# OxyContin maker filed bankruptcy



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

The discovery of the wire transfers comes as amid growing allegations by New York and other states that the Sackler family is moving billions of dollars offshore to protect their wealth.

The Stamford, Connecticut-based company has been accused by nearly every U.S. state of downplaying how dangerously addictive its blockbuster pain killer is while exaggerating its benefits. The Sackler family, which owns Purdue Pharma, has been blamed for helping fuel an opioid epidemic that’s claims an average of 130 lives a day. They’ve also been ostracized from the philanthropy circles they once traveled as museums across the world reject their donations. Prosecutors say the company’s marketing practices encouraged doctors to push higher doses of the narcotic and contributed to a public health crisis that has caused thousands of overdoses in the U.S. each year.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/16/oxycontin-maker-purdue-pharma-files-for-bankruptcy-protection.html


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I think all of that information is correct and more will come out. 

A bankruptcy won't put a ding in their overall wealth, billions are already hidden or set up in such a way that creditors or states can't touch it. Their social standing will take a hit, but when the initial crisis winds down their money will buy acceptance again. In my opinion.


----------



## Seth (Dec 3, 2012)

Irish Pixie said:


> I think all of that information is correct and more will come out.
> 
> A bankruptcy won't put a ding in their overall wealth, billions are already hidden or set up in such a way that creditors or states can't touch it. Their social standing will take a hit, but when the initial crisis winds down their money will buy acceptance again. In my opinion.



I imagine that you are correct.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

We have known that opioids are addictive for hundreds of years. This is nothing more than corrupt governments trying to steal money from rich citizens.


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Farmerga said:


> We have known that opioids are addictive for hundreds of years. This is nothing more than corrupt governments trying to steal money from rich citizens.


Are you rich?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> Are you rich?


No, what difference does that make?


----------



## SLADE (Feb 20, 2004)

Many users of these drugs were lied to and became addicted. They have skin in the game.
What skin do you have in taxing or not taxing the rich?


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

If you didn't see that coming...

It's the 'Capitalism' way, privatize profits, move profits off shore, then declare bankruptcy and dust your hands off and walk away...

Then socialize the cleanup of the mess they make, dumping it on the taxpayer stuck with the medial, mental and economic fallout from the opioid epidemic,
Same with nuclear, chemical, biological, toxic metals and every other 'Capitalism' big business.

They will vacation in Europe sitting on billions for a couple years while lawyers & politicians sweep it under the rug after the news cycle gets bored with it, and it will all land in the taxpayer's lap like it always does...


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

JeepHammer said:


> If you didn't see that coming...
> 
> It's the 'Capitalism' way, privatize profits, move profits off shore, then declare bankruptcy and dust your hands off and walk away...
> 
> ...


They are being attacked by government for making a legal product that everyone, with more than two brain cells, knew could be addictive. They are forced to defend themselves from those corrupt governments. Misuse of their product by other people is not their fault.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> If you didn't see that coming...
> 
> It's the 'Capitalism' way, privatize profits, move profits off shore, then declare bankruptcy and dust your hands off and walk away...
> 
> ...


I know I am going to regret asking you.

What system do you prefer? You here, and in other places have derided capitalism, but you yourself seem to practice it.

Are you hinting that the state could run your business better than you can?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

SRSLADE said:


> Many users of these drugs were lied to and became addicted. They have skin in the game.
> What skin do you have in taxing or not taxing the rich?


Opioids have been known to be addictive longer than any of us have been alive. I have a sense of fair play that forces me to be against acts by corrupt governments, no matter if those acts are aimed at me, or, not.


----------



## D-BOONE (Feb 9, 2016)

I am tired of people looking for someone else to blame.No one made them take them no one forced them to take more than prescribed. its there own fault nobody takes responsibility for there own actions any more. Smokers want to blame tobacco companies,shooting victims want to blame the gun manufacturer, etc etc. 
Wake up take responsibility for your own actions you did it to yourself, suck it up deal with it, move on.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

D-BOONE said:


> I am tired of people looking for someone else to blame.No one made them take them no one forced them to take more than prescribed. its there own fault nobody takes responsibility for there own actions any more. Smokers want to blame tobacco companies,shooting victims want to blame the gun manufacturer, etc etc.
> Wake up take responsibility for your own actions you did it to yourself, suck it up deal with it, move on.


It is getting to the point where we are going to start suing our professors if we fail an exam, our bosses if we get fired, the farmer if we get fat, Jack Daniels and Henry Ford if we drive drunk, etc. etc.. It is sad, it shows a lack of character in our culture, and it is a sigh of our impending demise as a nation.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Let me see,
Paying doctors who prescribe quotas,
Producing synthetics many hundreds or thousands times stronger than anything drug cartels could manufacture.

Breaking laws by not reporting to FDA/DEA (cooking the books) and shipping mass amounts.
Every LEGAL prescriber has a DEA number, and the amount shipped it supposed to be reported, but wasn't.
Same DEA number used all over the country for different people/places ordering.
Shipping drugs several thousand times stronger than drug cartels can produce, that by law were supposed to be used in care facilities, but they shipped to PO boxes...

There are very good reasons why they are in big trouble, but they will grease the right people through lawyers and the taxpayer will wind up with the bills for the junkies they created.
The taxpayer is already footing the bill for trying to stop the illegal drugs the junkies switched to when the synthetic opioids dried up...
Just because they didn't shoot guns doesn't mean it wasn't a drug dealing business, entirely intentional, and they stepped over victims and laughed all the way to the bank...


----------



## D-BOONE (Feb 9, 2016)

JeepHammer said:


> Breaking laws by not reporting to FDA/DEA (cooking the books) and shipping mass amounts.


They shipped what was ordered couldnt ship mass amounts if the people didnt take them



JeepHammer said:


> Producing synthetics many hundreds or thousands times stronger than anything drug cartels could manufacture.


Heroin is a lot stronger than oxycodone or oxycontin and I wont even begin on fentanyl 
put the blame where it belongs on the user.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Here are a few good articles about the Sackler family and Perdue Pharma. Google it's marketing history on both the original Oxycontin and Oxycontin IR for more information.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/04/sacklers-oxycontin-opioids/557525/

And this one as well: https://www.statnews.com/2016/09/22/abbott-oxycontin-crusade/


----------



## dyrne (Feb 22, 2015)

They train, bribe and incintivize doctors to write scripts for the highly addictive drugs to people that don't need them using attractive pharma reps to push the whole thing but yeah blame the patient. This is not some old phenomena... here is a chart of overdose deaths just for the last few years. Does this look like something that has always been with us or like something engineered?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Absolutely. It's disgusting how they'd target physicians, manipulated data, and out and out lied about the safety of the IR and ER versions.


----------



## D-BOONE (Feb 9, 2016)

your chart also includes heroin and fentanyl deaths which is a tactic the local gov around here used to make it look like more of a crisis than it was. Theres almost no prescriptions for oxy being given out but if you talk to the EMT crews theres just as many over doses now as there was 2 years ago.They go through just as much narcan now as then and some times its 3 and 4 times to the same address a week.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> Absolutely. It's disgusting how they'd target physicians, manipulated data, and out and out lied about the safety of the IR and ER versions.


Double so since it's food & drugs.

Capitalism in drugs/healthcare has been horrible for us,
The idea you squeeze every last penny out of someone for healthcare or medicine is a crime against humanity.

My Epi-pens went from $35 to $300 and landed at $600. I'm allergic to bee stings, and to pay $600 for something as common, easy to manufacture and absolutely essential...
Been around for decades, off patent, but the current maker bought up all the patents for the plastic injector, wouldn't licence the injector, and jacked the price up and sued the life out of anyone that tried to make an injector, using their parents or not.

Insulin has skyrocketed in cost the same way.

Do ANYTHING, say ANYTHING, just squeeze the last cent out of the product you neither created, or improved, just buy up the patents/accessories and Jack the price through the roof.
When our want to make even more money, lie to and bribe doctors so they push your dope making new addicts.

Capitalism is nothing more than a religion that worships the dollar bill.
People don't matter,
Ethics don't matter,
Laws don't matter, 

Make enough to buy your way out, and that's only *IF* you get caught, and you get away with billions no matter what you do to people.
Buy some politicians in advance, and they are remarkably cheap, and you don't even get charged...

If you don't believe it, look up exactly how many involved in the sub-prime mortgage scam went to jail, how many oil company people went to jail in the oil spills/dumps, the credit card scams, and the list goes on and on.
One going on right now is student loans, by design, it's designed to keep 18 year old students in debt until they are in their 70s...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

D-BOONE said:


> your chart also includes heroin and fentanyl deaths which is a tactic the local gov around here used to make it look like more of a crisis than it was. Theres almost no prescriptions for oxy being given out but if you talk to the EMT crews theres just as many over doses now as there was 2 years ago.They go through just as much narcan now as then and some times its 3 and 4 times to the same address a week.


The chart should include all opioid deaths, shouldn't it? And the chart is titled, "National *drug* overdose deaths". That assumes all drugs.

Docs would prescribe Oxycontin for an ankle sprain, the patient would take it as prescribed and many became addicted. The Doc wouldn't prescribe anymore, the patient (now addict) would buy Oxy on the street, but oops! heroin is cheaper and easier to find. Now the patient is a heroin addict, and the problem is still growing.

And fentanyl is prescribed as well. I don't think it should be outside a controlled hospital setting, but that's just my opinion.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Exactly, no one set out to become an addict.

I got REAL lucky, I got a doctor that didn't lie to me and 'Follow Policy'.
The VA hospital dumped PILES of pain killers on me, literally quart jars twice a month.
Several different types twice a month, enough to kill everyone I knew...

The doctor told me they do it to keep us quiet,
Once addicted, nothing else matters, we will go along with the VA program and not cause issues,
If we did raise Cain, they would point to the drug consumption and say the guy was a junky and wasn't credible.
It works.

I stopped the pain pills, took the pain, beat the VA for what they should have done in the first place, and when they wouldn't, I had it done by civilians and sued the VA.
I won.

I NEVER set out to be a junky, but I was able to detox myself. Most can't.
I got the truth early, most don't.
Red flags didn't go up when I was getting between 1,000 & 4,000 pills a month,
But it sure turned up when I filed a lawsuit!
My lawyer was ahead of them, I'd been taking drug screens for months before we got to court that showed me clean...

The only place I could find to dispose of the pills was a used oil tank that was going to recycling... And I videoed the disposal since the lawyer KNEW they would call me a junky or dealer.

I feel exactly the same way about 'Anti-Depressants', they are epidemic and harder to kick than opioids...
No one has raised a flag in a big way, but it doesn't make it any better.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Speaking of depressing. For years fish, mussels and other water creatures in local lakes, rivers, ocean shorelines have been showing detectable amounts of depressants in their bodies thats passed on to them from human urine and waste water. Guess what, scientist are now looking for and finding opioids and other drugs. 

The effects of these drugs and the behavior of the wildlife is now being studied. It’s not just humans being affected. It’s the food chain also. Corporations, citizens and politicians have been ignoring the effects of a variety of drugs on humans and other species for a LONG TIME. A few law suits and laws passed are fine, but its going to take something drastic to really create some changes that are effective. Meanwhile it keeps the media advertising budgets very profitable.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Redlands Okie said:


> Speaking of depressing. For years fish, mussels and other water creatures in local lakes, rivers, ocean shorelines have been showing detectable amounts of depressants in their bodies thats passed on to them from human urine and waste water. Guess what, scientist are now looking for and finding opioids and other drugs.
> 
> The effects of these drugs and the behavior of the wildlife is now being studied. It’s not just humans being affected. It’s the food chain also. Corporations, citizens and politicians have been ignoring the effects of a variety of drugs on humans and other species for a LONG TIME. A few law suits and laws passed are fine, but its going to take something drastic to really create some changes that are effective. Meanwhile it keeps the media advertising budgets very profitable.



I hadn't heard that but it makes sense.
Life is a big circle and you get back what you put out.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

D-BOONE said:


> They shipped what was ordered couldnt ship mass amounts if the people didnt take them
> 
> 
> Heroin is a lot stronger than oxycodone or oxycontin and I wont even begin on fentanyl
> put the blame where it belongs on the user.


Anyone who's taken chemistry knows the truth on that.
Of course if science isn't used to make your decisions, well that's a different problem.



Irish Pixie said:


> Here are a few good articles about the Sackler family and Perdue Pharma. Google it's marketing history on both the original Oxycontin and Oxycontin IR for more information.
> 
> https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/10/30/the-family-that-built-an-empire-of-pain
> 
> ...


I was going to post that last link, as it is about as damning of that family as it could possibly be. But those supporting the right to get as many addicts on the payroll as possible won't read it, even if is IS the words of the owner.
*Note* The above statement is NOT meant for the proper prescribing of opioids. I'm talking about the pushers, you'll have to go back to the 60's to know that reference.








D-BOONE said:


> your chart also includes heroin and fentanyl deaths which is a tactic the local gov around here used to make it look like more of a crisis than it was. Theres almost no prescriptions for oxy being given out but if you talk to the EMT crews theres just as many over doses now as there was 2 years ago.They go through just as much narcan now as then and some times its 3 and 4 times to the same address a week.


Is there any factual basis you can provide for that statement?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

A case of people looking for someone, other than themselves, to blame and attempt to get a pay day, nothing more, nothing less. If it concerns you that taxpayers have to pay for this or that, insist that our stupid elected officials don't spend our money on it. Unless you are almost brain dead, you know that these drugs can be very addictive. The sad fact of human nature is that most either don't care, or, stupidly believe that "it will never happen to me". It may be seen as harsh, and it is, but, perhaps we should just let nature take its course.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Redlands Okie said:


> Speaking of depressing. For years fish, mussels and other water creatures in local lakes, rivers, ocean shorelines have been showing detectable amounts of depressants in their bodies thats passed on to them from human urine and waste water. Guess what, scientist are now looking for and finding opioids and other drugs.
> 
> The effects of these drugs and the behavior of the wildlife is now being studied. It’s not just humans being affected. It’s the food chain also. Corporations, citizens and politicians have been ignoring the effects of a variety of drugs on humans and other species for a LONG TIME. A few law suits and laws passed are fine, but its going to take something drastic to really create some changes that are effective. Meanwhile it keeps the media advertising budgets very profitable.


What you can't convince people of is hormones, chemicals don't break down in cooking (like living pathogens do) and they are so over prescribed a serious amount blows right through the body. 

Prophylactic use of antibiotics in livestock blew right through them, wound up in the wild in small but increasing doses, and now we have 'Super Bugs' that have built up an immunity to antibiotics.
For decades, over 60 years, poultry were fed a constant diet of anti-biotics and the result is a super strain of salmonella in the past 20 years.
In beef, the super strain of E-coli 0157-H7 popped up, and it's completely immune to all anti-biotics.

The reason is, livestock were fed the dregs, the bottom of the tanks when anti-biotics were produced, and they got a wide spectrum of all anti-biotics at once, allowing the bugs to evolve in a soup of all the anti-biotics lines, or so the researchers believe.

Over use of pesticides & herbicides did exactly the same thing with weeds & bugs.

I live next to a fish and wildlife area, and in talking to the guys working there is probably why I know this, but the studies on opiates & anti-depressants are in relationship to declining native fish stocks.
Since we are way 'Down South' on the river, the area originally monitored pollution in the days when the river caught fire! 
That's right, the younger folks don't remember rivers catching fire they were so polluted.
Heavy metals, particularly lead & mercury was so bad you couldn't eat ANYTHING out of the river.
Chemical producers up stream were dumping directly into the river, it was so bad when I was a child, humans weren't supposed to even swim in the river, and the river caught fire on two different occasions I can remember because my grandpa took me to see 'Water' burn.

We live 800 yards from the river, we won't eat anything that comes out of it.
I have a lake, which has tested to be as clean and healthy as anything around here, but I found out the coal mine that built the lake during reclamation had to truck clean dirt in to build it.
I can't expand my lake, the state won't issue a permit for expansion unless I truck in clean dirt to line the expansion with since it sits on land contaminated by river silt.

When we drilled our wells, the state area guys showed up and warned us not to stop until we hit bedrock and use a stainless liner in the well to keep the silt & ground water out of the well.
We had to drill until we hit the water table in limestone to get water that tested clean.
You don't even want to know what a stainless liner costs, but steel liners weren't lasting 10 years because of the corrosive chemicals trapped in the river silt.

To this day, if you dig a 3 foot deep post hole down by the river, the chemical smell will hit you like a brick to the face...
And all it takes is one big flood to turn that stuff right back up...
The coal mine wouldn't even get close to the river, not because there wasn't coal there, but because when they moved the top soil workers got sick/poisoned from fumes coming out of the silt/dirt.

I got lucky, when my land was reclaimed, the EPA was strong, and clean dirt was trucked in to help seal off the silt end of the property so it would pass EPA/reclamation regulations.
Wildlife ponds & lakes were required, the idea being more ponds & lakes, the more runoff water would be regulated to flush out the dirt over time through ground water movement.
I built my house, have my gardens well above the historic silt line, but there is a BUNCH of farming down in those silt beds, and the production is going into the food supply.


----------



## CKelly78z (Jul 16, 2017)

Darwinism at work, nobody is at fault other than the user.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

The finger that points outward.
This is the norm for the mentality/lack of personal responsibility.
Blame someone else and either label them, blacklist and banish them, but above all, extort money from them.
It must always be someone or something else.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> The chart should include all opioid deaths, shouldn't it?


Not if it includes illegal drugs as a reason to condemn doctors and drug companies.
Drunks kill nearly as many as opioids.
Why isn't alcohol on the "drug" chart?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Not if it includes illegal drugs as a reason to condemn doctors and drug companies.
> Drunks kill nearly as many as opioids.
> Why isn't alcohol on the "drug" chart?


I don't know, it's not my chart. It's clearly titled "National *drug* overdose deaths" tho. 

You should do your own chart (and thread) rather than trying to derail this one. Just my opinion.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Is there any factual basis you can provide for that statement?


https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/maps/rxrate-maps.html



> *Key Highlights*
> 
> After a steady increase in the overall national opioid prescribing rate starting in 2006, the total number of prescriptions dispensed peaked in 2012 at more than 255 million and a prescribing rate of 81.3 prescriptions per 100 persons.
> The overall national opioid prescribing rate declined from 2012 to 2017, and* in 2017, the prescribing rate had fallen to the lowest it had been in more than 10 years* at 58.7 prescriptions per 100 persons (total of more than 191 million total opioid prescriptions).


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

I believe the issue is that many don't (or won't) understand that addiction is a disease. Do you (collective you) that blame addiction solely on the addict, directly blame the cancer patient for their condition? 

Disease is disease.

An interesting read: https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-addiction-a-brain-disease-201603119260


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> I don't know, it's not my chart. It's clearly titled "National *drug* overdose deaths" tho.
> 
> *You should *do your own chart (and thread) rather than *trying to derail* this one. Just my opinion.


It obviously doesn't include all "drugs".
Not an opinion, just a fact.

Please stick to the actual topic rather than telling me what I should do, or accusing me of something I'm not doing.

Saying "just my opinion" doesn't anyone give a free pass to tell others what to do here.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

You can't argue against someone's opinion, especially when there are no facts to back it up


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Bearfootfarm said:


> It obviously doesn't include all "drugs".
> Not an opinion, just a fact.
> 
> Please stick to the actual topic rather than telling me what I should do, or accusing me of something I'm not doing.
> ...


LOL. No, it doesn't. Was alcohol mentioned in any of the previous posts? If so, can you point it out?


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> I believe the issue is that many don't (or won't) understand that addiction is a disease. Do you (collective you) that blame addiction solely on the addict, directly blame the cancer patient for their condition?


I understand that some want it labeled a "disease". It is not, and if we were to concede that it is, for sake of argument, it is a self inflicted one.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

"a self inflicted disease." Ouch.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Farmerga said:


> I understand that some want it labeled a "disease". It is not, and if we were to concede that it is, for sake of argument, it is a self inflicted one.


If by “some” you mean the American Medical Association” - https://www.ncsbn.org/Understanding_the_Disease_of_Addiction.pdf

And the American Psychiatric Association- https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/addiction/what-is-addiction


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> If by “some” you mean the American Medical Association” - https://www.ncsbn.org/Understanding_the_Disease_of_Addiction.pdf
> 
> And the American Psychiatric Association- https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/addiction/what-is-addiction


Yes, those two political bodies.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

A very succinct and understated observation. I prefer the term "lobbying group."


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

GTX63 said:


> A very succinct and understated observation. I prefer the term "lobbying group."


Both fit.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

Farmerga said:


> Yes, those two political bodies.


Based on this opinion, do you think the NRA is a political body? Off topic, but I’m perpetually curious...


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Farmerga said:


> Both fit.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...s-a-special-interest-lobby-not-a-patient-ally


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> Based on this opinion, do you think the NRA is a political body? Off topic, but I’m perpetually curious...


Of course They lobby. They have a political interest just like the two groups you listed.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> Based on this opinion, do you think the NRA is a political body? Off topic, but I’m perpetually curious...


The NRA exists for one reason, to "lobby" and influence elected officials to preserve and protect the 2nd from those like you.

So the answer is a resounding yes.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> LOL. No, it doesn't. Was alcohol mentioned in any of the previous posts?


It's irrelevant whether or not it was mentioned before.
It's still a "drug" that causes many deaths, and it's not listed on the chart about "drug deaths".



Irish Pixie said:


> And the chart is titled, "National *drug* overdose *deaths*". *That assumes all drugs.*





> Irish Pixie said: ↑
> I believe the issue is that many don't (or won't) understand that addiction is a disease. Do you (collective you) that blame addiction solely on the addict, directly blame the cancer patient for their condition?


Alcoholism can be *called* a "disease" too.
The addict is as much to blame as anyone, since it's self inflicted.

Cancer can't be controlled.
Alcohol consumption can.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> If by “some” you mean the American Medical Association” - https://www.ncsbn.org/Understanding_the_Disease_of_Addiction.pdf
> 
> And the American Psychiatric Association- https://www.psychiatry.org/patients-families/addiction/what-is-addiction


You can add the Center For Disease Control (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO).

Who gets addicted immediately is biology, like allergies, you don't know the tolerance/resistance level until exposed, and then it's too late.
By using that information, and passing out opioids to everyone for everything, they were able to find the addiction susceptible and hook them.

Antidepressants are worse, everyone IS going to get hooked since it effects the reward center of the brain directly, everytime, no one has a resistance.


----------



## Hitch (Oct 19, 2016)

Heaven forbid people take responsibility for their actions instead of blaming others..the drug maker in this case. 

These lawsuits are as idiotic as an alcoholic suing the manufacturer of spirits for their own disease.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Sometimes it seems that culpability is measured in the number of assets one has.
The "principals" proclaimed are just a veil made from wool.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Irish Pixie said:


> Based on this opinion, *do you think the NRA is a political body*? Off topic, but I’m perpetually curious...


The NRA is primarily a gun safety and training organization.

They also have an "Institute for Legislative Action", which works at protecting gun rights from those anti-gun people who would take them away.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Hitch said:


> Heaven forbid people take responsibility for their actions instead of blaming others..the drug maker in this case.
> 
> These lawsuits are as idiotic as an alcoholic suing the manufacturer of spirits for their own disease.


No, it is the fault of capitalism, right @JeepHammer


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

JeepHammer said:


> Who gets addicted immediately is biology


Care to show us the science behind immediate addiction?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Farmerga said:


> Care to show us the science behind immediate addiction?


I know @JeepHammer has access to more info than most of us, but here is what I found

"Some prescription drugs are more addictive than others. Most addictive drugs affect your brain’s reward system by flooding it with dopamine. This results in a pleasurable “high” that can motivate you to take the drug again. Over time, you might become dependent on the drug to feel “good” or “normal.” You might also develop a tolerance to the drug. This can push you to take larger doses."

https://www.healthline.com/health/addiction/addictive-prescription-drugs


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Farmerga said:


> Care to show us the science behind immediate addiction?


The scientific term I think you are looking for is "Canard."


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Farmerga said:


> Care to show us the science behind immediate addiction?


https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02203.x

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002204268701700104

https://www.cell.com/neuron/pdf/S0896-6273(00)80113-0.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/tp201254

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02213.x

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12035-014-8726-5

https://www.bmj.com/content/322/7293/1056.short

https://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/12/2/227.short

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjABegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0sdp5dVPFaK_h-6ijSHWIS[

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjADegQIBRAB&usg=AOvVaw2L3w2Nq0epZTtQos0j8yIu

How many do you want because there are over 5,700 listed on genetic predisposition to immediate addiction alone...
Even more on environmental, cultural and chemical factors that contribute to addiction.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> How many do you want because there are over 5,700 listed on genetic predisposition to addiction alone...


So, predisposition leads to immediate addiction?










I don't read it that way


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

HDRider said:


> So, predisposition leads to immediate addiction?
> 
> View attachment 79448
> 
> ...


You read all those links in 8 minutes? Impressive.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> You read all those links in 8 minutes? Impressive.


I am good


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

JeepHammer said:


> https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2008.02203.x
> 
> https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/002204268701700104
> 
> ...


Read several, saw absolutely nothing beyond a possible genetic predisposition for addiction. Not one thing about immediate addiction.


----------



## Farmerga (May 6, 2010)

Irish Pixie said:


> You read all those links in 8 minutes? Impressive.


Most of those links were short abstracts.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> So, predisposition leads to immediate addiction?
> 
> View attachment 79448
> 
> ...


Doesn't matter how *YOU* (personally) 'Read' or comprehend the facts in this matter.

What matters is trained experts with real doctorates in their fields classify, quantify, clarify, categorize what's happening using actual scientific standards & practices to weed out 'Opinions', false positives or negatives, and get to the facts of the matter.

What at least one opioid producer did was use the facts, encourage doctors to over prescribe opioids to everyone to find the 50% or so predisposed to addiction.
No different than handing out candy to toddlers with hidden peanuts to locate the kids with nut allergies, and just as ruthless/efficient.

The difference is, once hooked they made billions feeding the addictions they created, instead of killing toddlers.
Silent addictions don't bring the spotlight like dead toddlers, and the idea was to make money.
They succeeded, now we are left to clean up the mess since they hid the billions off shore and declared bankruptcy...

If you don't think it was planned from the beginning, you are a little slow on the uptake.
No one spends a billion dollars on mass production facilities without expecting a return, and profits on investment.

YOU (personally) might not have run into it, but the makers gave away free sample packs, 10 to 14 days worth which were supposed to be passed along to patients.
This is a page right out of street drug dealer handbook, 'Free' samples to get you started, see if you come back for more with a hand full of money...

I got lucky, I'm not in the approximately 50% predisposed to opioid addiction.
Alcohol is the problem in my family, and there is a reason I don't drink.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> Doesn't matter how *YOU* (personally) 'Read' or comprehend the facts in this matter.
> 
> What matters is trained experts with real doctorates in their fields classify, quantify, clarify, categorize what's happening using actual scientific standards & practices to weed out 'Opinions', false positives or negatives, and get to the facts of the matter.
> 
> ...


What seems to matter to you, and only you, is how YOU tell us what it means. Ad nauseum


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> What seems to matter to you, and only you, is how YOU tell us what it means. Ad nauseum


And there you have it...
Dozens of opinion posts, when someone takes the time to post actual research by competent, trained researchers, peer reviewed by other researchers, actual experts in the fields *YOU* were speaking on with absloute authority & confidence,
Exactly zero of the actual experts agreeing with your 'Opinion',

*YOU* attack/insult the messenger.
(Frustration since you can't support your 'Opinion' any longer)

If we go one step further,
I just reported what happened to me personally,
And I don't have an 'Opinion', I adopt the consensus opinions of actual educated, trained scientific people working in the fields they trained for.
(IE: not a science denier)

*YOUR* (personal) 'Opinion' is yours and yours alone.
Just like mine, it *May*, or *May NOT* have anything to do with facts, science, or even common sense.

I can be just as stupid about something as the next guy, my chosen field of employment is making metal fit together to make machines.
Everything else I take the word of professionals in their fields, particularly when those experts have a 98% consensus on something (2% wrong/crazy is WAY below the average in anything else).

Noting *YOU* (person/personally) is defining the issues, not a personal insult.
Just like *Me/I* (person/personally) is defining my experiences.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Unless the manufacturer of a product that ends up to be bad LOOSES way more money than they made then theses practices will continue. Jail time for some if they helped create the problem is fine also. But as long as the producer can make a profit it does not matter how large the penalties are.
If the producer can save some of those profits by use of bankruptcy or other means then the motive still remains to do it again.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> And there you have it...
> Dozens of opinion posts, when someone takes the time to post actual research by competent, trained researchers, peer reviewed by other researchers, actual experts in the fields *YOU* were speaking on with absloute authority & confidence,
> Exactly zero of the actual experts agreeing with your 'Opinion',
> 
> ...


The exception is not with the "research" you posted, but with YOUR interpretation of it, and changing the meaning of words, from "predisposition" (not disputed by me) to "automatic" (disputed by me.).

There. You have it.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Mr. Hammer or somesuch,
I won't speak for the above poster, but you take opposition as an attack on the messenger, when frankly, you continue to post incorrect, disproven or flawed statements and perpetually claim that they are facts from proven experts.
When you are confronted with these errors you ignore them and continue to post unreadably long diatribes.

You have yet to respond to numerous members who have confronted you with blantant errors and misrepresentations other than to claim it is personal.
Then you wonder why the conversation devolves.

That is how you lose credibility and how folks learn to predispose your posts as nonesense by the end of the 2nd sentence.

You cannot mix junk science and garbage theories with a few links and claim your knowledge superior to those who alreadyknow better.
Just trying to help man.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

GTX63 said:


> Mr. Hammer or somesuch,
> I won't speak for the above poster, but you take opposition as an attack on the messenger, when frankly, you continue to post incorrect, disproven or flawed statements and perpetually claim that they are facts from proven experts.
> When you are confronted with these errors you ignore them and continue to post unreadably long diatribes.
> 
> ...


I could not have said it better, or been nearly as polite.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> The exception is not with the "research" you posted, but with YOUR interpretation of it, and changing the meaning of words, from "predisposition" (not disputed by me) to "automatic" (disputed by me.).
> 
> There. You have it.


The word was 'Immediate', not 'Automatic'.
Immediate in biological terms means very quickly since biological processes are understood to be slower than say, quantum physics.
The search is *"Studies Genetic Predisposition Of Immediate Addiction"* since Predisposition Of Immediate Addiction was the question, although poorly phrased when written.

The drug has to dissolve, be absorbed, reach the brain, find the appropriate receptors, etc.

That's also not counting the 10-14 days worth of drugs commonly prescribed, which is a 'Saturation' dosage situation.

A little more research into how this happened instead of calling people 'Weak' might be in order...
A saturation dosage, free of charge, prescribed by one of the people you trust the most,
Paying those prescribers to write & give away the drugs,
Falsifying the reports about how addictive the synthetics were in the first place to get FDA approval,
Falsifying the numbers being produced and where they were shipped to, or just not reporting at all,
Not doing the required legal DEA certification reporting and research into who was buying,

It was a quasi legal drug cartel, until they got caught which turns out it was outright illegal.
And like all drug cartels, they hid the money...
Your opinion is missing some facts!


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

So, you are saying since I don't communicate in memes or bumper sticker slogans, attempt to cover a subject at least in a cursory synoptic manner, that 'Offends' you?

Because I don't deny science that offends you?

Or is it I don't roll over and play dead for the meme and bumper sticker pile on guys?
The ones with the highest post count and shortest posts are supposed to 'Win' something?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> The word was 'Immediate', not 'Automatic'.
> Immediate in biological terms means very quickly since biological processes are understood to be slower than say, quantum physics.
> The search is *"Studies Genetic Predisposition Of Immediate Addiction"* since Predisposition Of Immediate Addiction was the question, although poorly phrased when written.
> 
> ...


Sorry, immediate, which also does not means the same as predisposition.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> So, you are saying since I don't communicate in memes or bumper sticker slogans, attempt to cover a subject at least in a cursory synoptic manner, that 'Offends' you?
> 
> Because I don't deny science that offends you?
> 
> ...


Not sure who you are talking to, but I don't think you have seen me post many, or any memes.

I do make short postings. Most seem to get my point, which often cannot be said for your postings.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> Sorry, immediate, which also does not means the same as predisposition.


Actually it's relevant since there was some question about immediate addiction, 
And THAT'S genetic predispositions allow for immediate addiction.

Why some can 'Use' and not become addicted, and some are immediately addicted, according to thousands of studies is about 50% genetic, like allergies or immune system strength, green eyes, it's just another genetic disorder in about 50% of people...
Assuming the researchers located the correct gene for alcohol addiction, opioid addiction, tobacco addiction, etc (not all the same genes by the way).

*I* (me, personally) didn't 'Crave' opioids once the physical effects were over.
No where near the long lasting cravings from cigarettes that I wonder if they will ever completely go away... 18 years later I still get cravings that haunt me for days.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> Not sure who you are talking to, but I don't think you have seen me post many, or any memes.
> 
> I do make short postings. Most seem to get my point, which often cannot be said for your postings.


Do you post to make a point, or to expound on your 'Opinion'?
I could go on about the term 'Point' being a data point, proof involved, or a factual 'Point', again proof involved...
An 'Opinion' or 'Belief' needs no proof. It's ego driven and proves/disproves nothing,
And there isn't room for debate, which defeats the idea of conversation/debate entirely.

But to explain that in detail, with proof of definition, subject to debate, and counter debate would produce a bunch of posts off topic, and apparently 'Offend' many...


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

JeepHammer said:


> So, you are saying since I don't communicate in memes or bumper sticker slogans, attempt to cover a subject at least in a cursory synoptic manner, that 'Offends' you?
> 
> Because I don't deny science that offends you?
> 
> ...


I wish I could like this polite response more than once.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

JeepHammer said:


> If you didn't see that coming...
> 
> It's the 'Capitalism' way, privatize profits, move profits off shore, then declare bankruptcy and dust your hands off and walk away...
> 
> ...


Don't forget whose lap that really is. The rich!


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> Actually it's relevant since there was some question about immediate addiction,
> And THAT'S genetic predispositions allow for immediate addiction.
> 
> Why some can 'Use' and not become addicted, and some are immediately addicted, according to thousands of studies is about 50% genetic, like allergies or immune system strength, green eyes, it's just another genetic disorder in about 50% of people...
> ...


I am going to sum this up for you. You argue that genetic predisposition outweighs free will and discipline. I favor the opposite view. Let's just leave it at that. Short and sweet.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

JeepHammer said:


> Do you post to make a point, or to expound on your 'Opinion'?
> I could go on about the term 'Point' being a data point, proof involved, or a factual 'Point', again proof involved...
> An 'Opinion' or 'Belief' needs no proof. It's ego driven and proves/disproves nothing,
> And there isn't room for debate, which defeats the idea of conversation/debate entirely.
> ...


Getting to the point IS important to me. Making myself understood is important to me.

I am not quite sure what is important to you, as I am fairly certain, it is not either of those.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Irish Pixie said:


> I wish I could like this polite response more than once.


I liked your post twice, then four times. Should I try for 8?


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

HDRider said:


> I liked your post twice, then four times. Should I try for 8?


Yes. It was on point. You should hit the that bad boy at least 10 times.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

HDRider said:


> I am going to sum this up for you. You argue that genetic predisposition outweighs free will and discipline. I favor the opposite view. Let's just leave it at that. Short and sweet.


I 'Argue' nothing.

I point to studies that conclude some people have no choice in the matter,
No more choice than birth marks or green eyes, they were born with a genetic predisposition to mind altering addictive substances that were previously unknown to themselves since unlike a birthmark, genetic predispositions to opioid addiction doesn't show until people are exposed to opioids.

YOUR argument is women genetically predisposed are responsible for having breast cancer when they don't have any idea... And nothing but age triggers the cancer, or any one of a thousand common things trigger the cancer.

The evidence of those (5,700+) studies show about 50% of the population have genetic predispositions.

The evidence shows synthetic opioid makers were fully aware of these genetic predispositions.

The evidence shows the testing of the synthetic opioids showed the same results, but were hidden/concealed/falsified when submitted to FDA for approval.

The evidence shows prescribers were paid bonuses for writing high volume of synthetic opioid prescriptions.

The evidence shows free sample packs were widely distributed to prescribers to pass along to patients.

The evidence shows the makers lied, deleted, or didn't otherwise comply with FDA & DEA laws, rules & regulations.

The evidence shows when caught, the primary distributor in question moved billions of dollars off shore.

The evidence shows after moving billions of dollars off shore, the company filed bankruptcy and dumped the entire mess in the taxpayer lap.

I say evidence because one maker, the largest, is in deep crap over what is actual evidence sized by investigators, and this is just what they released, it's not everything they know...
This is just what leaked or was released.

It seems to me you can't understand that many never set out to be a junky (about 50%),
*They didn't seek out heroine or other street drugs, they got hooked because a prescribed medication triggered a genetic time bomb, and there are plenty of studies to support that very thing, *
But YOUR 'Opinion' is they made 'Bad Choices' and actively woke up one morning and decided to be junkies.
AND, your refuse to accept any other explanation other than *YOUR OPINION*.

That kind of thinking means everyone in a car accident brought it on themselves intentionally by getting into a car, crossing a street etc,
Anyone ever shot is responsible because they didn't dodge the bullet,
Every kid born with birth defects CHOSE to have those genetic birth defects in the womb...
That kind of thinking is unsupportable, indefensible.

I agree it will be will power & strength that gets them off opioids (or cigarettes, or alcohol),
*Entire industries/global businesses spend every waking moment figuring out how to get you ON those addictive substances in the first place...*
This was just a really sneaky twist on that agenda by people with no morals or ethics, and now the taxpayer is left to clean up the mess, yet again...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

GTX63 said:


> The finger that points outward.
> This is the norm for the mentality/lack of personal responsibility.
> Blame someone else and either label them, blacklist and banish them, but above all, extort money from them.
> It must always be someone or something else.





Farmerga said:


> I understand that some want it labeled a "disease". It is not, and if we were to concede that it is, for sake of argument, it is a self inflicted one.





I can understand someone feeling that way about a person who was seeking to get high and ends up like a football bat.
But it seems to be thew opinion that there were/are no people who followed Dr.'s orders, took as prescribed and ended up addicted to opioids.
Is that the same opinion held on every other thing done by a doctor's advice, it's your own darn fault for doing it?


And conceding that an addict usually has themselves to blame for most of their predicament, there's an interesting exercise done at AA and NA meetings comparing it to another serious disease, like cancer.
When you list the symptoms side by side, you can hardly tell which is which.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

HDRider said:


> I am going to sum this up for you. You argue that genetic predisposition outweighs free will and discipline. I favor the opposite view. Let's just leave it at that. Short and sweet.


Would you say the same thing about type I diabetes, or colon cancer, or Alzheimer's?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Would you say the same thing about type I diabetes, or colon cancer, or Alzheimer's?


Those aren't totally dependent one thing that can be controlled.

Drug addiction *can* be controlled by abstinence, either voluntary or forced.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

farmrbrown said:


> Would you say the same thing about type I diabetes, or colon cancer, or Alzheimer's?


Exactly.
Same with breast cancer, birth defects, genetic predispositions to heart disease...

Exhaustive research says about 50% have genetic predispositions to opioids they don't know about... Once triggered it's too late.

A foot note here,
My little idiot dog needs steroids, which there is a shortage of all the sudden.
So I asked the vet about it, because I'm curious about the way everything interacts & works,
And the company most responsible for the opioid production, and is now bankrupt, also made made the common hormones/steroids.
He's had people as far away as California call to see if he has growth steroids/hormones in stock...
This was the maker of the #1 abused steroids/growth hormones, and the DEA has checked has inspected his books on drugs... And warned him about people seeking hormones/steroids/opioids.

Maybe opioids weren't the only drugs they were peddling off the books?


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

JeepHammer said:


> How many do you want because there are over 5,700 listed on genetic predisposition to *immediate addiction* alone...


Can you pick any one of those and copy and paste a portion that actually *says* "immediate addiction"?

I think you're just doing "data dumps" that really don't support your claim at all.



> Addiction is due 50 percent to genetic predisposition and *50 percent to poor coping skills.* This has been confirmed by numerous studies. One study looked at 861 identical twin pairs and 653 fraternal (non-identical) twin pairs. When one identical twin was addicted to alcohol, the other twin had a high probability of being addicted.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Those aren't totally dependent one thing that can be controlled.
> 
> Drug addiction *can* be controlled by abstinence, either voluntary or forced.


Really?
So, all instances of colon cancer, diabetes and heart disease no amount of controlling one's diet would have prevented it?
In every case, it was totally beyond the patient's control?

BTW, I noticed you emphasized one half of that finding the supports your theory but ignored the other half that refutes it.
Could it be that you're not 100% right about it?


> Addiction is due 50 percent to genetic predisposition and *50 percent to poor coping skills.* This has been confirmed by numerous studies. One study looked at 861 identical twin pairs and 653 fraternal (non-identical) twin pairs. When one identical twin was addicted to alcohol, the other twin had a high probability of being addicted.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

farmrbrown said:


> Really?
> So, all instances of colon cancer, diabetes and heart disease no amount of controlling one's diet would have prevented it?
> In every case, it was totally beyond the patient's control?


That begs the question of environmental factors being ones 'Fault' or not.
Since you can't control the geographic location of your birth, or the food supplies in that geographic location, that leaves at least half the world not having a choice in diet, they eat what's available.

Even in 1st world countries where it's possible to control your diet, your idea doesn't account for poverty where you simply can't afford the top end 'Healthy' diet.

But I think the biggest head scratcher is what exactly triggers that cancer or genetic disease?
The very health foods you consume to avoid cancer/disease can very well contain the trigger.
Age can be the trigger, the genetic time bomb simply has a timer.

As to choices, you don't get a option with type 1 diabetes, while excess sugars/sweeteners can very well trigger type 2.



> BTW, I noticed you emphasized one half of that finding the supports your theory but ignored the other half that refutes it.
> Could it be that you're not 100% right about it?


I didn't ignore anything...
The topic of conversation was the synthetic opioid epidemic,
"Synthetic Opioid Epidemic" is poetically accurate since it was engineered...

At least the organic opioid users had full knowledge, if not understanding, of what they were up to, while synthetic opioids by prescription completely blindsided people. It a bunch of cases it was people that would never seek street drugs and weren't looking to get 'High'.


----------



## MichaelZ (May 21, 2013)

Just watched a very good documentary relating to this.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

JeepHammer said:


> That begs the question of environmental factors being ones 'Fault' or not.
> Since you can't control the geographic location of your birth, or the food supplies in that geographic location, that leaves at least half the world not having a choice in diet, they eat what's available.
> 
> Even in 1st world countries where it's possible to control your diet, your idea doesn't account for poverty where you simply can't afford the top end 'Healthy' diet.
> ...


Yep.
From this point on though, I'd like to make a few corrections.



> As to choices, you don't get a option with type 1 diabetes, while excess sugars/sweeteners can very well trigger type 2.


I should have said type II, I get them mixed up sometimes.




> I didn't ignore anything...
> The topic of conversation was the synthetic opioid epidemic,
> "Synthetic Opioid Epidemic" is poetically accurate since it was engineered...
> 
> At least the organic opioid users had full knowledge, if not understanding, of what they were up to, while synthetic opioids by prescription completely blindsided people. It a bunch of cases it was people that would never seek street drugs and weren't looking to get 'High'.


The "ignored" comment wasn't directed towards you, but rather the one who cherry picked it for you.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Farmrbrown,

I try not to get locked into anything underway/ongoing, if the people running the circus don't have it all figured out, I'm sure not going to have any revelations...

Not my monkeys, not my circus, I'm just a spectator.
From what investigators are turning up, it doesn't look good for Perdue Pharma, but the family has already hidden billions. Do innocent people hide money?

Anyway, it's not going to change the outcome,
Through police, courts, jails, hospitals/health care, crime etc. this entire mess is going to land in the taxpayer lap, like always...
Profits privatized, fallout & cleanup socialized.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

JeepHammer said:


> Farmrbrown,
> 
> I try not to get locked into anything underway/ongoing, if the people running the circus don't have it all figured out, I'm sure not going to have any revelations...
> 
> ...


Remember who the taxpayers really are... Yep, it's those evil rich people who provided pain relief to millions in need. Without those evil opioids I would most likely have taken myself out of the game several years ago. With them my life becomes tolerable. Maybe not great but doable. I for one hope my hydrocodone remains cheap and available.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Really?
> So, all instances of colon cancer, diabetes and heart disease no amount of controlling one's diet would have prevented it?
> In every case, it was totally beyond the patient's control?


Controlling the diet might help.
Cancers can have multiple causes.

A drug addiction has one cause, the drug itself.

In the case of addictions, quitting it's the *only* help



farmrbrown said:


> BTW, I noticed you emphasized one half of that finding the supports your theory but ignored the other half *that refutes it*.
> Could it be that you're not 100% right about it?


I didn't "ignore" anything.
I copied and pasted a paragraph.
Nothing there refutes anything I've said at all.



farmrbrown said:


> Could it be that you're not 100% right about it?


I never claimed to be "100% right".
It's easy to "refute" things I didn't say by pretending I did.
You try that all the time, but it never works.



farmrbrown said:


> The "ignored" comment wasn't directed towards you, but rather the one who *cherry picked* it for you.


It was no more "cherry picked" than any of the other sources offered so far.
Many of those didn't even mention the things they were supposed to prove.
I've yet to see one with the term "immediate addiction".



> https://addictionsandrecovery.org/is-addiction-a-disease.htm
> Addiction is due 50 percent to genetic predisposition and *50 percent to poor coping skills.* This has been confirmed by numerous studies. One study looked at 861 identical twin pairs and 653 fraternal (non-identical) twin pairs. When one identical twin was addicted to alcohol, the other twin had a high probability of being addicted.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

JeepHammer said:


> I point to *studies that conclude* *some people have no choice* in the matter,


Can you copy and paste a portion of *any* one study that really *says* that?


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

farmrbrown said:


> Would you say the same thing about type I diabetes, or colon cancer, or Alzheimer's?


I am no expert like @JeepHammer but I expect genetics plays a big role, with some possible contribution by environment.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Yvonne's hubby said:


> Remember who the taxpayers really are... Yep, it's those evil rich people who provided pain relief to millions in need. Without those evil opioids I would most likely have taken myself out of the game several years ago. With them my life becomes tolerable. Maybe not great but doable. I for one hope my hydrocodone remains cheap and available.


By 'Evil Rich People' you mean drug pushers?
There is always heroin if your pill supply gets cut off, same type of people that hide from DEA, don't submit information or lie to FDA, obstruct law enforcement investigations, spirit profits out of the country...
This thread was about Perdue Pharma, the biggest supplier of synthetic opioids, and if the investigators are to be believed, did all the above,
And it's the point of the thread, the company that declared bankruptcy after moving billions of dollars off shore...



HDRider said:


> I am no expert like @JeepHammer but I expect genetics plays a big role, with some possible contribution by environment.


I'm no 'Expert', I simply listen to the actual, educated experts, particularly when there is an overwhelming consensus between studies with multiple experts contributing.
It's never as simple as a one liner or bumper sticker...

I didn't ask for a big nose, big feet, allergy to bee stings, predisposition to gaining weight, colon polyps, skin cancer since I'm (mostly?) caucasian, it just happened...
I also didn't ask, and wasn't asked/informed I was being sprayed/fed DDT, asbestos, lead or any number of a million different chemicals...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Controlling the diet might help.
> Cancers can have multiple causes.
> 
> A drug addiction has one cause, the drug itself.
> ...




Several of your comments about addiction have been refuted, including the study results on twins, which shows genetics plays a major role, therefore it *isn't* simply a matter of choice. Unless of course that includes "choosing" to ignore what a doctor prescribes to you. Pretending isn't necessary when the comments are in writing.

As far as "immediate addiction", I never said anything about it.
The effects of poppy derived products are well known. The deniers can keep denying until the end of time.
The truth is irrelevant to them no matter how many examples they see.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

farmrbrown said:


> Several of your comments about addiction have been refuted, including the study results on twins, which shows genetics plays a major role, therefore it *isn't* simply a matter of choice.


I *Think* I was the one that brought up the topic of genetic predispositions.
*I* (personally) was interested in the subject when I nearly wound up a junky (by the VA on prescribed heavy duty pain killers) so I've been studying the subject on and off since 1996 or so.
If a 'Pain Management' specialist doctor (actual medial doctor with further actual education in opioids) hadn't set me down, talked straight, and warned me what was coming, I might be one of the vets out looking for heroin since the VA cut pain pills back to the quick all at once instead of treating the drug addiction they created and weaning vets off instead of cutting them off...



> Unless of course that includes "choosing" to ignore what a doctor prescribes to you. Pretending isn't necessary when the comments are in writing.


Most people won't ignore what the doctor prescribed then, so big pharma paid bonuses to doctors for prescribing opioids.
I didn't ignore doctors orders in the beginning, but that's exactly what I had to do...
And when I went after the VA, first they pointed at my 'Drug Use', but since my lawyer had seen that coming, seen it before, I was taking drug screens proving me clean, then they pointed out I WASN'T taking the prescribed drugs (pain killers).
First they say I didn't need the surgery, then they say there is no GUARANTEE the surgery will help, when I pay for the surgery and it DOES bring my legs back about 60% (from useless) they say I'm a junky and don't know what I'm talking about, when I prove I'm not a junky, they say I'm not following doctors orders...
They finally just paid up for the surgery when cornered...

Surprise!
Turns out I wasn't in pain because my body had a deficiency of opioids, I was in pain because when my back broke it crushed nerves, releasing the nerves restored my legs, like it does for 85%-95% of the people that have the surgery... No need for opioids when the ACTUAL PROBLEM is fixed.



> As far as "immediate addiction", I never said anything about it.


Apologies. I can't keep track of who wrote what sometimes. I also include counter debate points from several posters into one post, a bad habit.



> The effects of poppy derived products are well known. The deniers can keep denying until the end of time.
> The truth is irrelevant to them no matter how many examples they see.


The thread title is about synthetic opioids.
*IF* you are stupid enough to smoke or shoot heroin, then you KNOW full well you are doing something illegal.
I don't have anything for street drug dealers but a club or bullet, and still would up with an opioid problem... That's what we are talking about here...

It's 'Capitalism' medicine, run as many though the office as possible maximize profits, instead of doctors taking charge of the patients care.
Maximize profits above all else.

The 'Average' face time with your doctor per visit used to be 15 minutes in the 70s,
Now it's less than three minutes, it's a production line to maximize profits.
Follow-up visits to monitor things like possible drug addiction are rare, instead call in got you new prescription for opioids, according to what's published and *I* (personally) had the same experience, call in for a follow up visit, get a 'Nurse' (probably a receptionist) and get prescription renewal instead...


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

JeepHammer said:


> I *Think* I was the one that brought up the topic of genetic predispositions.
> *I* (personally) was interested in the subject when I nearly wound up a junky (by the VA on prescribed heavy duty pain killers) so I've been studying the subject on and off since 1996 or so.
> If a 'Pain Management' specialist doctor (actual medial doctor with further actual education in opioids) hadn't set me down, talked straight, and warned me what was coming, I might be one of the vets out looking for heroin since the VA cut pain pills back to the quick all at once instead of treating the drug addiction they created and weaning vets off instead of cutting them off...
> 
> ...


My wife went thru a similar experience with a plate in her neck after battling with workers comp for 8 months. 
You were lucky to have a doctor prescribing them that was willing to admit the truth.
I argued with a few in the hospital about it as she was recovering from the effects of taking oxy *as prescribed*, until of course she couldn't stop vomiting and nothing was going in her.
They looked me straight in the eye and denied it was happening.

Poor thing, it was all her own fault.


----------



## CKelly78z (Jul 16, 2017)

I have taken Oxycontin for a horrible traffic accident I was in (17 broken bones from someone who ran a stop sign into the side of me) and didn't catch that "addiction disease". I CHOSE to quit taking any pain meds after about 2 days of hot/cold/nausea that were the side effects.

I didn't however CHOOSE to have Hodgkins Disease (cancer) at 23 years old, that I have had 2 re-occurances of over the years with multiple chemo/radiation treatments, and countless followups with specialists, and ultimately a new pace maker for my failing heart at 54 years old.

Addiction is not a disease, it is a weakness of character.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Looks like we have a way to save a ton of money on medical care in the U.S.
Cut off treatment for smokers, drinkers and the obese, on the grounds of character weakness.


----------



## Irish Pixie (May 14, 2002)

farmrbrown said:


> Looks like we have a way to save a ton of money on medical care in the U.S.
> Cut off treatment for smokers, drinkers and the obese, on the grounds of character weakness.


And all the diseases that stem from smoking, drinking, and obesity. They should should just quit cold turkey, lack of will power is just a character weakness.


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

Irish Pixie said:


> And all the diseases that stem from smoking, drinking, and obesity. They should should just quit cold turkey, lack of will power is just a character weakness.


AND...
While you BUY health insurance (your cost) insurance companies jack up your rates for obesity, smoking, drinking, etc.
When you become disabled by said actions, you wind up on Medicare/medicate and the taxpayer foots the bill...
Tobacco, alcohol & junk food producers privatize profits, insurance companies privatize profits, while the taxpayer foots the bill for the results...

The increased taxes on the above mentioned don't come close to covering the costs, and it's not like those taxes are being set aside just for patients, instead hitting general funds so they can be wasted on pork...

Like the poster before, I didn't get a choice.
3 months in a body cast and traction, the doctor ordered the opioids, the IV delivered the opioids, and you can't pull the IV out when in a body cast/traction.
After 3 months, you are a junky even if you aren't genetically predisposed.

Instead of opioid drug addiction treatment, they prescribe MORE!
Opioids are cheap, addiction treatment is expensive, which do you think they are going to choose when the all mighty dollar is being worshipped?

Surgery is expensive, opioids are cheap, which do you think they are going to choose when you need the problem fixed instead of more opioids?
I can prove it's not the surgery...


----------



## JeepHammer (May 12, 2015)

farmrbrown said:


> My wife went thru a similar experience with a plate in her neck after battling with workers comp for 8 months.
> You were lucky to have a doctor prescribing them that was willing to admit the truth.
> I argued with a few in the hospital about it as she was recovering from the effects of taking oxy *as prescribed*, until of course she couldn't stop vomiting and nothing was going in her.
> They looked me straight in the eye and denied it was happening.
> ...


Yup!
She was 'Weak Willed' for not going to medical school, internship, residency, specialized training and doing her own surgery with monitoring follow-up visits to herself!

I was VERY lucky TWICE.
I got a doctor that laid it out straight for me,
AND,
I didn't have the genetic predisposition that keeps you craving for the rest of your life once exposed.

Sorry to hear about your wife, the horror stories about workman's comp are endless.

EVERYONE my age I know has a horror story about workman's comp,
In this state, the insurance company get to pick the doctor, the 'Treatment', decide when you are to return to work (off comp), and believe this or not, they actually own the clinics, therapy centers, etc they send you to...
And they pick (and own) the clinics that decide your level of disability when you don't, or can't be fixed.

A guy I went to highschool with had all 8 front fingers cut off just in front of the 3rd knuckle the disability rating was 8%...
Can't hold a fork or wipe his own butt, but only 8% disabled, the offer was $12,000 for lifetime compensation.

He won an $9.8 million settlement against employer/work comp insurance company when he sued, the fingers were lost when the insurance company wouldn't pay for reattachment and stalled until they died.
Today, that would be a $1 million cap since the 'Right To Work' law also limits judgments against employers/insurance companies.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> Several of your comments about addiction have been refuted


No, they really haven't.
You merely disagreed.



farmrbrown said:


> Pretending isn't necessary when the comments are in writing.


Then why do you do it?



farmrbrown said:


> *The truth* *is irrelevant to them* no matter how many examples they see.


We agree on how the truth seems irrelevant to some.
I've seen the truth enough times to know who is honest and who isn't.
But that has little to do with this discussion, and changes nothing at all.



farmrbrown said:


> As far as "immediate addiction*", I never said* anything about it.


I never said you did.
You took it upon yourself to defend the comments someone else made.
So far you haven't proven the statement was true any more than they have.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> No, they really haven't.
> You merely disagreed.
> 
> 
> ...


I've seen who is honest too, we all have, all over this thread.
Sometimes the truth needs defending in the face of an onslaught of lies.


----------



## CKelly78z (Jul 16, 2017)

farmrbrown said:


> Looks like we have a way to save a ton of money on medical care in the U.S.
> Cut off treatment for smokers, drinkers and the obese, on the grounds of character weakness.


Why should I pay for their choices, i'm none of the above !


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

As a former smoker who is still addicted to nicotine gum, I get told all the time I have a weak will/character because I don't/can't just quit cold turkey. I used to get looked at like the worst deviant on the planet when smoking where other people could see me, and people felt just fine walking up to me and making comments about me, to me. Still get disapproving looks at the checkout buying my nicotine gum.

Yet everything else is a disease and we should feel sorry for the addicted people. The more the drug affects their behaviors and other people, the more accepting we should be about how hard it is for them to quit, and the more it becomes a disease and not a weakness. So weird.

As I do understand addiction, I sort of feel like a lot of these other addicts are pulling a huge scam on the general public by manipulating people's best intentions into believing the hype that addiction is a disease. That's what addicts do, they manipulate other people to get sympathy and the ability to do the substance they're addicted to. I roll my eyes when people fall for it because I am an addict also - just to a substance that no one thinks causes an addiction "disease" even though nicotine is just as addictive as opioids. Good job addicts, you've got people on your sympathy train, the manipulation worked. Lots of people willing to enable you at this point. You're now the same as someone with cancer. (insert my "I see what you just did there" eyeroll)

So schizophrenic as a society and completely illogical. Addiction is an addiction, it is not a disease. From the mouth of an addict who takes care of an incapacitated person with an actual disease which was in no way self-imposed.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

CKelly78z said:


> Why should I pay for their choices, i'm none of the above !


I can't give you any reason at all to do that. I do often take advice from this man however...



> *Matthew 25:35-40 King James Version (KJV)*
> 35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
> 
> 36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
> ...


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> I've seen who is honest too, we all have, all over this thread.
> Sometimes the truth needs defending in the face of an onslaught of lies.


Then why not tell it?


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

farmrbrown said:


> I can't give you any reason at all to do that. I do often take advice from this man however...


The thing about God is you know where He stands on the issue but He gives you a choice to do as you see fit.
I don't believe He dictated that our pockets be emptied against our will by the government.
There are other and better ways to help; believing in programs funded by forced taxation isn't the only or best method.


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

Bearfootfarm said:


> Then why not tell it?


LOL.
You mean over and over again?


----------



## farmrbrown (Jun 25, 2012)

GTX63 said:


> The thing about God is you know where He stands on the issue but He gives you a choice to do as you see fit.
> I don't believe He dictated that our pockets be emptied against our will by the government.
> There are other and better ways to help; believing in programs funded by forced taxation isn't the only or best method.


I agree 100%. There's also advice on letting someone get hungry enough until their stomach drives them to get outta bed and go to work, lol.
The gift of discernment is very useful in that regard.
I'm with you on the gov't taxing and redistributing at will, not a good plan.
That was meant towards not lumping everyone in the same bucket and leaving the drug pushers totally blameless in all this mess.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

farmrbrown said:


> LOL.
> You mean over and over again?


You know that's not what I mean.


----------

