I think that if Purdue or anyone else made fraudulent claims in their marketing or sales, then they ought to be held to account (and there are many pending lawsuits trying to discover that as we speak). However, I also think that the extent to which drug companies are responsible for this epidemic is vastly overblown. The vast majority of pain pill recipients don't get addicted, just like the vast majority of people who try any drug for any reason don't get addicted. There's a reason buttfuck towns in areas no one would ever choose to go willingly are full of addicts, while suburbs aren't. The opioid crisis is far more of a social/socioeconomic problem than it is a drug problem per se. They could sue all $14 billion out of the Saklers, but WV would still suck.
In 2007 they paid $600 Million for 'mislabeling' and that number has been alleged to be one week of profits from Oxycontin sales. I would argue that they have not been held to account. I understand the point you are making here. Places with high degrees of addiction would suck without whatever it is that the junkies are on, or they would find some other chemical crutch. I'm not going to argue that. I WILL argue the first point No, they couldn't. That's a large part of the point of this article, the people who profited are immune from prosecution. They will never see a day in court, their wealth will never be touched. There will be some way to pay it out of corporate funds or through some other shell game that ensures that the family never sees a loss.I think that if Purdue or anyone else made fraudulent claims in their marketing or sales, then they ought to be held to account
They could sue all $14 billion out of the Saklers, but WV would still suck.
They could sue all $14 billion out of the Saklers,