>Has anyone tried to demonstrate that OxyContin addiction, for example, might not have been heroin addiction if OxyContin wasn't available? The facts on the gr

>Has anyone tried to demonstrate that OxyContin addiction, for example, might not have been heroin addiction if OxyContin wasn't available? The facts on the ground are that a pharmaceutical company actively encouraged and massively profited off the sales of a product they fully knew to be addictive, leading to a severe public health crisis. If we want to argue that these people would have just turned to illegal substances instead, then the logical conclusion is that the company should be prosecuted like any other common purveyor of controlled drugs would be. That wouldn't end well for Purdue.