I understand the contents of the link; that judgement prompts my question rather than answering it. The DOJ found that old Purdue's problem was illgal marketin

I understand the contents of the link; that judgement prompts my question rather than answering it. The DOJ found that old Purdue's problem was illgal marketing, kickbacks, etc. I understand that as a legalistic thing. But as far as human judgement goes: I thought the problem here was opioid addiction, which is continuing to rise in the "new Purdue" regime. We all think old Purdue should not have been doing the illegal stuff. But was the illegal stuff the real problem here? It seems like the "new Purdue" reforms are not affecting the growth of the opioid epidemic.