Answer Addiction

Tag: deceptive marketing

  • Sacklers Benefit From Ski Resort Sales In Areas Hit Hard By Opioids

    Sacklers Benefit From Ski Resort Sales In Areas Hit Hard By Opioids

    Some believe the Sacklers should donate the profits to fund addiction treatment.

    The Sackler family, including those who own Purdue Pharma, have recently earned as much as $116 million from the sale of ski resorts that they owned in areas of New Hampshire, Vermont and Ohio that have been heavily impacted by the opioid epidemic. 

    The Sackler family owned 54% of Peak Resorts Inc., according to Bloomberg. The company was purchased by Vail Resorts Inc. last week, leaving members of the Sackler family with a massive check and some members of local communities frustrated.

    New Hampshire Associate Attorney General James Boffetti explained why to The Washington Post: “It is clear that the Sacklers withdrew a huge amount of money from Purdue Pharma. To the extent that was used for these investments, including in the ski resorts, that is money that they would have only because of this deceptive marketing scheme that they have been running at Purdue.”

    Critics Say Sacklers Should Donate The Profits

    Amanda Bevard, chairwoman of the board of commissioners in Carroll County, New Hampshire, where one of the ski resorts is located, wants to see the Sacklers give up the money from the sales. 

    “The 10 counties in the state of New Hampshire spent over $60 million between 2015 and 2019 on the opioid problem,” she said. “It would be really nice if they would donate their profits back to the state of New Hampshire’s counties.”

    New Hampshire, which is home to three of the resorts sold, has the forth-highest overdose rate in the nation. In the area around one of the resorts, there were enough opioid prescriptions filled between 2006 and 2012 to give 201 pills per year to everyone living in a five-mile radius, the Post noted. Even when you account for out-of-town travelers to the ski area, that’s vastly higher than the national average of 36 pills yearly per person. 

    One Local Denies The Outcry Against The Ski Resort Sales

    Still, some New Hampshire locals said that the sales were needed, especially in rural areas of the state that could use an economic boost. Gene Chandler, former New Hampshire House Speaker, represents an area that is home to one of the resorts. 

    “There hasn’t been any outcry that we’ve been aware of,” he said. “Most people seem to be just interested in what’s best for the ski areas. If anything is going to offset opioid abuse and get control of it, it’s a good economy.”

    One of the ski resorts included in the sale is in Ohio, near where the opioid lawsuits are being litigated. Greg McNeil used to take his son Sam skiing at that resort, until Sam died of an overdose in 2015. Now, he says that seeing the Sacklers benefit from the sale of the resort is painful. 

    “Sam grew up skiing on that mountain, so we had many, many fun days,” McNeil said. “There’s a lot that the Sackler family can do so other families don’t have the same experience—the same thing we had with a loved one.”

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • What Does 2019 Hold For Opioid Lawsuits?

    What Does 2019 Hold For Opioid Lawsuits?

    Many are looking at the settlements with Big Tobacco to see how the opioid settlements—if there are any—might take shape.

    During 2018, as opioid overdose rates continued to soar, municipalities from around the country vowed to hold drug manufacturers and distributors accountable. This year, 2019, will show how many of the lawsuits around the opioid epidemic will pan out. 

    The plaintiffs — mostly local and county governments from around the country — hope that settlements from the lawsuits will help them recoup some of the costs of treating people addicted to opioids and maybe even help finance better treatment options going forward.

    “We are still in the throes of a public health crisis in Summit County,” Greta Johnson, a county official in Akron, Ohio, told NPR. In order to respond to that crisis, she said, the county needs funds from the major companies that caused or contributed to the epidemic. “We’re confident the court will see it that way as well.”

    Johnson’s argument, echoed in dozens of lawsuits, may sit well with Federal Judge Dan Polster, who is presiding over the largest group of lawsuits out of his Cleveland courtroom. Polster has called the opioid epidemic a “man-made plague,” and called for comprehensive solutions to the issues of addiction and recovery. 

    While defendants will likely try to have certain allegations dismissed on legal technicalities — like the statutes of limitations being up — Richard Ausness, a law professor at the University of Kentucky, told NPR that effort is unlikely to succeed entirely.

    “The judge has made it clear that he wants a settlement ultimately from this, along the lines of the tobacco settlement,” Ausness said. “If that is indeed the way that he feels, he is probably not going to let the defendants off the hook.”

    As the court cases proceed, the public could learn even more about practices that led to millions of Americans becoming hooked on opioids. Attorney Joe Rice, who represents some governments suing Big Pharma, said that he would like to see the information about misleading advertising and other unscrupulous practices become common knowledge. 

    “Our next battle is to get the documents that are being produced made available to the public instead of everything being filed under confidentiality agreements so we can get the facts out,” he said. 

    Many people are looking at the settlements with big tobacco to see how the opioid settlements — if there are any — might take shape. Tobacco companies have paid more than $100 billion in damages to Americans, some of which have been used to fund anti-smoking public health campaigns. A similar settlement with manufacturers and distributors could impact how future generations are educated about drug use.  

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • New York Sues Purdue Pharma Over Opioid Marketing

    New York Sues Purdue Pharma Over Opioid Marketing

    New York plans to work with other states that are investigating opioid manufacturers and distributors in the US.

    This week, New York became the 27th state to sue Purdue Pharma, a producer of OxyContin, for alleged fraud and deception in its marketing of opioids.

    The Wall Street Journal reported that Purdue is the only defendant listed in the lawsuit, driven by the administration under Governor Andrew Cuomo and New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood.

    The complaint was filed in Suffolk County Supreme Court and charged that a community flooded with opioids has been devastated while Purdue has increased profits and prescriptions.

    The suit charges that as of 2016, over 75% of New York’s opioid overdose deaths were caused by painkillers which include Purdue’s product, OxyContin.

    Governor Cuomo was quoted in Insurance Journal as saying, “The opioid epidemic was manufactured by unscrupulous distributors who developed a $400 billion industry pumping human misery into our communities. This lawsuit sends a clear message (to those) who mislead the public to increase their profit margins that we will hold you accountable.”

    Purdue released a response which called New York’s allegations false, while citing that the company also shares the state’s concerns about the opioid crisis.  

    Purdue noted that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “continues to approve” of scientific and medical information it provides to physicians.

    In the suit, New York is seeking civil fines to be levied against Purdue. The state asks to recoup profits the drug company has made and pay fines for what they allege in the Insurance Journal is “criminal nuisance.”

    In 2007, Purdue and three executives pleaded guilty to misbranding OxyContin. The company was charged with $634.5 million after a U.S. Department of Justice investigation.

    The New York lawsuit against Purdue is part of a trend; a number of U.S. states are suing opioid makers and distributors over opioid marketing.

    New York joined 26 other states, and Puerto Rico, in suing Purdue over their allegedly deceptive opioid marketing practices and the resulting health crisis.

    Cuomo released a statement published in the Wall Street Journal that the country is fed up with the practice of pharmaceutical companies purposefully creating addiction for the purpose of profit.

    Barbara Underwood in the Wall Street Journal said that the complaint is only New York’s first step toward holding pharmaceutical companies responsible. “Our work won’t stop with this lawsuit,” she said.

    New York plans to work with other states to investigate United States opioid manufacturers and distributors.

    View the original article at thefix.com

  • Purdue Pharma Knew About Oxy Misuse Early On, Report Finds

    Purdue Pharma Knew About Oxy Misuse Early On, Report Finds

    The report also alleges that in 1999 company officials learned of a call to a pharmacy describing “OxyContin as the hottest thing on the street—forget Vicodin.”

    Purdue Pharma reportedly knew that the opioid pill OxyContin was being snorted and sold on the street as early as 1999, just three years after the medication’s release.

    However, the company reportedly kept quiet about this knowledge and continued marketing the drug as a safer pain-relief pill.

    The New York Times obtained a confidential Justice Department report that was compiled in the early 2000s, leading up to Purdue’s settlement with the federal government in 2007.

    Purdue executives have testified in Congress that they did now know that the product was being abused until the United States attorney in Maine issued a warning in 2000. 

    “Everyone was taken by surprise by what happened,” Purdue’s top medical officer, Dr. Paul D. Goldenheim, testified in 2001. “We launched OxyContin in 1996, and for the first four years on the market, we did not hear of any particular problem.” 

    However, the Justice Department report shows that this is not true.  

    “We have in fact picked up references to abuse of our opioid products on the internet,” Purdue Pharma’s general counsel, Howard R. Udell, wrote in early 1999 to another company official.

    The report also alleges that in 1999 company officials learned of a call to a pharmacy describing “OxyContin as the hottest thing on the street—forget Vicodin.”

    Federal prosecutors also found the words “street value,” “crush,” or “snort” in 117 internal notes that recorded meetings between Purdue representatives and doctors before 2000.

    The report’s findings were so alarming that prosecutors recommended that felony charges be brought against three of Purdue’s executives. However, Justice Department officials under George W. Bush did not support that and ended up brokering a settlement in 2007 that avoided felony criminal charges and allowed Purdue to continue selling OxyContin. 

    Now, some people see this as a missed opportunity. 

    “It would have been a turning point,” said Terrance Woodworth, a former Drug Enforcement Administration official who investigated Purdue Pharma in the early 2000s. “It would have sent a message to the entire drug industry.”

    However, another former DEA official told The New York Times that U.S. Attorney John Brownlee ultimately felt that accepting a deal would be best because Purdue had so many resources available to aid in its defense, including the expertise of Rudy Giuliani, who helped craft the deal for Purdue. 

    “He told me he was outgunned,” Joseph Rannazzisi said. 

    Brownlee has said that he felt the deal reached in 2007 was appropriate, but that he thought it would trigger tighter oversight of Purdue, something that did not happen. 

    “I didn’t feel as a lawyer I could be in a position to bar anyone from getting OxyContin. Faced with that decision, I was just simply not prepared to take it off the market. I didn’t feel like that was my role,” he said. “My role was to address prior criminal conduct. Hold them accountable. Fine them. Make sure the public knew what they did.”

    View the original article at thefix.com