- dahdum 9y agoIt's false, but fair to say the family is involved in both political parties. They seem to lean more towards the Democrat side, but that's to be expected given Obama's two terms. The reason it matters is that political clout and general goodwill helps shield them from legislative action and judicial inquiry.
- creaghpatr 9y agoMuch has been written on the Sackler family this year, including the article below, but rest assured they are embedded deep in politics and popular culture behind the scenes. Not so easy to simply sue them out of business. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-tha...