5 ms·

At the end of the day, if a doctor is prescribing medication against clinical guidelines, surely the doctor is at fault? If a pharma warehouse is burgled then i

At the end of the day, if a doctor is prescribing medication against clinical guidelines, surely the doctor is at fault? If a pharma warehouse is burgled then it's on the burglars. Am I missing something regarding this case? Did they mislead doctors? Edit: Downvotes to -4 with no engagement for asking a question. This place has gone downhill rapidly

smitty1110 7y ago
First, they I mislead doctors. They insisted very enthusiastically that’d OxyContin relieved pain for 8 hours, when 4-6 was much more common for most patients. Secondly, I don’t remember the laws and requirements exactly, but there are reporting requirements for abnormal behaviors that indicate drug abuse. One of the long form articles over the past few years saw a memo where Perdue deliberately decided not to report large orders in certain areas. Of course, I haven’t had coffee yet, so caveat lector.
mehrdadn 7y ago
> At the end of the day, if a doctor is prescribing medication against clinical guidelines, surely the doctor is at fault? Even if you assume that's the case, there's no reason a doctor being at fault would mean nobody else can be at fault.
- easytiger 7y ago
  Well there would have to be some wrongdoing to be proven.
  - JumpCrisscross 7y ago
    > there would have to be some wrongdoing to be proven Are you claiming the extensive evidence brought in numerous cases across the country against Purdue and the Sackler family, accepted in many cases by juries and judges, has not done that?
    - easytiger 7y ago
      I was asking what it was. I'm in the UK and am not familiar with this issue despite the same medication being available here
      - mehrdadn 7y ago
        If you're genuinely interested, there's so much reading on this. I'll quote one snippet here for you. Just to give you an idea. (This is not an invitation to reply to it and debate the issue. Just trying provide a pointer for reading more on the topic since you expressed interest.) > The drugmaker admitted in 2007, when confronted with evidence gathered by prosecutors, that it trained sales representative to tell doctors that OxyContin was less addictive and prone to abuse than competing opioids, claims beyond the one approved by the F.D.A. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/health/purdue-opioids-oxycontin.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/health/purdue-opioids-oxy...
- LateRuin 7y ago
  If you are not for publicly executing several thousand doctors and pharma executives, you are equally guilty in the opioid crisis.
PopeDotNinja 7y ago
That's saying killer whale don't kill seals, only killer whale teeth do.
DanBC 7y ago
Purdue mislead doctors, and the public, in several different ways. They said that their medication was unlikely to lead to addiction if used to treat pain. They said their medication was less likely to lead to addiction than other opioids. They knew some doctors were prescribing vast quantities of opioids - far more than even Purdue recommended as treatment for pain. They used a variety of marketing to doctors and to members of the public, and some of that was designed to evade regulation of marketing. They used stealth marketing methods such as employing physicians to speak at conferences without disclosure. They interfered with the creation of treatment guidance. They used front groups. They targeted vulnerable and wealthy populations. They concealed what they knew about the addictiveness of their product. They concealed what they knew about the efficacy of their product (people may tolerate an addictive medication if it increases function. Purdue knew their meds didn't increase function for many patients.) There's a huge list of absolutely scumbag behaviour from that company, and we need to recognise their part in driving death and misery to millions of Americans.
sigmaprimus 7y ago
You might be right, but it's not an either or situation. Some sales reps that told doctors Oxy was NOT or LESS addictive and knew that was untrue so they did lie. Ironically the exact same thing happened a century earlier with Bayer and Heroin, history does indeed repeat itself. The thieves that burgled drugs from pharma are also responsible obviously. As far as the fast down votes, chances are everyone knows someone who has been hurt from the opiod crisis. It is a very painful subject for people. Playing the devils advocate is going to get a swift response that just the way it is. My personal experience with the opiod crisis is typical, I had a friend who got hurt, started taking oxy, got hooked, his doctor cut him off, he spent a ton of money buying pills off the street, when the cost got too high he switched to heroin, when he decided to get help he went to a doctor for methadone, they did a blood test, because of the fentinyl he tested positive for abusing methadone and was refused. Three months later he was gone. I feel the entire system failed him, ofcourse he was not without blame, everyone played a part in his death, including me for giving him money.
rgovostes 7y ago
I linked to a 6,500-word article answering your question and you are surprised you got downvoted? Or feel free to look into why armies of lawyers on both sides negotiated a $10bn settlement. If "surely the doctor is at fault" held water, they wouldn't have come close to that number.

smitty1110 7y ago

First, they I mislead doctors. They insisted very enthusiastically that’d OxyContin relieved pain for 8 hours, when 4-6 was much more common for most patients. Secondly, I don’t remember the laws and requirements exactly, but there are reporting requirements for abnormal behaviors that indicate drug abuse. One of the long form articles over the past few years saw a memo where Perdue deliberately decided not to report large orders in certain areas. Of course, I haven’t had coffee yet, so caveat lector.

mehrdadn 7y ago

> At the end of the day, if a doctor is prescribing medication against clinical guidelines, surely the doctor is at fault? Even if you assume that's the case, there's no reason a doctor being at fault would mean nobody else can be at fault.

easytiger 7y ago
Well there would have to be some wrongdoing to be proven.
- JumpCrisscross 7y ago
  > there would have to be some wrongdoing to be proven Are you claiming the extensive evidence brought in numerous cases across the country against Purdue and the Sackler family, accepted in many cases by juries and judges, has not done that?
  - easytiger 7y ago
    I was asking what it was. I'm in the UK and am not familiar with this issue despite the same medication being available here
    - mehrdadn 7y ago
      If you're genuinely interested, there's so much reading on this. I'll quote one snippet here for you. Just to give you an idea. (This is not an invitation to reply to it and debate the issue. Just trying provide a pointer for reading more on the topic since you expressed interest.) > The drugmaker admitted in 2007, when confronted with evidence gathered by prosecutors, that it trained sales representative to tell doctors that OxyContin was less addictive and prone to abuse than competing opioids, claims beyond the one approved by the F.D.A. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/health/purdue-opioids-oxycontin.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/health/purdue-opioids-oxy...
LateRuin 7y ago
If you are not for publicly executing several thousand doctors and pharma executives, you are equally guilty in the opioid crisis.

PopeDotNinja 7y ago

That's saying killer whale don't kill seals, only killer whale teeth do.

DanBC 7y ago

Purdue mislead doctors, and the public, in several different ways. They said that their medication was unlikely to lead to addiction if used to treat pain. They said their medication was less likely to lead to addiction than other opioids. They knew some doctors were prescribing vast quantities of opioids - far more than even Purdue recommended as treatment for pain. They used a variety of marketing to doctors and to members of the public, and some of that was designed to evade regulation of marketing. They used stealth marketing methods such as employing physicians to speak at conferences without disclosure. They interfered with the creation of treatment guidance. They used front groups. They targeted vulnerable and wealthy populations. They concealed what they knew about the addictiveness of their product. They concealed what they knew about the efficacy of their product (people may tolerate an addictive medication if it increases function. Purdue knew their meds didn't increase function for many patients.) There's a huge list of absolutely scumbag behaviour from that company, and we need to recognise their part in driving death and misery to millions of Americans.

sigmaprimus 7y ago

You might be right, but it's not an either or situation. Some sales reps that told doctors Oxy was NOT or LESS addictive and knew that was untrue so they did lie. Ironically the exact same thing happened a century earlier with Bayer and Heroin, history does indeed repeat itself. The thieves that burgled drugs from pharma are also responsible obviously. As far as the fast down votes, chances are everyone knows someone who has been hurt from the opiod crisis. It is a very painful subject for people. Playing the devils advocate is going to get a swift response that just the way it is. My personal experience with the opiod crisis is typical, I had a friend who got hurt, started taking oxy, got hooked, his doctor cut him off, he spent a ton of money buying pills off the street, when the cost got too high he switched to heroin, when he decided to get help he went to a doctor for methadone, they did a blood test, because of the fentinyl he tested positive for abusing methadone and was refused. Three months later he was gone. I feel the entire system failed him, ofcourse he was not without blame, everyone played a part in his death, including me for giving him money.

rgovostes 7y ago

I linked to a 6,500-word article answering your question and you are surprised you got downvoted? Or feel free to look into why armies of lawyers on both sides negotiated a $10bn settlement. If "surely the doctor is at fault" held water, they wouldn't have come close to that number.